San Jose Mayor proposes requiring insurance for guns

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sa...requirement-for-guns-following-mass-shootings

I own half a dozen guns. I can deal with it! There needs to be insurance to both protect those who have to pay for mass shooting and discourage those who conduct the shooting.

Cars are a deadly weapon....they require insurance....Right now....WE....the non-violent population pays for mass shooting with taxes, for damages, and insurance rate increases.

Firearm insurance would offset many of those loses and costs....

Maybe if trump would be forced to buy STUPIDITY INSURANCE....he would stop Tweeting and Speaking like an idiot....

 

No insurance company is going to be liable for intentional torts, like murders.

If you have home owners insurance they will already cover accidents at your home..like potentially if a gun accidental goes off

 

Firearm accidents are lower than they've ever been, but knock yourself out.

Death by firearm accident is 0.4% of all accidental deaths.

 

But don't worry, it's not like a registry of any sort...

 

That should or maybe be covered by your liability umbrella insurance if you are smart enough to carry that. That would be if you did something stupid by accident. Homeowners would cover the gun /f it it stolen or destroyed by fire or another covered hazard. The Home Owners policies cover you for liability for things that happen or you cause accidently to third parties. I am not sure if the HO POLICY will cover you if you accidently drop your gun while showing it to a friend and it blows off his big toe. You are correct insurance does not cover intentional torts. Even life insurance coverage is excluded if you commit suicide in the first few years after policy inception. Suicide being an intentional act.

You auto insurance liability will not cover you if you decide to drive into someon's car or run someone over.

 

I've been checking my auto policy for my coverage limits for driving into a group of pedestrians and can't seem to locate it.

My sacrificial altar doesn't seem to have a category in my home insurance coverage either.

What the hell.

 

Okay, all you have to do is explain how it would prevent a single murder.

 

Ha ha you are covered within the liability limits if you perform that task accidently. If on purpose you are SOL.

 

Whaaaaat?

Does Jerry Nadler know about this?!11!!?

 

There already is Terrorist insurance in that a business or a non profit can purchase coverage that would pay for business interruption, clean up of bodies and blood and other by products of a shoot em up.

 

I am actually, initially (since this is the first time I have heard of this concept) for it. For a couple of reasons:

1. A big part of carrying insurance is liability. It isn't always to protect the insured, but the people and property that the insured hurts or damages.

2. If insurance companies are required to insure individuals based on risk, then naturally in the name of profit they are going to ensure that their insured don't significantly increase the risk pool. For instance, ex cops, ex military, etc. would most likely be provided with a lower rate, while young people who haven't ever went through weapons training would pay a higher rate.


There are a couple of problems I see.

1. People that are going to commit crimes aren't going to get their guns legally, nor insurance.

2. This provides the government with a list of firearm owners, which bothers me.

 

Accidents? We have multiple countries in the world that are giving their citizens warning about coming to the gun happy US. That has NOTHING to do with accidents!
White Supremacist are going wild...with the urgings of the Liar in Chief....

Racist used to be ashamed to come out as white supremacist. But now that they have their man in the Oval Office, they see their racism as a badge of honor...

 

That is about as stupid of a suggestion I have ever heard. Comparing it to auto insurance is even more stupid.

1. No insurance will cover intentional acts.
2. Home Owner's or Renter's insurance already cover unintentional acts.
3. If I have a vehicle that never leaves my ranch, I am not required to insure it.....I am not even required to register it. Will the same be said about my guns?
4. Those with illegal guns or guns obtained illegally will not buy insurance.
5. Many legal gun owners today will ignore such a stupid law and will likely not buy insurance.
6. Talk about punishing law abiding people for something that will not change anything.

 

All instances that insurance will not cover, as they are deliberate and malicious acts. Therefore the insurance is useless.

 

Cars do not require insurance unless operated on public roads.

Drivers do not even need a license unless driven on public roads.

Your analogy is a failure

 

Require insurance as a condition to posess a firearm? Unconstitutional. All other arguments are moot.

 

Once again ITS NOT THE GUN. The criminal use of a gun is just a manifestation of the underlying disease. Like if the Dr. tells you that you have cancer so you decide to get a manicure. Not getting to the disease but your fingers look great.

 

Not true

Racists have always and still do openly express their beliefs

That is how we know there are. It very many such people and the threat is a massive exaggeration or hoax which Tucker CORRECTLY pointed out

 

So at BEST, they could suggest requiring CCW holders to carry insurance.

 

Oh Geez, in a thread about another 2nd Amendment tax you bring up racism and white supremacists twice! Do those countries you speak of warn their people about traveling to Detroit, St Louis, Baltimore, New Orleans and Chicago? Those are the places you're most likely to get shot at. Perhaps the people in those fine municipalities should be forced to get 'standing on a street corner' insurance, what do you say?

 

Require insurance to practice a constitutionally recognized right? Yeah, that isn’t going to happen.

 

I'm just trying to help them make a better argument

 

California has a preemption clause. No local jurisdiction can pass gun laws stricter than state laws.

 

Much like driving a car on public roads requires insurance they could probably mandate it for carrying in public. But that is all

 

This is like the straight pride parade being denied a permit to assemble because they didn't have insurance. Who needs 1a rights

They'll stop gun violence by making people have insurance on their guns and making the price of insurance so high no one can own a firearm anymore.