Gun owners should have insurance, JIC

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2009
168,037
16,519
2,165
S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly
 
S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly
Kill a bunch of people accidentally? Way to go Jake…
JIC as Jubilee International Church?
 
Some do. One of the posters here, Lonestar_logic I think, has said he carried liability insurance for the eventuality of him shooting someone. And an ex-congressman is selling liability insurance to nutters.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly
,
Kill a bunch of people accidentally? Way to go Jake…
JIC as Jubilee International Church?
If you driving a car kills a buncha people by accident, you better have your insurance.

Same with a gun, bub.

JIC: just in case for the illiterate.
 
Some do. One of the posters here, Lonestar_logic I think, has said he carried liability insurance for the eventuality of him shooting someone. And an ex-congressman is selling liability insurance to nutters.
Muddly, my dear, just why are you calling people who believe in the Constitution as a whole "nutters?"
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
Some do. One of the posters here, Lonestar_logic I think, has said he carried liability insurance for the eventuality of him shooting someone. And an ex-congressman is selling liability insurance to nutters.
Muddly, my dear, just why are you calling people who believe in the Constitution as a whole "nutters?"
He is referring to you types who say you do but in fact don't understand the Constitution. You have not a clue.
 
S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly
,
Kill a bunch of people accidentally? Way to go Jake…
JIC as Jubilee International Church?
If you driving a car kills a buncha people by accident, you better have your insurance.

Same with a gun, bub.

JIC: just in case for the illiterate.

Just another method of making sure poor people can't afford firearms, right farkey?
 
If you driving a car kills a buncha people by accident, you better have your insurance.

Same with a gun, bub.

JIC: just in case for the illiterate.
You still did not explain how people kill a bunch of people in a movie theater accidentally.
JIC may refer to:

JIC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
He is referring to you types who say you do but in fact don't understand the Constitution. You have not a clue.
Maybe you need to read upon the Federalist Papers to give you insight about the background how the Constitution was drawn up. If you want to display how stupid you are, you are doing a good job Fakey...
 
S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly

Great topic. You're dead wrong, of course, but this really shines a light on where we're headed legally.
 
S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly

Fuck off take your more taxes and shove it up your ass.

Have not had a car insurance claim in 30 years

Have not used medical insurance in 35 years...

Shove it ....
 
Ah, we see the libertarains and a few far right wanting to shirk their responsibility for accidental damage with cars and guns.

What about intentional use of cars or guns to kill: execute the driver or shooter.
 
Marty: Just another method of making sure poor people can't afford firearms, right farkey?[

JakeStarkey: You want poor people to exempt from insurance on cars. Remember that is the car, not the person, that kills.
 
Ah, we see the libertarains and a few far right wanting to shirk their responsibility for accidental damage with cars and guns.

What about intentional use of cars or guns to kill: execute the driver or shooter.
You still did not explain how one shoots a bunch of people accidentally...
 
Ah, we see the libertarains and a few far right wanting to shirk their responsibility for accidental damage with cars and guns.

What about intentional use of cars or guns to kill: execute the driver or shooter.

The whole reason behind mandatory car insurance is that the volume of civil cases resulting from car accidents would swamp the system. Insurance is a way of reducing the # of cases to a more manageable level.

There is not the same issue with gun cases, so forcing insurance is not needed.

Also, considering RTKBA is a right, and driving a car isn't, different standards apply.
 
Marty: Just another method of making sure poor people can't afford firearms, right farkey?[

JakeStarkey: You want poor people to exempt from insurance on cars. Remember that is the car, not the person, that kills.

Again with the inability to quote properly.
 
You, young Marty, are not the authority here on quotation style. Did you say it, you betcha your skinny pock marked ass (your boy friend told us) you did.

"There is not the same issue with gun cases, so forcing insurance is not needed" without out any fact, rhyme, or real reason. Give us some.

No one is stopping some from owning and carrying arms at all by requiring insurance.
 

Forum List

Back
Top