Posted on 05/21/2018 10:12:55 AM PDT by dila813
Require all Schools get insurance for students while on school property.
Why?
Because look what is required for you to have employees on your property.
The Insurance Company's underwriters require that you pay insurance rates that are subject to the likelihood that they will sustain a claim.
What does this mean, 1. those insured take steps to reduce their rates such as taking steps that are identified by insurers that reduce their risk. 2. those who are extremely risky can't obtain insurance and therefore can't have students. 3. the insurance companies investigate all claims to determine the root cause to better underwrite their policies.
The answer is capitalism once again.
Another thing you can do is require the rate that they are paying is publicly available and ranked by their geographical location along as the size of their school.
That can affect home buyer’s decisions.
At the end of the day, schools will know the potential impact of their decisions of not securing schools on the community.
Right now, security for schools is only looked at as a cost in doing security improvements without any benefit.
Why not have schools teach instead of incite which many of them do... politics and azzholes expressing political opinions don’t belong in schools.
Sort of like charging low student loan rates to people majoring in STEM disciplines and high rates to those majoring in Victimology Studies . . .
Step by Step
And make sure schools can’t say they are insured by nature of being a state or local owned property, make private insurance required in order to get the true cost.
Interesting idea and I understand the logical progression of the idea. But I can’t get on board with introducing insurance regulators to government run institutions. Talk about a festering cesspool of corruptions and waste...
However, to the extent that a school is somehow responsible, or even negligent, regarding injury or illness to a student, the school is already insured (liability). If I understand correctly, this “insurance” is through the district. Each school likely does not have a stand alone policy, which I think is what you are suggesting. For public schools, this might be an issue because the funding goes through the district.
Keep in mind, for public schools, we are talking about local government funding. I am not sure an extra premium would motivate fundamental change in school security. It ain’t their money.
At the heart of what you are suggesting lies the underwriting assessment process by which risk is assessed and premiums assigned based on that risk. Keep in mind, if assessors get involved and start running the risks, they are going to find data that is in company with the risk of commercial airline crashes. They are very rare (as measured against all students/schools) but usually include large payouts.
I think there is a better way than to introduce more insurance companies to government run “businesses”.
They claim insurance by the simple fact that they are part of government and therefore can just tax more for any loss.
What I am saying is we eliminate this protection.
The key to motivation is making these rates and risk assessments public which they will be required to do if they want to be insured.
In not, they can’t have students.
I want private enterprises to assess our schools because I don’t trust governments.
Private enterprises can’t play politics, it affects their bottom line when a claim is written and they have to compete against other insurance companies. There is a very strong incentive to make this non-political.
It is the insurance companies - certainly its lobbies - that created gun-free zones for schools in the first place. No insurance carrier will allow armed teachers or administrators on campus. A quick search will reveal that already happening in Kansas.
Even cheaper is for the media not to disclose the identity of the shooter.
Use terms such as a former student, etc.
Even faster and easier to just remove sovereign immunity in Federal Court for school administrators and board members. Do that also for local officials regarding immigration and you’ll see sanctuary cities vanish overnight.
they will have to demonstrate that in lower insurance rates, I don’t think so.
That’s not going to preemptively prevent school attacks.
Bingo. We didn’t have waves of mass school shootings until the 24 hour news networks started publicizing these scumbags for weeks on end and other loser scumbags realized it was a path to easy fame.
They will just pass the cost onto taxpayers.
Any solutions have to make decision makers accountable for their behavior.
At least we would know how well they are doing
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.