Yes, esparza. Yes. In a unanimous vote, the SAN Jose City Council approved first of its kind, gun safety measures. The first would require every gun owner to have liability insurance coverage for their firearms. The second requires gun owners to pay an annual fee to compensate taxpayers for the public cost of responding to gun related injuries and deaths. It's also the case that while the Second Amendment certainly protects the right to own a gun, does not mandate that we subsidize as taxpayers subsidize the possession of those guns during the virtual meetings, public comment. Gun rights advocates said it would punish law abiding gun owners. I believe these mandates are unconstitutional because they impose a financial burden on only a subset of the population, which is discriminatory. Others worried infringes on the Second Amendment, we feel very strongly that it is clearly unconstitutional for the government at any level to require some sort of a feed Before somebody can exercise an enumerated constitutional right. New data from an independent nonprofit organization shows gun violence incidents in San Jose cost taxpayers $442 million dollars annually. The vote comes in the wake of the vita mass shooting that took the lives of nine people in May, supporters say the measures are a step forward. There is no one law or policy that is going to solve the public health crisis. That is the gun violence epidemic. However, a holistic and proactive approach, like the proposed common sense measures will reduce gun harm in SAn Jose.