Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Advocates push idea of requiring gun insurance
Seattle Post Intelligencer ^ | 1/18/13

Posted on 01/18/2013 2:12:04 PM PST by Clint N. Suhks

As lawmakers cast around for ways to curb gun-related violence, some are hoping the insurance market might offer incentives.

A bill filed Friday in Massachusetts would require gun owners to purchase liability insurance in the event that a firearm is used to injure. The insurance policies would give those injured by a weapon a legal recourse, backers of the bill say, but they also would create financial incentives that could reduce accidents and fatalities. Gun owners, for example, might see lower insurance rates if they agreed to take firearms training courses and properly stored their weapons.

"Insurance companies were able to discourage smoking through the marketplace and make cars safer through the marketplace," said state Rep. David Linsky, the bill's sponsor.

And insurers have more leeway than law enforcement in some cases, he said.

Massachusetts already has gun storage laws, but police cannot come into a person's home without a warrant, Linsky pointed out. An insurance company, however, would be able to verify that there is proper gun storage before writing a policy.

Officials at the National Conference of State Legislatures say to their knowledge no state has adopted a gun insurance requirement.

The idea is already meeting with resistance for gun rights advocates, who say it amounts to more regulation aimed at law-abiding gun-owners.

"Now we're going to have insurance companies telling us how we are supposed to be trained and where we are going to store our guns?" said Jim Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners Action League in Massachusetts.

Craig Baenziger, who works at a gun- and ammunition-seller in North Attleboro, Mass., called Northeast Trading Co., said requiring liability insurance for guns makes little sense because it targets people who buy the weapons legally instead of going after criminals who illegally possess them.

(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: banglist; democrats; govtabuse; guncontrol; liberalidiots; liberals; secondamendment; tyranny

1 posted on 01/18/2013 2:12:08 PM PST by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Then only limo-liberals get to exercise the second amendment. These “progressives” are soooo smart. Smart like the devil.


2 posted on 01/18/2013 2:19:01 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

How about voting insurance, so the rest of us can get reimbursed for damages by the idiots who voted in Obama and the other Dems?


3 posted on 01/18/2013 2:19:04 PM PST by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Bull Sh!t idea.


4 posted on 01/18/2013 2:19:20 PM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Gun insurance? How about STUPID insurance for the legislators?


5 posted on 01/18/2013 2:19:37 PM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson

Notice this bill originates in Massachusetts, the insurance capital of the USA?

What a scam.


6 posted on 01/18/2013 2:21:44 PM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Welfare for plaintif lawyers.

Requiring docs to carry malpractice insurance created the malpractice industry.


7 posted on 01/18/2013 2:23:48 PM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
liability insurance for guns makes little sense because it targets people who buy the weapons legally instead of going after criminals who illegally possess them.

Can someone explain the LOGIC in that...?

Lemme review that; it's good when laws punish law-abiding people, and leave unmolested the law breakers.

Do I have that right...?

8 posted on 01/18/2013 2:26:50 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Mentally-ill, lib-dems, flailing-about for anything which’ll accomplish their socialist/marxist/fascist/commie goals of “gun control”. This is also going nowhere. (Unless treasonous John Roberts requires it, by another SCOTUS tax/mandate decision.)


9 posted on 01/18/2013 2:28:04 PM PST by carriage_hill (AR-10s/15s are the 21st Century's Muskets. Self-Defense is The First Human Right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

And just how would that reduce crime committed with guns? It wouldn’t. It is just another measure intended to harass gun owner and cost them money.


10 posted on 01/18/2013 2:29:00 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The only thing that Hollywood gets right about guns is that criminals will always get them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx
I'm surprised this idea hasn't surfaced long before now.

Hey! Government can compel you to buy health insurance you don't want; the Supremes even said it was constitutional. This is only the logical next step: liability insurance for those DANGEROUS weapons in your home.

Can't afford it? Have to sell your weapons? Too bad.

11 posted on 01/18/2013 2:29:26 PM PST by Jerrybob (Truth -- the new hate speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
How about some “insurance” that the thieving government will not steal any more Social Security? How about some “insurance” that the government will fallow the Constitution?
12 posted on 01/18/2013 2:30:56 PM PST by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson

If someone steals a Bushmaster and raids the local High School. A couple of things are about to happen. The first is that the perpetrator doesn’t have any insurance because he stole the rifle and ammunition. Second the thirty five students that he offed are going to have to apply on their own for burial funds.


