Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

State Lawmakers Push Gun Insurance Schemes

February 12, 2013 by  

State Lawmakers Push Gun Insurance Schemes
PHOTOS.COM

Public support for sweeping gun control measures isn’t that high and reports indicate that legislative attempts to force draconian new gun laws of the Federal level would be met with swift and fierce rejection. But lawmakers in some States are currently working on a new gun control idea: requiring gun owner insurance.

Legislative measures have been proposed in Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York and California that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance on firearms to cover damages or injuries caused by the weapons.

Some proponents of the idea believe it will cut public costs associated with gun crime and accidents and encourage gun owners to be more responsible. Type of firearm, gun theft and accident would all factor into gun insurance premiums.

“I was moved, like many others, being the father of two young children, by the Sandy Hook incident and looking for constructive ways to manage gun violence here in California as well as the rest of the country,” Assemblyman Philip Ting of San Francisco who introduced a gun insurance bill told Fox News. There’s basically a cost that is born by the taxpayers when accidents occur. … I don’t think that taxpayers should be footing those bills.”

Gun rights supporters say the real goal of the bills is to price Americans out of gun ownership by placing hefty fees on the right to bear arms.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “State Lawmakers Push Gun Insurance Schemes”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • CZ52

    “Gun rights supporters say the real goal of the bills is to price Americans out of gun ownership by placing hefty fees on the right to bear arms.”

    And they are correct. By putting ever greater costs on gun ownership eventualy only the top 10% or so will be able to afford to legaly own a firearm.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      The government will then know with surety who own guns and how many. The Insurance proposal is nothing more than a “protection racket” that does not protect. Once the insurance company starts charging their fees the insurance will get more and more expensive till people will not be able to afford the cost of the guns. Every which way they can be sneaky to take away guns.

    • Hedgehog

      CZ52:
      Don’t pay the fees, don’t pay the fines. Become a felon, the fees and fines cease to apply due to your 5th amendment right against self incrimination. Check it out, felons are not legally required to have background checks or register firearms because of the 5th amendment. They are forbidden to own firearms, which is a violation of their 2nd amendment rights. Your government is the real criminal!

      • just ramblin

        The Fifth Amendment is two part,YOU don’t have to be a WITNESS against yourself,and that is what you want to use.
        When you blow for traffic stop you are being a witness against yourself,and they impose a penalty for not being a witness against yourself.
        Talk about TREASON on the part of state legislators.
        just rambling

    • Steve E

      Did you realize that only the blue states are the ones that want to infringe on your rights?

    • kevin

      A form of registration that’s what they want to do the progressive socialist wants to insure our rights. anther way to infringe on our rights they want to start a civil war it looks like…
      maybe it’s time to clean the progressive socialist and comunist out of our government
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants

    • http://www.facebook.com/jeff.rowbottom.5 Jeff Rowbottom

      Up till now they haven’t taxed a right,unless you count Affordable health care law.

  • Mr Diesel

    I don’t care as I won’t be getting it.

    • RivahMitch

      The best “gun insurance (especially against the Kenyan fascist and thugs of its’ ilk) is to buy more ammo.

      • Guy Waukcinebar

        Good luck finding much ammunition, much less any firearm except a peashooter.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      You will be forced to make a choice when this insurance clause is connected with your home insurance. What choice will you make when you can’t get home insurance.?

      • Walt

        “Legislative measures have been proposed in Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York and California that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance on firearms to cover damages or injuries caused by the weapons.”

        It’s not surprising that these northern states and Commiefornia is proposing more ways to get around the 2nd Amendment by these stupid laws. Notice that not one of the mid-west or southern states is on the list.

        It seems that once again, our country is being divided between north and south on issues of freedom. Once again, the mindset of the Liberal north is hell bent on imposing it’s twisted will on the rest of the country.

        No southern politician would venture to suggest such an outlandish law because they know their constituents would vote them out or use recall in a New York minute.

    • eddie47d

      I doubt if this insurance policy on guns will fly because as some say people are required to have auto insurance yet don’t bother. Uninsured motorists have always relied on the insured motorist to cover their costs and that is written into most state laws. I’m thinking the reason behind gun insurance is the fact that most gun injuries and deaths occur within ones home. Whether suicide, spousal disputes or maybe kids getting ahold of a weapon and playing with it. Seems like that could be handled under the homeowners policy,health insurance or possibly life insurance.

      • ibcamn

        yep Eddie your right(never thought id say that)but yes in several of my insurance papers they ask if there is any fire arms(weapons)kept in the house and or in the vehicles!(if you have a vehicle as a private hunting vehicle)also in some policies as a four wheeler is a recreational vehicle,or in some states you can drive said four wheeler on roads and it may be registered as such,the list goes on,but as i take it you wouldn’t need seperate “gun”insurance to do the same job!!

      • Opal the Gem

        ” Seems like that could be handled under the homeowners policy,health insurance or possibly life insurance.”

        eddie the operative word in your statement is COULD.

