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.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 13 days ago)
35,645 posts, read 18,006,664 times
Reputation: 50687
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by austinnerd
Not quite:
I went ahead and found a link myself that does agree with the link you quoted, and although apparently true, it's kind of bizarre that we're legally required to have insurance that covers 60K for personal injury, and 25K for property damage per accident caused, but you can waive that off with a 55K bond.
Makes no sense, and doesn't provide enough liability insurance.
And assuming someone can put up 55K in a surety bond to save on longterm costs of insurance, you know they have money besides that and are leaving themselves really, really vulnerable to a devastating lawsuit for the damages incurred over 55K.
When you have good insurance, you have not only their money to work with, but their lawyers too.
Taking the surety bond method just seems foolish on so many levels.
Anyway, thanks for pointing that out, interesting.
How is this different from car owners being forced to carry liability insurance, and pay a registration tax every year?
If you own something that could cause grievous damage to someone else, you need to be able to cover the damage you do.
These gun owners aren't going to be responsible for insuring OTHER gun owners, just themselves and the weapons THEY own.
Just like homeowners, and business owners and doctors are forced to carry liability. In case they harm someone, that person doesn't have to bear the burden themselves.
HOLY COW.
This is the breathtakingly uninformed statement I've read here.
If anyone ever wonders how communism ever manages to get started, ^^^ this is why!
Some people will believe anything to have government grown to massive proportions!
No, they won't. There should be SEVERE penalties for those who own and carry firearms illegally, or purchased illegally.
Those who purchase them legally and don't have a history of violence, will likely have a fairly low insurance rate, same as drivers with clean records.
I don't see how this is the least bit different from how we deal with auto liability.
You do not have a specific constitutional right to own a car. Think poll tax for your equivalency.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 13 days ago)
35,645 posts, read 18,006,664 times
Reputation: 50687
Quote:
Originally Posted by austinnerd
That "the cops" don't believe what he's saying is not evidence to contradict what he did say. Do you have any links that expand on why they don't believe him? Certainly even if the two showed their weapons, or brandished their weapons, that would be even more justification for filing some level of charges.
But again, this is exactly the point. One can pass all the guns laws in the world, but if they are not enforced then all that occurs is the further restrictions of one's rights ad infinitum. And if the public's reaction is to simply encourage that exact behaviour, then guess what, things get worse.
It's like some little kid with their parent in a store, the kid picks up a gumball and chucks it at someone. The kid picks up another gumball and chucks it at someone else, and all the while the parent just saying "stop it" but the kid just ignores them. In trots good samaritan and spotting the gumball carnage, exclaims "something must be done" and then proceeds to force the store owner to stop selling gumballs.
Police chief Chacon has said the other two BOTH had guns, and BOTH were involved in the altercation, but it's not clear whether they fired their guns at the scene.
It's outrageous that these two who were involved in this gang mayhem in a crowded entertainment district, that resulted in one death and 13 other injuries many of them severe, have been let go.
And let's hope the others quoted in this article prove to be correct, that charges may be filed in the future.
And from what I gather on KLBJ radio, there's a move afoot to recall the DA.
No, they won't. There should be SEVERE penalties for those who own and carry firearms illegally, or purchased illegally.
Those who purchase them legally and don't have a history of violence, will likely have a fairly low insurance rate, same as drivers with clean records.
I don't see how this is the least bit different from how we deal with auto liability.
By definition, those that illegally own firearms are unknown and unknowable. If the police knew who and where they were, they'd be arrested for it -- cuz they're breaking the law. So no, the illegal gun owners will not be penalized. There is no registry of illegal gun owners. Nope, only legal ones. San Jose can only penalize legal gun owners, which is precisely what they're doing.
I think this breaks the 2nd Amendment and will be struck down anyways, but how on earth do you justify punishing law-abiding citizens for the crimes of other people??
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 13 days ago)
35,645 posts, read 18,006,664 times
Reputation: 50687
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
By definition, those that illegally own firearms are unknown and unknowable. If the police knew who and where they were, they'd be arrested for it -- cuz they're breaking the law. So no, the illegal gun owners will not be penalized. There is no registry of illegal gun owners. Nope, only legal ones. San Jose can only penalize legal gun owners, which is precisely what they're doing.
I think this breaks the 2nd Amendment and will be struck down anyways, but how on earth do you justify punishing law-abiding citizens for the crimes of other people??
They can absolutely penalize illegal gun owners.
You get caught with an illegal gun, either in the commission of a crime or during a traffic stop, you're going to prison. Period.
They won't get illegal gun owners to buy liability insurance, but they can dang sure penalize them with prison time.
You get caught with an illegal gun, either in the commission of a crime or during a traffic stop, you're going to prison. Period.
They won't get illegal gun owners to buy liability insurance, but they can dang sure penalize them with prison time.
And that was already happening, and has nothing to do with San Jose abusing law-abiding citizens.
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.
