Lets treat cars and guns exactly alike; Reigster/License/Insurance mandates!

[sfcalifornia]

Hmmmm. Yep, you guys got me. You're right. The Constitution doesnt say anything about cars.

Because...the Founder rode around on horses. Cars didnt exist. They probably couldnt even fathom the thought of a car or airplane.

And, I bet they couldnt fathom anything other than muskets and cannons.......much less AK47s or M4s that fire 30 rounds in 10 seconds.

See how that works? You guys have to stop trying to govern like we are living in the 1790's still.

OH, guess what? The Constitution doesnt say anything about child porn or heroine or crack cocaine or abortions either. Should all that be legal?

Good luck with that.

That's the problem with conservatives to begin with: they're so deathly afraid of change.

If it were up to them, we never would have left 1790.

 

[bucs90]

Yet, when we went from common civilians owning a musket..or revolver............to owning a weapon of war like an AK47 or AR15, we never jumped to the same conclusion of "Oh shit, these assault rifles are way more deadly than a pistol or hunting rifle, we better take some common sense approaches to safeguard".

What common sense approaches to safeguard do you have in mind ?

I said it. License, Registration, Insurance. I own an M4 and love it. I'd gladly apply for a license, register it, and have some insurance on it. Plus, insuring guns would create a whole new industry of gun insurance, and that means JOBS!!!!

For example, the most expensive insurance would be one you buy, and the agent knows nothing about you or the gun except your name and what type gun it is. Period. Expensive.

The cheapest would be knowing you, the gun, and an in home visit to see how well you secure it and what training you have attended to become adept with it. Like the Newton mom, who should've had that fucking gun secured away from her son. Getting cheap insurance as an incentive to secure your guns well would be an incentive.

I have never, and will never, advocate a gun BAN. Not only do I think it wouldnt help, but it is unenforceable.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

That would mean millions of americans with any felony conviction or a misdemeanor conviction for domestic violence could not drive. Sounds good to me.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I said it. License, Registration, Insurance

License, Registration ?

That won't stop a criminal.

Insurance against what ? Criminal acts ? Come on.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

How bout this? Treat guns exactly like cars; no worse, no better.

To carry a gun anywhere outside your home, you must:

1- Have a license. If you drive a car without license, you go to jail. Lets make it the same with a gun. Must have proof with you.

2- Must register the car. Many states dont require gun registry. But do for cars. Make all guns be registered with the state, just like a car. Must have proof with you.

3- Gun Insurance. Yep. You must have liability insurance on the gun. Just like a car. If you accidentally shoot someone, you pay up...er, well, the insurance company pays up. Get caught outside your home with a gun, and no insurance? Go to jail, just like a car.



You can buy a car without a license, park it in your driveway, not register it, and carry no insurance on it, and its legal. You just cant drive it off your property.

Treat guns the same. Buy your guns for your home.

But take them anywhere off your property, and you must have a license, registration and insurance, just like a car.

Afterall, a car, like a gun....is just a tool, not a killing machine, unless being operated by the wrong person.

Fair enough?

When we see a voter I'd photo card treated the same as a passport, a library card, and a drivers license rather than a suppression of a Constitutional right ..... then we'll talk.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Yet, when we went from common civilians owning a musket..or revolver............to owning a weapon of war like an AK47 or AR15, we never jumped to the same conclusion of "Oh shit, these assault rifles are way more deadly than a pistol or hunting rifle, we better take some common sense approaches to safeguard".

What common sense approaches to safeguard do you have in mind ?

I said it. License, Registration, Insurance. I own an M4 and love it. I'd gladly apply for a license, register it, and have some insurance on it. Plus, insuring guns would create a whole new industry of gun insurance, and that means JOBS!!!!

For example, the most expensive insurance would be one you buy, and the agent knows nothing about you or the gun except your name and what type gun it is. Period. Expensive.

The cheapest would be knowing you, the gun, and an in home visit to see how well you secure it and what training you have attended to become adept with it. Like the Newton mom, who should've had that fucking gun secured away from her son. Getting cheap insurance as an incentive to secure your guns well would be an incentive.

I have never, and will never, advocate a gun BAN. Not only do I think it wouldnt help, but it is unenforceable.

I like your idea.

The Constitution guarantees my right to purchase a very well-regulated alcoholic beverage, I don't see why guns can't be well-regulated too.

 

[bucs90]

Ok. My proposal. I dont believe in a gun ban. Wouldnt work for one. And not enforceable.

So what about gun insurance? You have the right to transport, yet, cars are so dangerous, we require insurance.

So, lets pop up a new industry (JOBS!!!!) with gun insurance. How it works:

You buy a gun. You are informed by the dealer you are mandated to buy gun insurance. Just like when you buy a car. Now...you can ignore to do so, like some car owners do. But, if you never take the gun out of your home, you probably will never have a problem. Get caught with an uninsured gun, and you get a big time fine.

So how bout the insurance? Well, its liability only. Lost guns and damage aren't covered. Only property or personal damage you may cause with that gun, or another person causes if it falls into the wrong hands.

