Dems push for $10K fine for gun owners who don't buy liability insurance

Discussion in 'Politics' started by tinydancer, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. tinydancer
    Offline

    tinydancer VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    25,015
    Likes Received:
    4,676
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Sundown
    Ratings:
    +4,710 / 3 / -0
    Democrats push for $10K fine for gun owners without liability insurance

    By Cheryl K. Chumley

    The Washington Times


    All these people need to be voted out of office. They're freaking looney tunes. As if gang violence in any city is going to be curtailed by this new law.

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. When purchasing a weapon illegally in the city of Chicago, the gun runner is going to demand the gang member purchase liability insurance.

    Rep. Maloney is one hell of a dumb bitch to think that for one moment this is going to stop gun violence. Sheesh. Where do these fools come from?


    A group of congressional Democrats has signed on to new legislation that would mandate liability insurance for all gun owners in the United States — and fine those who refuse to purchase it as much as $10,000.

    The Daily Caller reports that New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s Firearm Risk Protection Act says that all gun buyers — before they buy — purchase and show proof of “a qualified liability insurance policy,” and that those caught owning a weapon without the insurance are subject to harsh fines.

    “It shall be unlawful for a person who owns a firearm purchased on or after the effective date of this subsection not to be covered by a qualified liability insurance policy,” the text of the bill states.

    Ms. Maloney says her bill would shift the cost of gun violence back onto those who own the weapon. Gun rights groups call that logic ridiculous, however.

    “[The bill] is ridiculous on its face, as it presumes law-abiding gun owners are guilty for merely exercising a fundamental, constitutional right,” said Chris Cox, the executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, to The Daily Caller.



    Democrats push for $10K fine for gun owners without liability insurance - Washington Times
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2013
  2. martybegan
    Offline

    martybegan Silver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,923
    Likes Received:
    1,754
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Ratings:
    +1,813 / 4 / -0
    And the attempted end runs around the constitution continue.
  3. Little-Acorn
    Offline

    Little-Acorn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,231
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +643 / 0 / -0
    They are even abusing the concept of "insurance" with this pitiful attempt at govt control of gun owners.

    Insurance is for ACCIDENTS. Or at least thing you didn't intend to cause. Many life insurance policies will not pay off if you commit suicide. I don't know if your auto insurance will pay off if it can be proven that you deliberately crashed your car, or torched it etc. Ditto if you deliberately burn your house down, committing arson.

    But most incidents of people getting shot with guns, are done deliberately by somebody, to somebody else (or to himself in a suicide). If these big-govt maroons try to force you to pay in advance for your gun shooting someone, chances are it's you doing the shooting in the rare event that it happens. I'm not sure what that payment policy would be called, but "insurance", it ain't.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Ratings:
    +2,784 / 13 / -0
    About one third of shootings in the US are accidental shootings.
  5. Little-Acorn
    Offline

    Little-Acorn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,231
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +643 / 0 / -0
    Thanks for supporting what I said. Most shootings are done deliberately. So the concept of "insurance" doesn't even apply.
  6. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Ratings:
    +2,784 / 13 / -0
    Here is the actual bill if you want to read it for yourself:
    Full Text of H.R. 1369: Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2013 - GovTrack.us

    Another insurance mandate.
  7. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    23,909
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Ratings:
    +2,784 / 13 / -0
    Don't worry. The bill has been sent to the House Judiciary committee where it will die a quiet death.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Crackerjaxon
    Offline

    Crackerjaxon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2012
    Messages:
    2,375
    Likes Received:
    265
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +265 / 0 / -0
    The insurance companies must love democrats. First Obama forces everyone in the country to give them money, now they're forcing gun owners to give them money.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    11,521
    Likes Received:
    703
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +723 / 6 / -0
    How will the government know if I have insurance?
    First, it has to know I have a gun.
    How will the government know I have a gun?
    Universal registration.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    8,393
    Likes Received:
    1,231
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,231 / 0 / -0
    While I do not except such a blatantly unconstitutional bill will become law, it is yet another example of gun grabbers making rules to keep firearms from the hands of poor people.

    Shame, shame, shame...
    • Like Like x 1
  11. tjvh
    Offline

    tjvh Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    6,893
    Likes Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +915 / 0 / -0
    That's hardly the point, the idea that elected officials are wasting our time introducing ridiculous measures like this makes one wonder if they shouldn't be doing something a bit more constructive.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    10,408
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +1,785 / 0 / -0
    No need for insurance when it comes to all those accidental shootings? Interesting. So if you come to my house and I accidentally shoot and kill you while I'm showing you my gun, your spouse should not be able to collect anything for my negligence? The thought process for those on the right leaves a lot to be desired.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. martybegan
    Offline

    martybegan Silver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,923
    Likes Received:
    1,754
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Ratings:
    +1,813 / 4 / -0
    No you sue the person in question using the courts. If the person was negligent, it should be a simple matter to get compensated.

    The concept behind auto insurance is that there are so many accidents, that ajudicating every single one would require a massive court system that would still be bogged down due to the sheer number of cases involved. The number of gun accident cases does not warrant this.

    The real reason behind requiring insurance is to price people out of owning firearms, pure and simple.
  14. gallantwarrior
    Offline

    gallantwarrior VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Messages:
    14,300
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Location:
    So far in the boonies, I'm not on google street vi
    Ratings:
    +1,398 / 1 / -0
    Will they be including and "uninsured gun owner" clause as well, similar to the "uninsured motorist" insurance?
  15. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    10,408
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +1,785 / 0 / -0
    Good luck suing someone with very few assets. Most Americans live from paycheck to paycheck. Suing them won't get you a dime, but it'll keep the lawyers wealthy.
  16. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    11,521
    Likes Received:
    703
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +723 / 6 / -0
    Explain to us exactly how a requirement to have insurance before you can exercise a fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution does not constitute an infringement of that right.
  17. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    11,521
    Likes Received:
    703
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +723 / 6 / -0
    Why do you want to deny poor people the right to keep and bear arms?
  18. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    10,408
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +1,785 / 0 / -0
    Why do you want to deny yourself recourse in the event of an accident that takes one of your loved ones?
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2013
  19. Truthseeker420
    Offline

    Truthseeker420 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    10,293
    Likes Received:
    955
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Home of the 2013 BCS National Champion
    Ratings:
    +956 / 0 / -0
    Car insurance hasn't stopped car accidents...
  20. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    11,521
    Likes Received:
    703
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +723 / 6 / -0
    Don't avoid the question.
    Why do you want to deny poor people the right to keep and bear arms?

Share This Page