House bill would require gun owners to have liability insurance

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Ernie_McCracken, May 30, 2015.

  1. Capitalism

    Capitalism Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2014
    Messages:
    5,129
    Likes Received:
    786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I honestly don't understand the thought process on gun control currently.

    Instead of making gun free zones why don't we instead make every American an intelligent gun owner.

    Offer incentives for taking firearms safety courses. Offer people free Military Surplus ammo to fire at shooting ranges. Show people how to properly lock and store firearms. (IE. Trigger locks, quick release locks, etc)

    The more familiar people become with guns the less likely accidents are to occur.

    Not to mention if a war ever started you'd have many a good shot.

    Could you imagine trying to rob someone if every citizen was armed? What about rape?


    **Note- I wasn't arguing against you, I was agreeing that said argument was derailed.
     
  2. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fire can be quite fatal.

    In 2013, there were a total of 5,574 deaths in the US by fire. There were 8,438 firearm related homicides, 505 by accidental firearm discharge. That's not a trivial number of deaths due to fire. Considering the homicides are intentional while most fires are accidental, it makes fire that much more of a threat to the average person.


    And actually take away the guns from criminals and they resort to other means - such as arson. Australians like to claim that there have been no mass killings in Australia since the 1996 gun control/ban went into full effect. Not true. Mass killings in Australia have always been rare, but before 1996 they were almost al with firearms. Since 1996, some mass murderers have turned to arson:

    June 2000, Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel, killed 15, by a fire started by Robert Long.
    Feb 2009, Churchill, 10 dead, fire started by Brendan Sokaluk.
    Nov 2011, Quakers Hill Nursing Home, at least 10 dead (possibly over 20), fire started by Roger Dean.
     
  3. Ernie_McCracken

    Ernie_McCracken Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    May 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,391
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    41 pages? Don't I get some sort of thread of the month award?
     
  4. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Don't know about that, but I read your avatar as saying that you like fat chicks. Either that or you have a self-imposed prohibition on signs that read, "No Fat Chicks." I get the feeling that isn't what you were trying to say?

    Just my observation for the day.
     
  5. Ernie_McCracken

    Ernie_McCracken Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    May 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,391
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    what of it?
     
  6. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,180
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I answered that with "they already deny guns to some people, it's a slippery slope, someday they may do the same for speech or religion too"
     
  7. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But the primary purpose of gasoline or other fire starting chemicals is not to kill, is it?

    Your numbers appear way off from most that I've seen (very low), especially when you attempt to indicate that deaths by fire and guns are similar. They aren't. And we're really not talking about that anyway. It's about the discharge of guns, accidently or on purpose, causing harm to someone else and expecting the shooter to have insurance to pay for damages.
     
  8. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Semantics. You still need to apply to the government and pay $200 for that stamp.

    Great. Link?
     
  9. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This isn't really correct. Buying a machine gun isn't any different than buying a regular gun. You have to pay a $200 tax stamp and fill out what's called a form 4. Not much different than filling out a 4473 to purchase a regular firearm.

    There is no permit required.
     
  10. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The numbers on fire deaths and accidental firearm deaths come from the CDC WISQARs data base. Homicide data comes from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports. Direct from the primary source, no middle man.

    You compared the danger of fire and the danger of guns, claiming fire was rarely fatal. The numbers show otherwise.

    The claim that gun owners should have liability insurance in case they shoot some one is a red herring. Its been proposed by banners for many years, and it will go the same route as all banner proposals - the purpose is not to "pay for damages", the purpose is to place a major burden on gun owners to discourage people from owning firearms.
     
  11. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks for no links. FBI stats are questionable since they obtain their information from states and municipalities and have been called into question more than once.

    Uh, I don't know where you get your information, but you stated that there were 5,574 fire deaths in the U.S. in 2013, but there were over 31,000 deaths by guns in that same period. The numbers are nowhere near comparable.

    No red herring at all and what problem do you have with someone being responsible enough to be able to pay for damages they might cause, for whatever reason? Perhaps if such a law were in place, there might be fewer deaths by gun, unless you wish to state that all gun owners are completely responsible people and never make mistakes.
     