Cheapest rate: An insurance agent, probably an ex-vet or ex-cop (Yay, jobs for vets!), comes by your home, checks to see how secure your gun is, and you provide a copy of a clear psychological exam and certificate from a training class on it, like concealed carry. Bingo!!! Insurance is so cheap, you hardly notice. Like $20 a year.

Moderate rate: You do the psych exam and training cert, but tell the agent he cannot see your gun security situation at home. Higher rate, like $20 a month.

Moderate-High rate: You do the training cert, but refuse to do anything else. Much higher rate. Like $75 a month.

Highest rate: You do nothing but buy the insurance. Dont provide anything except name and type of gun. No training. No psych exam. And absolutely no way he is seeing your home and how you secure your gun. That rate is high. $250 a month or more.


Not only does it help with securing loose guns and keeping them in safer hands, but creates JOBS!!!! And, doesnt take away your right to own a gun.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Lost guns and damage aren't covered. Only property or personal damage you may cause with that gun, or another person causes if it falls into the wrong hands.

Starts to slip off Retarded Ridge right about here.

 

[boedicca]

Just another full employment scheme for lawyers...like we really need more of those.

 

[alan1]

Ok. My proposal. I dont believe in a gun ban. Wouldnt work for one. And not enforceable.

So what about gun insurance? You have the right to transport, yet, cars are so dangerous, we require insurance.

So, lets pop up a new industry (JOBS!!!!) with gun insurance. How it works:

You buy a gun. You are informed by the dealer you are mandated to buy gun insurance. Just like when you buy a car. Now...you can ignore to do so, like some car owners do. But, if you never take the gun out of your home, you probably will never have a problem. Get caught with an uninsured gun, and you get a big time fine.

So how bout the insurance? Well, its liability only. Lost guns and damage aren't covered. Only property or personal damage you may cause with that gun, or another person causes if it falls into the wrong hands.

Cheapest rate: An insurance agent, probably an ex-vet or ex-cop (Yay, jobs for vets!), comes by your home, checks to see how secure your gun is, and you provide a copy of a clear psychological exam and certificate from a training class on it, like concealed carry. Bingo!!! Insurance is so cheap, you hardly notice. Like $20 a year.

Moderate rate: You do the psych exam and training cert, but tell the agent he cannot see your gun security situation at home. Higher rate, like $20 a month.

Moderate-High rate: You do the training cert, but refuse to do anything else. Much higher rate. Like $75 a month.

Highest rate: You do nothing but buy the insurance. Dont provide anything except name and type of gun. No training. No psych exam. And absolutely no way he is seeing your home and how you secure your gun. That rate is high. $250 a month or more.


Not only does it help with securing loose guns and keeping them in safer hands, but creates JOBS!!!! And, doesnt take away your right to own a gun.

Kind of like the Pit bull/German Shepard/Doberman insurance.

 

[bucs90]

What common sense approaches to safeguard do you have in mind ?

I said it. License, Registration, Insurance. I own an M4 and love it. I'd gladly apply for a license, register it, and have some insurance on it. Plus, insuring guns would create a whole new industry of gun insurance, and that means JOBS!!!!

For example, the most expensive insurance would be one you buy, and the agent knows nothing about you or the gun except your name and what type gun it is. Period. Expensive.

The cheapest would be knowing you, the gun, and an in home visit to see how well you secure it and what training you have attended to become adept with it. Like the Newton mom, who should've had that fucking gun secured away from her son. Getting cheap insurance as an incentive to secure your guns well would be an incentive.

I have never, and will never, advocate a gun BAN. Not only do I think it wouldnt help, but it is unenforceable.

I like your idea.

The Constitution guarantees my right to purchase a very well-regulated alcoholic beverage, I don't see why guns can't be well-regulated too.

Doesnt it say something about a "well regulated" militia?

 

[sfcalifornia]

I said it. License, Registration, Insurance. I own an M4 and love it. I'd gladly apply for a license, register it, and have some insurance on it. Plus, insuring guns would create a whole new industry of gun insurance, and that means JOBS!!!!

For example, the most expensive insurance would be one you buy, and the agent knows nothing about you or the gun except your name and what type gun it is. Period. Expensive.

The cheapest would be knowing you, the gun, and an in home visit to see how well you secure it and what training you have attended to become adept with it. Like the Newton mom, who should've had that fucking gun secured away from her son. Getting cheap insurance as an incentive to secure your guns well would be an incentive.

I have never, and will never, advocate a gun BAN. Not only do I think it wouldnt help, but it is unenforceable.

I like your idea.

The Constitution guarantees my right to purchase a very well-regulated alcoholic beverage, I don't see why guns can't be well-regulated too.

Doesnt it say something about a "well regulated" militia?

Indeed it does.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Doesnt it say something about a "well regulated" militia?

Yes it does. An individual's right to bear arms can not be infringed because a well regulated milita is necessary for secure State.

Each state addresses the regulation of its respective militia.

My state does in its Constitution

 

[bucs90]

Ok. My proposal. I dont believe in a gun ban. Wouldnt work for one. And not enforceable.

So what about gun insurance? You have the right to transport, yet, cars are so dangerous, we require insurance.