      • eddie47d

        No such gun insurance policy has been enacted or is set in stone Opal. That is why I said COULD. I know you are always trying to get your digs in without having to add anything relevant.

      • Opal the Gem

        “No such gun insurance policy has been enacted or is set in stone Opal. That is why I said COULD.”

        And that is why I pointed out the COULD.

        “I know you are always trying to get your digs in without having to add anything relevant.”

        Show me where I was “getting in a dig”. Pointing out the fact that it could is the operative word is relevant.

        I don’t have the wording of the proposals at hand but they seem to be requiring insurance over and above any other insurance you might have.

    • Ronald Wolfe

      Maybe the goverment should have insurance over the screw ups that they make.. They do more damage to America than any other person on the planet. They need to cover theirselves with the GREAT OBAMAAAA CARE, And leave us the hell alone. They need to leave our rights alone and stay in the DC area and play with each other.

  • Warrior

    Well, if you can’t sell “health insurance”, we can’t put all those people out of work now can we?

  • Richard

    I have an idea. Why don’t we make the criminals carry gun liability ins to cover their own violent acts when they commit a crime. Oh that’s right is has nothing to do with crime it’s all about control of everybody which is socialism. Stupid people deserve all they got coming to them. Let’s see how happy they are when they get all of thief change they voted for

    • Warrior

      Try to imagine the “fine print” coming in these insurance policies. LMAO!

    • Maryland Freestater

      it would also be considered racist and elitist to do that. Good idea anyway!

  • Chris

    Hmmmm………let me see now……….”all” gun owners HAVING to pay this insurance………I wonder HOW MANY CRIMES are committed with guns that are not even registered……like “underground” guns……….stolen guns……..etc.? “EVERYONE” paying for the few scum who “won’t” be paying for their “NONregistered” crime-committing guns? So what happens when the scum who have no insurance commit a crime? Seems to me that the taxpayers will STILL be “footing the bill”…………ya THINK?!?!?!?!?!? I don’t own a gun, but this is downright stupid and just another way to squeeze more money out of good people who only want to protect themselves against this scum.

  • FreedomFighter

    Gun rights supporters say the real goal of the bills is to price Americans out of gun ownership by placing hefty fees on the right to bear arms.

    Also register, regulate, eliminate and confiscate.

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

    • kevin

      it’s time to get our brother all together and up hold our oaths and defend the citizens of this country from the tyrants in our government…

      Semper FI

  • rendarsmith

    This is no different than taking the guns away! Again, how are you doing to collect gun insurance from criminals??? It’s just another way of punishing responsible and legal gun owners and taking the guns out of the good citizens’ hands!

    And some people wonder why government approval is dropping so rapidly….

  • Chester

    If I read that right, every gun that has ever been sold legally would be insured, and titled, by way of its serial number. After the gun is titled, regardless of whose hands it is actually in, the titled owner is liable for all actions taken with it, just like a car. Oh, if it is stolen, you HAVE to report it stolen as soon as you discover it, and even then, you are likely to be liable if someone decides your report wasn’t timely enough. Of course, they will have to recover the gun that was used to commit a crime to know who to sue for damages, unless they can figure out a way to absolutely tell which gun fired a round without having the gun to compare against.

    • ibcamn

      OH CHRIST,Chester,…you just gave Obama an excuse to hire 5,000 more agents(for the tax payer to pay for)for some gun police patrol agency beraue thingy!crap!more cops to look out for!would that be kinda like the mattress police?…just messing with ya man,just don’t give Obama more idea”s..okay!

      • RivahMitch

        These will be high-turnover jobs with a very short life-expectancy.

  • dpetrlak

    Wow. Insurance to be required just like cars.

    Wonder if there will be “No Fault” states and if I can buy “Uninsured Gun-ist” insurance?

  • ibcamn

    So will it come down to the police or border patrol to stop and ask if you for all your differint insurance papers and I.D. and registration..!!..??!?!..!?..oh noooo….PAPERS PLEASE!you people are right,it’s all about control and who owns a gun!!it’s not for anything else,and if anybody doesn’t see that you are the head of the sheeple line(with a little bell around your neck)and blind!
    this is just another step in the Marxist handbook of taking over a country!
    know your enemy!read up on it people!
    creeping death of a nation!
    the gov’t is doing this step by step,to the letter!

    and yes,the criminals don’t give a sheet about this,they make the mess,they won’t pay!it’s always been this way,they steal a car,wreck it,we pay!they shoplift items,the store raises prices and we pay!they break into our homes,steal or trash the place,we pay!so now if they kill someone we pay!??!..look people…think…what’s wrong here!??!…not the law abiding citizen!??!..the sheeple have voted totally wrong,and now,again,we pay!

  • Steve E

    At least none if this idiotic crap in not going to happen in VA anytime soon.

  • mark

    Excuse Me. But no matter how you label it isn’t requiring insurance and infringement on your right? No difference than if you had some requirement you had to meet to have free speech.