  12. cameron

    cameron New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That was rough statistics.

    Lets go to specifics.

    How many deaths by accidental gun shots? I ask in order to check how valid is to ask for liability insurance.

    Notice that deaths caused by gun shots in criminal activities and police actions can't be count.

    Show the graph year by year for a decade.
     
  13. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is when they are purchased with the intent of committing arson.

    You will note that intent is an important part of the discussion of law.
     
  14. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Correct. You are merely supporting the proposed position for the sake of the discussion that is being had. Proof that one does not have to actually support an argumentative position in order to argue in favor of it.

    Would such be sufficient for the proposed legislation to be declared unconstitutional? Or would it merely be sufficient for the particular plaintiff to have the requirement waived in their individual case?

    Except for being able to provide links to border agents exceeding their authority with regularity, and neither going to court for their actions, or truly being reprimanded by their supervisors.

    Would you care for a link to the story detailing how border agents held a troop of boy scouts at gunpoint for taking pictures of them doing their job, and the agents refusing to release video evidence that no firearms were drawn or brandished?
     
  15. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    And that still doesn't amount to a permit. Why don't you just admit that you held a mistaken belief and move on. No shame in it.


    Uhhh, what exactly did you want me to link you to?
     
  16. Jarlaxle

    Jarlaxle Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    8,939
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    That is usually covered by homeowners insurance.
     
  17. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If memory serves, I posted a link that there were over 73,000 ER treatments for gunshots a year or two ago, which is way more than accidental deaths or even total deaths. Now, you can go find that link, and get someone else to do your homework for you.
     
  18. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You dodged his question.
     
  19. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That does not show how many of them were accidental, rather than intentional.
     
  20. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    still pounding for backdoor registration, I see...........
     
  21. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :frustrated: I don't give a rat's patoot how many were accidentalal or on purpose - there were a lot of people who required ER treatment from gunshots that someone had to pay for. IMO, the proposal that you had to have liability insurance to legally own a gun seemed like a reasonable idea.
     
  22. ballantine

    ballantine Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,297
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's the most asinine suggestion I've heard in a long time!

    Pal, if you shoot someone "by mistake", insurance isn't going to help you. It's not going to bring your victim back to life, is it?
     
  23. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You should. The proposed legislation only covers acts that were accidental, and not of a criminal nature. If the majority of those some seventy three thousand cases were due to criminal action, and thus not covered by liability insurance, the proposed legislation would do very little in the way of good.

    Unless you can present evidence showing that the majority of those hospitalizations were caused by legally owned firearms, your argument is without merit. Liability insurance does not cover acts deemed to be of a criminal nature. And unless those who caused the injuries were actually found, and held accountable, the argument is moot.

    Of those seventy three thousand incidents, in how many of them was the responsible shooter ever identified?
     
  24. Grizz

    Grizz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    4,787
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, no, if they're dead they're dead. But it will pay the survivors and, since most gunshot wounds are NOT fatal, then it would also pay for their treatment.

    Okay, I'll take that because it's another way for police to remove illegal weapons from the street. "You got your insurance card, buddy?" If not, that gun is off the street. Further, if it is used in commission of a crime, that's one more charge than can be added.

    Here ya go:

    Also in 2011 (to keep things consistent), according to the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, of the 73,883 non-fatal firearms injuries that year, 14,675 (19.86%) were unintentional.

    Note, those are pure accidents, or as they're know at CDC, "Oopsies" and they are the non-fatal ones.
     
  25. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One out of hundreds of millions, and just as easy to replace if one knows where to look, or who to ask.

    Added, and then dropped by the prosecutor in a plea deal to expedite a conviction.

    In other words, more than eighty percent of the non-fatal incidents attributed to firearms use would not be covered by liability insurance, because they would be precluded by nature of being a crime.

    Of those fourteen thousands, six hundred and seventy five unintentional shootings, how many of them were not the actions of an outside party, but rather the individual themselves, and would thus be covered by their own currently existing medical insurance plan?
     

Share This Page