[Edit: Wow, that was a weird typo in the subject line. Sorry!]

[www.axios.com]

"Opponents of the insurance measures say they infringe on Second Amendment rights by creating a new financial burden for gun owners. The insurance and firearm industries have argued in the past that property or casualty insurance does not cover intentional criminal behavior."

financial burden
Not a problem, 2A says no where gun ownership need be affordable. See also 1934 National Firearms Act (a tax that effectively ended large-scale gangster violence.)

intentional behavior
Not a problem, since the firearms industry only sells to law-abiding citizens (right? RIGHT?) and since the insurance industry already uses actuary tables as tea leaves.


**********************

I'm not actually an advocate of liability insurance here. I think most of the insurance industry is a racket to begin with, and there are too many scenarios where the shooter's family would wind up liable, unfairly.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2019 04:00PM by deckeda.

I like the idea of liability insurance. The insurance would protect the good guy with a gun who accidentally shoots innocents when he is trying to stop the bad guy with a gun.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2019 09:27PM by Speedy.

Quote
Speedy
I like the idea of liability insurance. The insurance would protect the good guy with a gun who accidentally shoots innocents when he is trying to stop the bad guy with a gun.

Home/renter's/umbrella insurance would already provide liability coverage in that situation.

The idea of separate insurance for gun owners is merely a backdoor way of trying to make ownership too expensive for nearly all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2019 06:18AM by Bill in NC.

Quote
Bill in NC

Quote
Speedy
I like the idea of liability insurance. The insurance would protect the good guy with a gun who accidentally shoots innocents when he is trying to stop the bad guy with a gun.

Home/renter's/umbrella insurance would already provide liability coverage in that situation.

The idea of separate insurance for gun owners is merely a backdoor way of trying to make ownership too expensive for nearly all.

That’s the idea!

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.

Quote
Bill in NC

Quote
Speedy
I like the idea of liability insurance. The insurance would protect the good guy with a gun who accidentally shoots innocents when he is trying to stop the bad guy with a gun.

Home/renter's/umbrella insurance would already provide liability coverage in that situation.

The idea of separate insurance for gun owners is merely a backdoor way of trying to make ownership too expensive for nearly all.

The insurance thing is different from say, the tax thing. Special taxes have often been a bit disingenuous as to their purpose, but liability insurance is far more specific: it lets people know the tool is highly dangerous, in a climate where it’s “assumed” by so many to be no big deal so long as X,Y, and Z magically fall into place.

FWIW... many insurers require special riders for gun owners. Free Market !

Quote
cbelt3
FWIW... many insurers require special riders for gun owners. Free Market !

Cite?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2019 02:00PM by Bill in NC.