Mandatory insurance for firearm owners...

[tshadowchaser]

I am going to forgo reading the replys so far and say I do not even agree with mantatory registration of firearms so why whould I agree with mantatory insurance.

It is a good idea for those that own hand guns if you can afford it but that opens you up to even more laws suits when the person shoot or hurt finds out you have the insurence

 

[Rich Parsons]

I think the CCW requirements cover that for carry, and that's fine. I am not in favor of that for purchase, however. For purchase, at least in our state, you read a number of bullet points that detail the responsibilities you incur with purchasing and owning a gun, and have to initial each point, then sign that you understood your responsibilities. THat is as far as that needs to go, as far as I am concerned. People are told their responsibilities, and it is their job to abide by them. For the most part, they do.

Responsibilities!

No way!

Someone is supposed to be responsible. I cannot believe that.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Nope. Headed for Mason County. There has been a Gordon presence in Mason County for the last 140 -150 years, and I intend to keep that streak going. I miss Scottville!! And the Sheriff is a heck of a good guy along with the Chief in Scottville.

Scootville is a few / couple of hours north and west of me. We will have to talk if possible when you are in the area.

 

[jks9199]

It is certainly a right. And it can be an important one. But there's a long, long history of case law saying that such rights are not absolute. The time and manner may be restricted. No matter how devoutly you believe in Offler the Crocodile God you can't sacrifice your neighbor to Him. If you want to gather a couple thousand close friends to get petition the mayor for a redress of grievances you'll need a parade permit to walk down the street as a group to do so.

The possible restrictions I mentioned on the Second are in line with the above. They might not be perfect, but they're up to the same standard we apply to other rights.

Well, you CAN sacrifice your neighbor to Offler the Croc... assuming your neighbor is reasonably submissive to the idea. But, if you choose to do so, you can also expect to be praying to Bubba, the Lord of the Prison Dance, for quite a few years.

In a more serious vein, there are very few absolute rights, which cannot be restricted or controlled to some degree. As has been said many times, your freedom to swing your arm around ends at the tip of my nose. When your exercise of a right begins to effect other people, there is room for some control of it. The level of control should be proportionate to the impact on other's lives. Words? Generally small direct impact (few people have been killed solely by words), so generally small control. You don't have to register your pen or PC. Right to bear arms? Potentially huge impact, so more control. Limitations on where and when and how you may carry, regulation of what guns you may have, and so on.

 

[jks9199]

I think the CCW requirements cover that for carry, and that's fine. I am not in favor of that for purchase, however. For purchase, at least in our state, you read a number of bullet points that detail the responsibilities you incur with purchasing and owning a gun, and have to initial each point, then sign that you understood your responsibilities. THat is as far as that needs to go, as far as I am concerned. People are told their responsibilities, and it is their job to abide by them. For the most part, they do.

And that's really not much less than I'm after. What I personally want is enough of a stall/thought process that the guy who buys a gun because there was a robbery or burglary nearby, but never really wanted the gun, so it gets shoved into a closet and forgotten thinks twice about it. And at least knows his responsibilities. Whether it's tied to the gun or to the ammo... that's for legislatures to figure out. 'Cause the gun ain't much more than a club or paperweight if there're no bullets...

I'm often surprised at the guns people discover in their houses following the death of a parent or spouse which they never knew of... We recently had a pair of handguns discovered tucked into the floor joists in the basement of a house that had been purchased simply to tear down. A BRIEF class before buying would maybe have prevented that...

 

[KenpoTex]

mandatory insurance...just another stupid idea.

Firearms accidents are actually relatively rare. I won't bother with statistics but the point is that you are much more likely to die by drowning, burning, or a car accident than you are to be accidently shot.

The problem is that the news media is biased against lawful firearms use and ownership so whenever there is an accidental shooting resulting in a fatality, the media goes into a frenzy. They don't ever mention that the other 90 million gun owners in the US didn't accidentaly shoot anyone that day.

 

[Guardian]

I was listening to talk radio as I often do while driving, and a caller had made the claim that "Gun owners should be required to have manditory insurance, in case of an acccidental shooting and someone gets hurt." The logic she presented was that because we are required to have car insurance and homeowners/property insurance due to the risk of someone getting hurt in an accident or on the property.

I of course think this is absurd, and is a slippery slope. We might as well have to have insurance for lawn mowers and every thing else that could hurt someone.

Anyone else think this is a nutty proposition (or a sane one)? If so, how would you argue one point or the other?

Just curious...

This would be insane to even bring up. So that being said, I imagine some idiot representative will try it LOL. If you own a house, your home owners insurance policy may contain something for accidents or injuries while on the property, mine does.

As far as insurance for owning gun, it won't fly far that's for sure. As stated then lawn mowers, bicylces and such would need it also. This world gets more screwy by the year.

 

[Gray Phoenix]

Wouldn't firearms accidents already be covered under the homeowners insurance? If this were to come to fruition, I can see it increasing my homeowners by an extra $1 or $2 in order to cover any perceived risk. But knowing how politics works I will need to add several thousand to that figure to account for the the lawyers car payments..