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.
Can we also have IDs and background check for voters? It's free to everyone. Skin in the game and all that jazz.
I am strongly in favor of voter ID requirements.
As for a background check, thinking that would be expensive to run background checks on all registered voters before every election. Most states allow a convicted felon the opportunity to restore voting rights. 3 states allow inmates to vote from prison.
Actually, it is an infringement. Asking people to pay for some insurance to exercise a constitutional right is indeed an infringement. And owning a gun is a right. Owning or operating a car is a privilege.
Yet, most states impose fees/ conditions on those who wish to exercise that right.
Only 7 states, Alaska, Arizona, Kansas, Maine, Missouri, Vermont and Wyoming not require a permit for C/C within their borders.
I find it interesting that libs want to out more money on the pockets of major corporations, since this will not protect anyone, has nothing to do violent crimes, gun accidents are almost negligible.
While we are at it require the same for your cutlery.
Again, liability insurance will not protect the gun owner if the injury/ damage was criminal.
Liability insurance protects a homeowner from say a guest’s accidental slip and fall. The fall may be attributed to ice on the stars or an uneven surface or poorly lit conditions.
If however, the owner pushes someone down a flight of stairs, the liability policy is not going to defend the owner.
Diff between negligence, accidents and intentional criminal injury.
It would be ruled the same as a poll tax and struck down.
Yeah, blatant shameless attempts to subvert the constitution.
-Bullet Tax (lots of cities have tried this)
-Gun ownership fees (annual), Illinois tried this
-Require license, but refuse to give out licenses unless the person is "connected" (Chicago used this trick for a long time)
Then we have people that wander into gun control threads claiming that the laws are just "reasonable" and "common sense" and that no one is trying to ban or seriously restrict guns.
Like some KKK member circa 1940 talking about how "nobody is trying to keep blacks from voting"
One item is a Constitutionally protected right.
Another is not.
False equivalency? Or trying to test for consistency? Insuring firearms is a relatively new talking point.
It has nothing to do with the constitution, its sensible legislation based on the damage that is being done by guns. We already have licensing fees and background checks, this is no different.
In answer to your highlighted questions, how many of those folks would have owned those guns if they had to buy insurance. .
All of them. What part of, criminals don't care what your laws are do you not understand?
There's an awful lot of felons that get firearm charges dropped or reduced.
Alot of good that does...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard
Insurance cost will be based on the risk you pose. Like all insurance these companies will do an investigation to gage their risk.
Oh here we go this is gonna be LOL worthy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard
If you are on Facebook and social media and threatening violence, for instance, your insurance will be much higher.
Alot of good that does when folks report posts for threats etc and Facebook deletes them and locks/bans accounts... Congratulations. You played yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard
You will be deterred from buying a weapon because of insurance costs thus saving lives. Further, to keep insurance costs down, gun owners will also be much more careful how they handle their firearms.
How so, when violent felons already are in possession of firearms whether stolen, manufactured in their dwelling, or purchased via straw purchases?
Do I need to Google for you evidence of felons getting firearm charges reduced/dropped for you? Do I need to google for you all the ways criminals acquire firearms?
This proposal will do nothing.
Go tell some biker gang, street gang, or homicidal scumbag, they have to insure their weapons or else. They are criminals. They don't care what law "is".
The overwhelming majority of firearm owners are law abiding.
FBI UCR data supports this.
The overwhelming majority of firearm owners are responsible.
CDC data supports this with a reported 461 fatalities pertaining to "accidental/negligent" discharge of a firearm. Nation wide.
You're grasping at straws here to attempt to justify an added expense to exercise a constitutional right.
In addition to pricing out of the market the poor people that the elites are so terrified of, this will have the effect of creating a gun registry when the State forces the insurance companies to turn over lists of who took out policies.
A firearm background check Is required by Federal law . You don’t think the FBI maintains a database?
My homeowner insurance includes liability and does NOT exempt gun accidents and does NOT require me to disclose ownership.
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.