13 posted on 01/18/2013 2:31:08 PM PST by An Old Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Argus

Hear hear

I doubly second that motion.....


14 posted on 01/18/2013 2:31:36 PM PST by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Let's see....the poor _ _ _ _ _ welfare slobs will not be able to afford it (nor will they admit they even own a gun) so once again.....WHITEY will pay.

I'm sure we will soon have a Federal Registration Fee.....RETROACTIVE....and wait until you have tyo report possession on your 2013 Form 1040.

15 posted on 01/18/2013 2:32:39 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jerrybob

Yep you can have your guns but lts going to cost you $200 month in insurance fee. WTH?! Why? Because I’m the big bad wolf and I sad so - B. Hussein Obama.


16 posted on 01/18/2013 2:33:20 PM PST by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

The government needs to get out of the insurance business period.


17 posted on 01/18/2013 2:34:06 PM PST by Kadric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Fascists...


18 posted on 01/18/2013 2:34:15 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Argus

> How about voting insurance, so the rest of us can get reimbursed for damages by the idiots who voted in Obama and the other Dems?

I 2nd that. Now file a WH petition...


19 posted on 01/18/2013 2:35:32 PM PST by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man

Second the thirty five students that he offed are going to have to apply on their own for burial funds.


Or, the liberals could be sued for putting the children in a “gun free” zone trap of death.

Everyone lives happily ever after. : )


20 posted on 01/18/2013 2:37:13 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

How about if we have all Criminals, or those MOST PRONE TO BREAK THE LAW (aka, the Usual Suspects), purchase “Liability Insurance”, so they can compensate THEIR victims????


21 posted on 01/18/2013 2:37:31 PM PST by traditional1 (Amerika.....Providing public housing for the Mulatto Messiah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
No.

/johnny

22 posted on 01/18/2013 2:38:24 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kadric

and the school loan business and the mortgage business and the abortion business etc etc etc


23 posted on 01/18/2013 2:38:24 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Let’s see, when I get auto insurance, the insurance company requires identifying information regarding my autos.

When I get a rider on my homeowner’s policy for particular items, they want identifying information on those items.

When I want to get firearms insurance....

You do all understand that this is a backdoor into registration of firearms, don’t you? As well as, of course, a way in which to make it more expensive to own guns.

Oh, and those that are denied insurance - no guns. How convenient.

Phuck this idea.

By the way, general liability insurance (i.e. an umbrella policy) will cover such liabilities, provided you aren’t engaged in a criminal act when the injury in question occurs.


24 posted on 01/18/2013 2:39:34 PM PST by Ancesthntr (Banning guns to prevent crime is like banning cars to prevent drunk driving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

So, the idea here is to transfer the liability from the misuser of the firearm to the person who owns it? I guess that will apply to hammers, baseball bats, knives etc sometime in the future too?

These guys never give up.


25 posted on 01/18/2013 2:40:53 PM PST by Mouton (108th MI Group.....68-71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper; Travis McGee; Noumenon; Dead Corpse

Check this out, as well as #24.


26 posted on 01/18/2013 2:41:14 PM PST by Ancesthntr (Banning guns to prevent crime is like banning cars to prevent drunk driving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

For the left, it is always about money.


27 posted on 01/18/2013 2:42:20 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jerrybob

You’re right. I think we can expect “mandatory gun insurance.”


28 posted on 01/18/2013 2:42:34 PM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

As someone in the insurance business you already have liability insurance if you have a homeowner policy. This liability follows you where you go. Check with your insurance agent for specifies though as policy coverage will differ by company.


29 posted on 01/18/2013 2:44:48 PM PST by ealgeone (obama, border)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

Here in the DC metro area, one in ten drivers don’t have insurance, so I expect gun insurance would follow the same pattern.


30 posted on 01/18/2013 2:46:38 PM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Just like driving a car without insurance.
A separate charge.

NEW CHARGE:
Committing an armed robbery and being ALSO charged with no weapon insurance.

Next it will be to individually insure each bullet, with another charge being ‘chain of custody’ on a bullet used in the commission of a crime.

The lawyers AND insurers fall all over each other in new schemes to extort money from us, and if it came right down to it they are probably in collusion.

Few years ago I was raising ‘hell’ with the State over the Uninsured Motorist fee...You threaten me with jail, seizure of vehicle and tags, if I drive without insurance YET I have to ‘pay’ into a fund for others so they can drive without insurance.
The State blames the insurance companies and the insurance companies blame the states.....