So, lets pop up a new industry (JOBS!!!!) with gun insurance. How it works:

You buy a gun. You are informed by the dealer you are mandated to buy gun insurance. Just like when you buy a car. Now...you can ignore to do so, like some car owners do. But, if you never take the gun out of your home, you probably will never have a problem. Get caught with an uninsured gun, and you get a big time fine.

So how bout the insurance? Well, its liability only. Lost guns and damage aren't covered. Only property or personal damage you may cause with that gun, or another person causes if it falls into the wrong hands.

Cheapest rate: An insurance agent, probably an ex-vet or ex-cop (Yay, jobs for vets!), comes by your home, checks to see how secure your gun is, and you provide a copy of a clear psychological exam and certificate from a training class on it, like concealed carry. Bingo!!! Insurance is so cheap, you hardly notice. Like $20 a year.

Moderate rate: You do the psych exam and training cert, but tell the agent he cannot see your gun security situation at home. Higher rate, like $20 a month.

Moderate-High rate: You do the training cert, but refuse to do anything else. Much higher rate. Like $75 a month.

Highest rate: You do nothing but buy the insurance. Dont provide anything except name and type of gun. No training. No psych exam. And absolutely no way he is seeing your home and how you secure your gun. That rate is high. $250 a month or more.


Not only does it help with securing loose guns and keeping them in safer hands, but creates JOBS!!!! And, doesnt take away your right to own a gun.

Kind of like the Pit bull/German Shepard/Doberman insurance.

Actually.............

Most cities have leash laws, nuisance animal laws, "poop scoop" laws, and many HOA's have dog permits, and almost every apartment complex I know of makes you pay a fee to have a dog....which is basically insurance.

And all have held up in court.

So, yeah, kinda like that!

 

[OODA_Loop]

So my insurance has to compensate for the results of someone stealing my gun ?

 

[sfcalifornia]

Doesnt it say something about a "well regulated" militia?

Yes it does. An individual's right to bear arms can not be infringed because a well regulated milita is necessary for secure State.

Each state addresses the regulation of its respective militia.

My state does in its Constitution

Somehow you think no regulation = well regulated.

 

[uscitizen]

Just like you car is not covered against theft if you leave the keys in it.

 

[bucs90]

So my insurance has to compensate for the results of someone stealing my gun ?

Yes....up until you report it stolen to the cops and they enter it into NCIC.

Actually, many places in the US have laws that mandate you report a stolen gun within a set amount of time, often 24 hours. And that law has held up in court.

But yeah, if you go on vacation, and leave 5 assault rifles just laying in a closet unsecure, and they get stolen, then you are a dumbass and should pay. Afterall, stolen guns are the ones used in most inner city crime.

Deter people from making theft easy, and you solve SOME of that problem.

 

[alan1]

Ok. My proposal. I dont believe in a gun ban. Wouldnt work for one. And not enforceable.

So what about gun insurance? You have the right to transport, yet, cars are so dangerous, we require insurance.

So, lets pop up a new industry (JOBS!!!!) with gun insurance. How it works:

You buy a gun. You are informed by the dealer you are mandated to buy gun insurance. Just like when you buy a car. Now...you can ignore to do so, like some car owners do. But, if you never take the gun out of your home, you probably will never have a problem. Get caught with an uninsured gun, and you get a big time fine.

So how bout the insurance? Well, its liability only. Lost guns and damage aren't covered. Only property or personal damage you may cause with that gun, or another person causes if it falls into the wrong hands.

Cheapest rate: An insurance agent, probably an ex-vet or ex-cop (Yay, jobs for vets!), comes by your home, checks to see how secure your gun is, and you provide a copy of a clear psychological exam and certificate from a training class on it, like concealed carry. Bingo!!! Insurance is so cheap, you hardly notice. Like $20 a year.

Moderate rate: You do the psych exam and training cert, but tell the agent he cannot see your gun security situation at home. Higher rate, like $20 a month.

Moderate-High rate: You do the training cert, but refuse to do anything else. Much higher rate. Like $75 a month.

Highest rate: You do nothing but buy the insurance. Dont provide anything except name and type of gun. No training. No psych exam. And absolutely no way he is seeing your home and how you secure your gun. That rate is high. $250 a month or more.


Not only does it help with securing loose guns and keeping them in safer hands, but creates JOBS!!!! And, doesnt take away your right to own a gun.

Kind of like the Pit bull/German Shepard/Doberman insurance.

Actually.............

Most cities have leash laws, nuisance animal laws, "poop scoop" laws, and many HOA's have dog permits, and almost every apartment complex I know of makes you pay a fee to have a dog....which is basically insurance.

And all have held up in court.

So, yeah, kinda like that!

Laws and insurance are two entirely different things.
Let's try to not confuse the two or pretend that they are the same.

 

[bucs90]

At some point we have to make these rednecks take so personal responsibility for securing their damn guns. I own several, and it would take a damn SWAT-level attempt to steal them they're so secure.

But many of these rednecks just keep 'em in a closet or cheap ass safe that can be popped with a simple crowbar.

We need to be hard on crime. But we also need to be hard on stupid.