House bill would require gun owners to have liability insurance

originally posted by: CB328
People get accidentally shot all the time with no consequences.

People don't get accidentally shot all the time. Guns don't just go off. Stop by a gun shop sometime and ask them how many times their guns have just gone off and shot someone. Gun owners know that you have to load it and pull the trigger to make it go off. All that I was just cleaning it and it went off is BS. So is the I was carrying it to my truck and dropped it. If you don't engage the hammer it will not strike the firing pin, and the firing pin will not strike the bullet. That is assuming that the weapon has not been changed or modified buy some fool without a clue. Nor do I believe that your kid just found it. If it were put away in a case or safe, or at least had a trigger loch, your kid can't shoot it either. If proper care is taken, as any gun club member can tell you, a gun is no more dangerous than your TV remote. The danger comes from the dummy behind the trigger. Now if you want to punish them for being stupid I'm all for it.

I live in Arizona here we have a thing called the "Stupid Motorest Law". We have these dry river beds called a WASH. If you've ever been in the southwest during a thunderstorm you know these WASHES can flood real fast. During monsoon season there were always those fools who thought they could drive through them when flooded. They got stuck and had to be rescued. This cost the city money. This law says that if you try to cross and have to be rescued you receive a bill for that rescue. I would be OK with a "Stupid Gun Owner Law" that gives you an automatic 5 years if your gun just goes off and kills someone. The trouble is that even with the people being billed for their rescue, we still have hundreds of people each year who try to cross a flooded WASH and get stuck.

There's a lot of truth in the saying that If you out law guns then only the outlaws will have guns. Since they did not get them the legal way you won't know they have it until it's to late. Also according to my border patrol friend most of the guns in the hands of the bad guys came here from Mexico, and if we can't stop the drugs or the people, we have no chance to stop the guns.

As far as the air insurance argument goes, I would not trust the government not to tax us or buy insurance for it.
If there is cash to be harvested, whether directly from our pockets or from a lobbying group, they wouldn't care what it is that they have to blame for it.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Quick question, would the police departments have to carry firearm insurance too? I mean, just to make sure victims of gun violence are fairly compensated?

Just wondering...?

I doubt it.
They would just function as they have all along.
If they screw up and shoot someone, the cop gets a free paid vacation and the taxpayers foot the bill for any lawsuits/settlements.

a reply to: butcherguy

I think they just keep coming up with this stupid stuff to justify their still having a job. Don't want people to start thinking they get paid far too much for doing nothing.

So... if we are going to be required to pay insurance... then who is going to collect the money? And do we really have enough gun crimes to justify paying some entity billions of dollars for "what if" scenarios?

this is akin to asteroid insurance.

originally posted by: Kratos40
a reply to: Violater1

Any automobile could become a weapon, at the control of an unstable person. A gun is the same thing. But only more compact.

My weapon is my brain and my appendages.

One is a CONSTITUITIONAL RIGHT(bearing Arms IE a GUN) And one is not a right.(the car).

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Kratos40
a reply to: Violater1

Any automobile could become a weapon, at the control of an unstable person. A gun is the same thing. But only more compact.

My weapon is my brain and my appendages.

One is a CONSTITUITIONAL RIGHT(bearing Arms IE a GUN) And one is not a right.(the car).

I would have been extremely impressed if the Founding Fathers had the prescience to envision cars.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Kratos40
a reply to: Violater1

Any automobile could become a weapon, at the control of an unstable person. A gun is the same thing. But only more compact.

My weapon is my brain and my appendages.

One is a CONSTITUITIONAL RIGHT(bearing Arms IE a GUN) And one is not a right.(the car).

I would have been extremely impressed if the Founding Fathers had the prescience to envision cars.

I TOTALLY agree. Lets travel back in time and fix that.

a reply to: CB328

It's ironic that people who always talk about responsibility don't want to have any responsibility for their own actions.

Well that was too rich.

Considering the term 'gun violence' which denotes no personal responsibility of the shooter that actually do the shooting.

Which breaks the law to begin with.

Then making ALL gun owners carry gun insurance denotes NO personal responsibility either.

It's not even close to being a 'good' idea.

a reply to: Violater1

Can we get some insurance against idiots in public office? We could all use that!

This is just another way to keep people from owning guns, by making it too expensive.

Would this mean, if the law was passed, that all US men would have to purchase rape insurance - just because they have the equipment?

originally posted by: LeatherNLace
If I am a family member of a victim of your gun, then I am going to sue you into oblivion, leaving you in destitute.

It doesn't work that way, chief.

Spent the last few months working in South Sacramento...also spent a year working in Oakland, It's already illegal for a felon to own a firearm, illegal to carry a loaded firearm in California, illegal to be in a gang, illegal to fire a weapon within city limits, illegal to commit whatever crime they were already committing....and yet there are gun related crimes committed by felons and gang members ALL THE TIME. Why do these liberal scumbags always go after law abiding gun owners rather than enforing the laws already on the books and cleaning up these neighborhoods full of gang violence? I can darn near guarantee you 90% of the gun violence in Sacramento and Oakland are not from legal and law abiding gun owners.

Personally being of the opinion that the dollar collapse is slowly coming to fruition I really see things like this as evidence of that. They need revenue and will continue to look for it everywhere.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: gortex

So since we are forced to buy health insurance and auto insurance why not insurance for guns, lawn mowers, kitchen knives and whatever else Government can find to reward the insurance lobby? Seriously, some people are such useful idiots.

You know 'responsible' homeowners and renters do carry general liability insurance to protect themselves from all manner of 'accidents' on their property. It makes sense to have a special rider for homes with guns.

a reply to: intrepid

Clearly you've never been to China or LA in the 70s...

a reply to: beezzer

Actually the way the system works you're better off ,legally,killing an intruder than wounding them.
Sad huh?

a reply to: FyreByrd

I was under the impression that "insurance" was optional, not mandatory.

Oh wait, never mind.

a reply to: CB328

Really?
Show me.
I can easily discount what you siggest as COMPLETELY wrong...again.
www.cnn.com...