    • Brian

      Obamacare is required and it is insurance so there you go just another manatory tax

    • Alan

      You bet it is Mark! That was my thought exactly! It’s just a sneakier way of applying an infringement, that’s all!

  • ranger09

    Amazing what we pay these politicians to do with OUR time and Money, Just another way to control and Help their Insurance Buddies make more money off the honest american citizens, They need to spend more time working on the REAL problems they have gotten this Country In. But when you have a country of sheep that just follow the Bell, What else could we expect.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dale.briggs.92 Dale Briggs

    they must be smokeing the weed again it is just another way to make money of the right to own a gun and the 2nd amendment who will make money of this the insurance companys say hell no it will not go lets hope the sheep will not fallow

  • nelle

    The constition prevents the any government from taking our right to “bear arms”. This includes requiring insurance in order to have guns. The constitution gives us the right to vote, which is why the poll tax was determined to be unconstitutional. Requiring insurance amount to a tax on a constitutional right.

  • concerned citizen

    there has to be some legal precedent somewhere that says the government cannot make citizens pay directly for insurance that will never be used…. thus making it a choice to have it or not.
    If someone is afraid of gun violence, I have no problem with them going to their insurance agent and making a policy to protect them from incidental gun fire that might happen in their neighborhood, city, etc… Heck, they could even put a travel rider in case you get shot at somewhere internationally for all I care.

    But I REALLY don’t think that I should have to have insurance for a gun that never leaves my home that I use for home protection to give money to someone in case I do shoot someone by accident… AND have to register my guns because it might cost more to have insurance on a .50 BMG compared to a .22lr.

    I can’t imagine what it would do to competitive shooters in 3-gun competitions, etc… Having tactical pistols, shotguns and AR style weapons…

    What would be really interesting is to see if the government takes a percentage of the insurance money as tax from the insurers, and if they pass info back and forth to the govt…. If so, there is something SERIOUSLY WRONG with this country.

  • Ronald

    The oath of office
    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
    The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    I do not think the democtats and republicans or senators can read or judges can read when it says shall not be infringed.
    That is what it means
    We need to start bring charges against these people for treason for violating their oath of office I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
    They have no defence for not doing this only they are dumb and stupid and are committing treason against the American People and consitution and should be called traders what they are.
    You know them by what they are doing and voting for making laws that take our rights away and they are openly say these things
    violating our rights and making laws to change the Constitution

    We need to inforce the oath of office and make it law and make them responsible to it.

    All that have violated this oath of office should loose all money and power they got while in office
    past/ present/ and future.

    To pay for the conviction of these people that are committing treason against the american people and the Constitution.

    Judges / congressmen / senators and other Goverment officials.

    also people that work in the news for not telling the truth and covering up what goverment is doing all the money that they make shall be use to put these people in jail and get rid of all corrupt goverment.

    They are not fit for office.

    So help me God.
    =====================================================================

  • 45caliber

    In other words, if your gun is stolen and used in a crime, this allows the victim to sue you rather than the criminal for injuries. Then the insurance will pay off. It is also a move to attempt to make gun ownership too expensive for any except the rich to be able to own one.

  • Ben Thomas

    We the gun owner of this country really need to ban together and start being seen as a power not to be messed with.

  • Rennie

    So buying insurance saves lives???? NY State is in the back pocket of the insurance industry anyways, one more thing that makes vehicle or homeownership in NYS an extra burden. It is not going to get any better so you may as well leave states like this one (NY) because they just keep figuring another regulation, tax, fee or fine. I suppose this way if you shoot the criminal trying to rape or kill you, he won’t have to depend on obamacare to pay his bills?

  • John

    If a woman can’t afford an abortion, it seems as though the taxpayers have to pay for it. If I can’t afford gun insurance, will taxpayers have to pay for that?

  • Old Duffer

    Here’s an idea that should get the Democrats hotter than He!!. Mandated insurance for single women who decide to have sex without protection. This would put the burden upon the woman to either maintain birthcontrol (pills, IUD, condoms, etc) or carry the insurance. This would reduce the number of welfare mothers and all their add-on expenses. It’s the same thing the listed states want gun owners to do so they should be happy to attach an amendment requiring this idea to any bill requiring gun owners to carry liability insurance.

  • Guy Waukcinebar

    If you own guns and a gun is used in a crime, is the gun liable? No, you are liable. So then you should have liability insurance, not the gun. I know an ex-cop who owns way more than 50 weapons, and you can bet the commisars are going to aim for an insurance policy on each gun a person owns. This is simply a back door attempt at weapons confiscation. Remember, 200 million people were murdered by their own governments in the last century, but only after their weapons were confiscated.

  • Mike

    This is the crap that you get when you have lawyer’s running (ruining) the country.

  • robert

    i think no matter who it is, or what office they hold. if they try to violate the constitution hey should get a mandatory e@ years for treason, and not in a cushy resort pprison.

  • Kirk

    I would move out of Pennsylvania if they passed that crap.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.