Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think this could be a good middle ground in the gun control debate. Isn't it time that gun owners take personal responsibility and carry liability insurance for each of their fire arms, just like we require automobile owners to carry insurance? It seems like a very logical idea, since gun manufacturers can't be sued if their products cause the death of an innocent person.
First off, how many guns do you think I can fire at once? Who is going to enforce it when guns aren't registered in the US. ? Why should I have to pay for not shooting anyone while a criminal won't pay irrespective of any law? Why should I have to pay to ensure one of my constitutional rights?
I think this could be a good middle ground in the gun control debate. Isn't it time that gun owners take personal responsibility and carry liability insurance for each of their fire arms, just like we require automobile owners to carry insurance? It seems like a very logical idea, since gun manufacturers can't be sued if their products cause the death of an innocent person.
How are you going to get criminals to buy this "insurance"?
Better have folks who own hammers and knives and fists required to have insurance too in case they kill somebody with those things too.
A gun is designed to kill, those others things in their basic forms are not. Try again. We require auto owners to carry liability insurance, why not firearm owners?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.