Gun liability insurance- optional, mandatory, pros and cons? - Page 3

Gun liability insurance- optional, mandatory, pros and cons?

This is a discussion on Gun liability insurance- optional, mandatory, pros and cons? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Frogman Are the criminals going to be required to carry this insurance too?? Oh, sure. Find 'em all, track 'em down, force ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 36 of 36
Like Tree13Likes

Thread: Gun liability insurance- optional, mandatory, pros and cons?

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Quote Originally Posted by Frogman View Post
    Are the criminals going to be required to carry this insurance too??
    Oh, sure. Find 'em all, track 'em down, force 'em to write a check. Each and every one.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).

  2. #32
    Fla is offline
    Member Array Fla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Florida, Tampa Bay
    The only winner is the rip off insurance companies.
    NO Salt,Alcohol, Smoking,Caffeine,Chocolate,Meat,Anything Spicy,Gasoline,Weapons Except Stun Wands By Police,Contact Sports,Sex Other Than Virtual,Abortion,pregnancy Without A License,Non Educational Toys,Bad Language,Exchanging Bodily fluids Including Kissing,Aggressive Acts,Freedom Of Speech

  3. #33
    Distinguished Member Array onacoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    JMHO but Insurance should be a individual thing!

    With that said, I do have NRA insurance for both my instructor biz and my conceal carry liability. I also belong to Armed Citizen Legal Defense Network. I also cover my business and personal autos, business general and professional liability which are required per my business contracts.

    But again it should be your option and not a state mandate as they are trying to do in the New England region. Maybe they're trying to become more British up there and miss the kidney pies!

    “It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men!”
    Samuel Adams

    "In an insane society a sane man must appear insane." Spock & Movie "Serial"

  4. #34
    Member Array GunsAndViolince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Northern Michigan
    Er, um, yeah...

    No, no, I don't think this is a great idea for all the reason you guys suggested. Not the least of which is this illusion we have that business never becomes political. Who were the next people after universities to pick up the whole debacle of the political correctness thing? Corporations! Sure, for them to embrace non-discrimination as a 'best practice' makes sense, but did they stop there? The world is mad, now, mad I tell you! And we've given up so much of our 1A rights to protect the possibility that someone might not like something that is said, even if it isn't said to them, in a different room, on a secured line, but they MIGHT just happen to 'overhear.' It's insane. Just think of how people absolutely crucify someone who is being persecuted on a PC 'violation,' never mind that it's sometimes nothing more than failing to embrace the political values of the 'pc mainstream.' Does big business come to their aid? Does it defend them when they are persecuted for nothing more than politely expressing their opinion? Almost never. Sure, real discrimination happens and should NOT be accepted or tolerated, but if you put your rights in the hands of people who either don't care about those rights, or have taken on the values of those who do not care for freedom, you are asking for a whole lot of grief. Trust me, this is a move we would deeply regret.
    bombthrower77 likes this.

  5. #35
    Array dling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    BillK01, thanks for the information, much appreciated.

  6. #36
    Member Array BelaOkmyx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickx50 View Post
    No policy covering anything will cover you for an intentional illegal act of destruction or violence. That said; You would only need this type of insurance if you did a bad thing. Insurance to cover court costs might be a good plan but it (I'm sure) would only pay after the fact when proved you did not violate the above criteria. I'd be more in favor of a gun owners association with annual dues part of which helped cover legal costs. I thought the NRA toyed with that concept a while back but not sure.
    I don't agree that you would only need insurance if you did a bad thing. We have lawyers in this world, and part of their job is making the bad look good and the good look bad. Every criminal turns into an innocent victim after he loses a fight, and the justice provided by courts is never perfect. This I learned from my (unarmed) security training, that the moment you make physical contact with someone expect a lawsuit, right or wrong.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search tags for this page

gun insurance pros and cons

is gun liablity insurance optional

mandatory gun liability insurance

powered by mybb bear arms
powered by mybb help with medical bills

powered by mybb help with rent

powered by mybb individual insurance

powered by mybb united states liability insurance group

pro and cons for gun insurance

pros and cons of gun insurance

pros and cons of regestering guns in arizona
pros cons of mandatory firearm insurance
Click on a term to search for related topics.