Posted on 03/29/2012 9:48:36 AM PDT by pabianice
© gps333@charter.net
In a nutshell, here is the new law:
“Every owner of a firearm must, within ten days of taking possession of such firearm, obtain an insurance policy from a state-approved insurance provider, that provides a minimum of $ 250,000 liability and loss coverage per firearm, with a minimum total rider of $ 5,000,000, regardless of the number of firearms possessed. Each 100 rounds of ammunition will require a minimum coverage of $5,000. Failure to secure such insurance coverage will be punishable by a prison sentence of not less than one year and/or a fine of not less than $5,000.”
Sound farfetched? A Massachusetts liberal representative has already introduced a similar bill in the State House (http://fleming-hayes.com/2011/06/mandate-ma-lawmakers-consider-gun-insurance-2/). Would such a law make it into the federal statutes?
If ObamaCare is ruled constitutional, bet on it. If the federal government can force you to buy health insurance, it can certainly force you to buy other insurance “for the common good.” The immortal liberal lie that thousands of children are killed accidentally by firearms every year would be trotted-out again, and all it would take is a return of House control to the Democrats to make such a law happen.
Not worried about ObamaCare? You’d better be.
All of my Class III weapons and 500k rounds of ammo fell into the ocean, last year, in a boating accident. So, I’m okay...
What a shame, I feel your pain.
Don’t you—and others—ever get tired of trotting out that nonsense? It’s not original and it’s not clever.
And I doubt that any of you would bring up such idiocy if ever questioned by an LEO.
You boys better be careful starting something you can't finish.
Banglist (((ping)))!
wouldn’t the liability be picked up by the homeowners policy?
Well, you are absolutely right about the second part at least, I would never "bring up such idiocy to LEO" because I would refuse to answer any of his/her questions in the first place.
I have heard that a few citizens might own a firearm and I also heard of those few some own them as an insurance policy. I’m thinking that they might be exempt.
I’m new here; what do I know? I’ve seen it *once* on another topic. Like I said: what do I know? I forgot the sarcasm tag.
And no, I wouldn’t bring it up with a LEO. With a couple of exceptions, they already know what I have, via the voluminous FFL paperwork and Tax Stamps etc.
No way possible it would happen this way.
I am sure you would have to have proof of insurance prior to your gun leaving the shop or FFL. 10 days grace period? No way.
Does the legislation require criminals to sign up for these policies?
And I doubt that any of you would bring up such idiocy if ever questioned by an LEO.
Here’s to reckless and fearless boating.
And to Liberty
Its ok kid
Some here jump a little to fast
How the hell does this NOT FALL UNDER HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE already? This is just another tax disguised as insurance, just like the whole effing Obamacare 2000 page stack of s**t.
OK, let’s take it to the next step. What are you going to tell the judge? Nothing, I guess.
Then, we move on to the trial. Unless you bought all your guns “off record” you will have a helluva problem, Mac. Perjury is your last resort, I suppose, and we know where that leads.
They had better start building a lot of prisons.
> And I doubt that any of you would bring up such idiocy if ever questioned by an LEO.
In 1983 after a burglary, the chief of police asked me if I owned a gun.
I told him it wasn’t any of his business.
You should know that claiming to have all of your guns lost in a tragic accident is a long time running joke on FR.
Regardless why would I mention this to a “LEO”, its no business of his unless he’s investigating something, in which case I sure an hell ain’t gonna tell him.
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.