31 posted on 01/18/2013 2:50:19 PM PST by xrmusn (6/98 "It is virtually impossible to clean the pond as long as the pigs are still crapping in it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Stupid private sector tax payers...Like their cars, lets pass laws making these stupid tax peons to pay to register these things over and over and over and over...every damn year. If anyone mentions the Constitution, or rights, just laugh in their faces. Make them pay 100 bucks each a year, and give them a little pink sticker to stick on these things for their trouble...


32 posted on 01/18/2013 3:04:38 PM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Thanks for bringing that up! Always follow the money.


33 posted on 01/18/2013 3:05:48 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

It makes more sense for those who don’t contribute to their own defense and safety by purchasing a firearm and being proficient in it’s use to pay a tax to local gov’ts to cover the cost of local law enforcement.


34 posted on 01/18/2013 3:08:17 PM PST by TheDon (Criminalizing self defense contributed to the Sandy Hook massacre.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson
Particularly when the money is a penalty!
35 posted on 01/18/2013 3:08:23 PM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Another back door.

These people are relentless.

What they really want, and what "gun insurance" amounts to is registration which always leads to...

...say it with me...

...confiscation.

36 posted on 01/18/2013 3:14:21 PM PST by Washi (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

the insurance companies are all looking to help. LOL


37 posted on 01/18/2013 3:16:01 PM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

This is the reason why you need to kill criminals and not injure. To do that you need gun control ... of the accuracy variety.


38 posted on 01/18/2013 3:16:40 PM PST by ConservativeInPA (Molon Labe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Argus
How about voting insurance, so the rest of us can get reimbursed for damages by the idiots who voted in Obama and the other Dems?

Excellent! My nomination for post of the day.

39 posted on 01/18/2013 3:18:39 PM PST by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

The Governor of New York made a fool of himself by signing legislation attempting an end run.

The fools are assuming people will give a damn about their pitiful efforts and follow the law.


40 posted on 01/18/2013 3:21:53 PM PST by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone
I get tired of saying this, but it's the bad guys who have guns that cause the problems, and they will not purchase gun insurance. Another stupid idea.
41 posted on 01/18/2013 3:25:43 PM PST by ANGGAPO (Layte Gulf Beach Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Because gooberment interference in the health insurance industry has worked out so well. /s


42 posted on 01/18/2013 3:36:21 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Reproduction is an unalienable human right and there is a tremendous correlation between criminal behavior of children raised in a household without a strong male presence.

Since far more murders are committed with hands, fists and knives, it would seem that if any insurance is up for discussion, it would seem that requiring conception and child-raising insurance should be required before any copulation is permitted would yield far better social benefits.


43 posted on 01/18/2013 4:13:56 PM PST by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeInPA

Generating trash isn’t the difficult part - disposal is.


44 posted on 01/18/2013 4:46:40 PM PST by GreyHoundSailor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

The goal here is VERY SIMPLE, and that is to increase the opportunity cost of gun ownership on law-abiding people.

For good people, the cost is a big factor. In other words, why spend an extra $1,000 and fill out all this paperwork for a weapon that you very likely will never need (i.e., I suspect that 95% of law-abiding people never have to display or use their weapon for protection).

For bad people, opportunity cost is simply NOT a factor. You buy the weapon to rob people or businesses (or kill, or whatever)...so you know its value right off and you know it will be used - it often pays for itself the first time used.


So you price-out the good people - and gun ownership drops from 50% to, maybe, 15%. At that point, you confiscate...since there are not enough owners to fight back, as happened in many other countries.

That is why we fight EVERYTHING that makes gun ownership more difficult - our rights are ONLY protected by our numbers, once we’re decreased, it’s simply GAME OVER, at some point...likely sooner than later.


45 posted on 01/18/2013 5:45:46 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

The gun IS my insurance.


46 posted on 01/18/2013 6:02:49 PM PST by generally (Don't be stupid. We have politicians for that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Ah, it’s the invincible, invulnerable insurance racket again: a necessary part of New Rome.


47 posted on 01/18/2013 6:41:34 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

No. Taxing something that is a fundamental God given RIGHT is wrong. What would be next? Taxing free speech?


48 posted on 01/19/2013 6:54:20 AM PST by rfreedom4u (I have a copy of the Constitution! And I'm not afraid to use it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Somehow, I don’t think criminals buy insurance any more than they comply with gun control laws.


49 posted on 01/19/2013 8:17:01 AM PST by Little Ray (Waiting for the return of the Gods of the Copybook Headings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson