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 don't think it is worthless. I think it's something...it's a start, and it will force those who carry to take financial responsibility of the deadly weapon they carry around.
So what if criminals don't get the insurance? Many people are still wounded and killed by legal gun owners every year. Hell, if car insurance is mandatory, why shouldn't liability insurance for guns be?
No, it's not a start because there are no details of implementation at all. Driving is not a constitutional right.
More people get injured, maimed by stupid stuff gun owners do ----of the 33,000 deaths a year, I'm guessing most are not due to crazy or not criminally related.
I sure hope my family would sue the **** out of anyone who killed me accidentally or purposely.
YOU used the figure of 33,000 deaths and hope your family would sue the person who killed you - suicides account for 2/3 of those deaths so the most likely probability is your family would be suing you, friend.
The 80,000 figure is gross inflation of the stats - From the Rand corporation (Research Group)
Quote:
Official statistics on unintentional injuries and deaths in the United States are compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Recent data, from 2015, indicate that 146,571 fatal unintentional injuries occurred that year, for a rate of 46.50 per 100,000 people (CDC, 2017a). Of these, 489 (less than 1 percent) were caused by a firearm. Some of these fatal unintentional injuries were likely misclassified and were actually suicides or homicides.
The majority of unintentional injuries treated at hospitals are not fatal. There were close to 29 million unintentional injury discharges from emergency rooms in 2014, of which 15,928 (less than 1 percent) were caused by a firearm.
So unless you are one of the roughly 500 killed, not likely to sue over death due to "stupid stuff gun owners do". This insurance covers less than 1 percent of injuries treated - what are they trying to fix.
I don't think it is worthless. I think it's something...it's a start, and it will force those who carry to take financial responsibility of the deadly weapon they carry around.
So what if criminals don't get the insurance? Many people are still wounded and killed by legal gun owners every year. Hell, if car insurance is mandatory, why shouldn't liability insurance for guns be?
The number of accidental discharges in a city like San Jose would be very very low. That makes it like requiring all pet owner to have cat\dog etc. bite insurance. These instances would also already be covered under umbrella and homeowners insurance.
Bicyclists hit and injure pedestrians, what about mandatory bike insurance?
If you're suggesting that a legal gun owner, using their gun legally, like preventing their own rape\murder like a friend of mine should have to pay for the medical treatment and care of their assailant(s)?
More people get injured, maimed by stupid stuff gun owners do ----of the 33,000 deaths a year, I'm guessing most are not due to crazy or not criminally related.
I sure hope my family would sue the **** out of anyone who killed me accidentally or purposely. And I'd sure as hell hire the best atty to sue if I have any injury from someone's gun - or stolen gun that they failed to keep secure.
If I owned a gun and carried, I'd definitely have an umbrella liability policy "just in case" it was stolen, accidentally discharged, etc.
Well, many people who have firearms for defensive and other purposes have an insurance policy and an attorney on speed dial. Especially in CA where criminals who were shot in commission of a crime can and do sue if the person who shot them was an armed citizen. Homeowner usually since carry is only for the rich and connected in CA.
An armed criminal who has broken into a home or robbing a business can litigate and they often win in CA. But I couldn't sue a criminal who shot me or go after his family which many criminals who were shot will do if the shooter doesn't have any assets.
In the end what this insurance requirement will do is make it even more financially prohibitive for most people to be armed. It's going to be a rich mans only game. There is no consideration for public good involved. Only good for criminals who have far more rights and protections than citizens. CA considers being a criminal to be a "chosen profession." This has been used by scumbag lawyers representing shot criminals in CA who can no longer walk or have some other disability from being shot in a crime.
"They can no longer pursue their chosen profession." Truly CA has just walked off the edge.
This will solve absolutely nothing. 99.9% of those people committing crimes with firearms are doing so with weapons they have illegally. You think just because they mandate an insurance for firearms ownership that the vast majority of those committing crimes with firearms are going to pay insurance?
The local government is just inventing a new way to rake in revenue and attempt to try and keep those that can legally own a weapon from wanting to buy one, that's all. I'll still pay it though, if it becomes a requirement, simply because I love my guns! And a sensless "fee" won't stop me.
Chances are that most people with home insurance have an umbrella liability insurance that covers them. I know mines something stupid like $10M from my homeowners insurance, that covers liability of others being injured on my property, or by me, or my wife off property by accident (i.e. uncovered mva damage, running someone over with a shopping cart, knocking them over running to the rest room, etc.).
Only issue would be criminal acts, which you're never going to have any insurer cover, unless its provided by the state, and then you'd run into issues, is it insurance or a tax on exercising your rights, and further is it a register of gun owners? How secure is that information etc.
How are you getting chastised? It’s insurance, like car insurance is required if you own & operate a vehicle. Why are you crying about it?
Crying...here we go with the dramatics. Explain to me what good this will do for violence ? It is a pure money grab, and possibly targets those that might not be able to afford it. Since when do we have to pay for a Constitutional right ?
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.
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.
Truly CA has just walked off the edge.
