San Jose mayor proposes mandatory gun liability insurance (ethic, gasoline, cost)
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.
How would they know if you own a gun? If it never leaves your house, or stays in a "CA approved locking case" they will never know. Another imaginary law just like an assault weapon ban. Loons.
People sell firearms to out of staters all the time and that serial number never left the db.
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.
Liccardo is suggesting San Jose require gun owners in the city to carry mandatory liability insurance for weapons or pay an in-lieu fee to compensate taxpayers for the “public costs of firearm violence.”
I'm sure the gang-bangers and other criminals causing all the problems, will get right in line to inform the govt that they are a gun owner so the govt can crack down on them, take away their guns if they refuse to get the new insurance etc.
How would they know if you own a gun? If it never leaves your house, or stays in a "CA approved locking case" they will never know. Another imaginary law just like an assault weapon ban. Loons.
People sell firearms to out of staters all the time and that serial number never left the db.
Therein lies why private sale back ground checks are unenforceable. The state has to know who owns what. It requires a central registry. Something most gun owners aren't willing to comply with. I could sell any of my guns, and if they were used in a crime the serial number may lead back to me. But there's no way to prove I didn't sell the gun decades ago well before the BC requirement and that it hasn't changed hands a hundred times since then.
The only way it can be enforced is if every single gun owner registers their guns with the state. Make, model and serial number. If I am going to sell a gun and I have doubts about the buyer I just won't sell it. Or I'll run the sale through an FFL and have the current BC used which does not record the details of the firearm. Just handgun or long gun and yes or no on the buyer.
The main agenda for such an idea is 1) craft a way to generate revenue, 2) attempt to discourage law abiding citizens from purchasing firearms, 3) crafting a way to track data on law abiding citizens who own firearms.
Gotta look for the 'ol "free shipping" with ammo purchases......always nice to see that when ordering. Need another 1,500 or so of 9 mike mike myself. Thanks for the reminder!
Gotta look for the 'ol "free shipping" with ammo purchases......always nice to see that when ordering. Need another 1,500 or so of 9 mike mike myself. Thanks for the reminder!
Be careful with those red flag laws flying around....I mean , why would anyone in their right mind want 1500 rounds of ammo all at one time for ?!?!?
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?
First I doubt it is just for those who carry, but to own. What if a person owns 10...20 guns? I already know your answer " if you can't afford insurance for 20 guns then you can't have them".
Also....lol, got a driver license, took a driving test, got insurance and that stops someone from driving recklessly how? We can bring up pages of news reports of accidents and death due to drivers that were licensed, tested and insured who STILL drove reckless or under the influence.
How about this insurance required to own a mobile smart phone in case someone kills someone texting while driving or messages a bully message to push someone to suicide?
The most telling thing about your post..."it's a start". I can only imagine what comes after the start.
First I doubt it is just for those who carry, but to own. What if a person owns 10...20 guns? I already know your answer " if you can't afford insurance for 20 guns then you can't have them".
Also....lol, got a driver license, took a driving test, got insurance and that stops someone from driving recklessly how? We can bring up pages of news reports of accidents and death due to drivers that were licensed, tested and insured who STILL drove reckless or under the influence.
How about this insurance required to own a mobile smart phone in case someone kills someone texting while driving or messages a bully message to push someone to suicide?
The most telling thing about your post..."it's a start". I can only imagine what comes after the start.
Indeed. Laws like this are designed to open doors. The private transfer BC proposal open the door (kicks it open) for a central registry, insurance requirements proof of which has to be presented to the authorities, tells them who has what. plus puts an extra financial burden most regular folks can't afford in place, red flags gives the cops a reason to confiscate valuable personal property which will "disappear in evidence", all these proposals will give the state or feds a way to rip open our privacy and creates another source of revenue.
And cops are revenue agents at the end of the day. Sheesh red flags are a free gun store for the cops. You can bet there will be collections in LE safes that will grow with frequency. That's cops, DAs and judges.
A cop that wanted to take my guns but couldn't was all but slobbering all over my custom 1911. I wouldn't let him or his partner touch it. Or any of my other guns. But because I had been drinking, in my own house and I was not even being a problem for anyone, this one cop fished like hell. Even asked my neighbors to swear out false complaints that they felt I was a threat. It seems there are already red flag rules in place. This new law they just passed just makes things easier if the cops want your guns.
"In LEs judgement" is good enough. scary stuff
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.
