This is a discussion on Chicago could require gun owners get training, liability insurance if handgun ban ove within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by retsupt99 If you think training should be required to own a firearm, then you probably wouldn't mind having a college speech course ...
However, we might find liberal prosecutors put in their place because every gun owner in the state in a justified SD shooting would have an army of specialised lawyers.
[B]No insurance company I know of offers some type of insurance that guards against your use of firearms against another person which is the only reason this would even be brought up.
I have 2 million dollars of liability insurance, which includes acts of Self-Defense, with State Farm as part of an Umbrella Policy. It costs me an extra $136 a year I think.
This is for civil suits - and I assume if you are not found guilty of Murder or Manslaughter. Criminal proceeding costs, if those charges are brought against you, are not part of civil liability insurance.
The liability coverage includes use of handguns on or off the premises; as far as the old "intentional act" argument: State Farm said in an SD shooting you're intention would not have been to be surprised by an attack and to shoot someone, but to take a walk - or whatever it was you set out to do when the attack and your response occurred. So, you are covered for civil liability in an SD shooting by State Farm - and it would be hard to believe they were the only company that did this.
Last edited by hamlet; May 25th, 2010 at 10:13 AM.
Important to point out this is just one provider (as hamlet also points out), and covers many other potential issues than just firearms. If companies were to start specialising in firearms, the price might be very affordable (O'm guessing $50 to $60).
PS - Again, not saying it should be a requirement, but it might be more affordable then some might think & I'll add, might not be a bad idea on a personal level (but again, wrong that it would be a requirement).
Yes I believe all the premiums are somewhat discounted when one insurance company is used. I think the Umbrella policies are quite good, and it was recommended by several friends as the best way to go for insurance period - not just because of Self-Defense. The extra liability that you get with an Umbrella I believe covers liability for both car and home - and of course, rates for any of these depend on your own home and auto circumstances, record etc. My home insurance is apartment insurance, I don't know if that had anything to do with the very reasonable premium for the Umbrella with all the liability coverage.Did they provide a discount as a bundled with home & auto?
My friends' advice included the little extra money involved in these policies so maybe not. They may just all be relatively cheap.
In order to qualify for the Umbrella, I had to raise my existing liability on my car insurance - but that is only about $30 extra dollars a year. So, the true cost would be $160 that I pay in order to have the Umbrella with 2 million liability. About 50 cents a day. My newspaper costs more. It's well worth the extra money. Law suits for anything - especially with physical injury as they usually are - are huge nowadays - partly because medical costs are much higher them just a few years ago, and also everyone lately seems to sue each other. It's easy to be out of date with your coverage. If so, you can be screwed for life financially. But if you have an Umbrella, the liability is cheap, two million cost me only about $30 a year more than one million - AND at the point your car or home liability would be exhausted, the 2 million kicks in.
I would suggest anyone check out such a policy and it's cost to them - guns or no guns. The added benefit to me, was that it covered SD shootings for liability. I would have gotten it even if didn't.
(The one thing I'm not sure of is whether the liability for Self-Defense on the streets is an technically a part of liability for homeowners, or if the 2 million extra is a personal liability policy good for anything. Practically it makes no difference. It's there, and it applies to SD anywhere, car law suits and any damages, and home law suits and any damages. Perhaps it covers as well for any kind of action against you, for anything. I should find out.)
Daley doesn't believe in the rule of law. He believes in the rule of Daley. He will simply throw more and more obstacles in the path of gun ownership.
What do you expect from a mayor who bulldozed an airport runway at midnight because his wife wanted a park there.
Unfortunately, he is always re-elected because he gets things done for the rich near north side. Anyone who looks like they don't belong there will find a squad of police cars arriving in minutes. So the republicans vote for him too.