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; It puts the political debate in a different light. Suggestions to require liability insurance for firearms owners/carriers are coming mostly from the anti-guns, but there ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 36
Like Tree13Likes

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

  1. #1
    Member Array BelaOkmyx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    107

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

    It puts the political debate in a different light. Suggestions to require liability insurance for firearms owners/carriers are coming mostly from the anti-guns, but there is a valid point to be made and I think it can be turned around to our advantage.

    I think everyone here would agree that we are responsible for any damage caused by our weapons, intentional or unintentional. Suppose I were to go hunting with a big game rifle, and accidentally blow somebody's leg off. Sure, put me in prison. But who is going to pay the guy's medical bills and lost wages? I don't have that much money, and I'm not going to be earning any more if I'm in prison. Sort of like a car- an 18-year old kid with a minimum wage job is allowed to drive a car on a public road only because if he screws up and hurts somebody he is supposed to have insurance, and the insurance company handles the financial part.

    So being every one of us is imperfect and could at any time make a terrible mistake that causes a problem we can't afford to fix, isn't it fair to our fellow citizens to make provisions for that? I realize it's extremely unlikely, and in that case the insurance would be extremely cheap. (I haven't priced it myself yet, but I soon will.) But it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to require a person who carries or shoots anywhere but his own property to be financially responsible if the unthinkable happens.

    Now here's a 'pro': when you have to shoot in self-defense odds are very high you're going to get sued, and possibly bankrupted by your own lawyer even if you win. When you have insurance, the insurance company is on the hook so they provide the lawyer. That remedies this very unfair situation where we have to be bankrupted just for defending ourselves. So with insurance neither us nor a person we might accidentally hurt will be screwed financially.

    So do you think it would be fair to require all CC and gun hunters to have liability insurance, in exchange for this, the insurance companies are completely in charge of registering weapons, restricting equipment, and testing, training, and screening gun owners? A benefit of putting private sector companies in charge of it is that they have no power to ever confiscate weapons, all they can do is cancel your insurance. And you can guarantee they're not going to be silly or political about it, because all they care about is getting your business and then you not going out and hurting anybody. So if you're responsible and you can qualify on a pistol target you're going to pay next to nothing for your insurance, while a guy who is blind, drunk, and stupid is going to pay an arm and a leg, which is fine by me because he shouldn't be carrying anyway.

    It sounds like a great idea to me, because it would take government and politics completely out of it, and nothing good seems to be coming out of the politicians.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    No...........
    Clodbert likes this.
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,600
    There's already a mechanism for people "insuring" themselves against bad things happening: the existing insurance market. To the extent people want to "cover" themselves, it works very well. And there's strong incentive to do that.

    Making people pay a toll or fee for having Constitutionally-protected arms seems clearly unconstitutional to me, putting barriers up to ownership that shouldn't be there. As well, any charging of gun owners puts the responsibility of paying for crime on the backs of gun owners, instead of the criminals and the unwashed (who have incidents of negligence or "accident"). Such shifting of the "blame" also removes all incentives for people to protect themselves, in all the ways that matter.

    Who pays when folks can't cover their damage to others, financially? Then those without protections get stiffed, beyond basic restitution those responsible are capable of paying (ie, penalties via the penal system).

    Go to the criminals and the negligent for relief, if you're able. If you're not able, or there aren't "deep pockets" there, bummer. Life's a contact sport and there are no guarantees. But, DO NOT dare force me and millions like me to cover the cost of criminality and negligence by others, in such ways.

    bombthrower77 likes this.
    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: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array RoadRunner71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    6,344
    Have you ever dealt with an insurance company provided attorney? You think that will save you on attorney fees because they have to provide one to look after their interests. It is possible that it would save you money but, any one who has had an insurance company provided attorney represent them will tell you, thst attorney is NOT there to protect YOUR interests.

    I don't care how much it costs me. I will want my own attorney, representing MY interests, if I am ever unfortunate enough end up in court over a shooting incident.

    I really don't like the idea that I would only be ALLOWED to defend myself with a firearm if I could afford the insurance. Making an isurance company responsible for determining who can or cannot own or carry firearms is ridiculous. They would simply deny EVERYONE.

    "... shall not be infringed."
    "Mind own business"
    "Always cut cards"

  6. #5
    Member Array azretired's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    209
    Just what we need mandatory insurance...................oh wait Obama Care!

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,866
    the insurance companies are completely in charge of registering weapons, restricting equipment, and testing, training, and screening gun owners?
    See the operative words in your statement? I can guarantee you that the best option for the insurance company is to see that I am not able to have guns. No thank you. Just putting the terms being demanded by the anti's under the domain of a company (publicly traded or private) doesn't make them any more acceptable.

    NO!. Hell No!
    Hoganbeg likes this.

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member Array deadguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,745

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

    Nope
    There's nothing like a funeral to make you feel alive

  9. #8
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,345
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
    So do you think it would be fair to require all CC and gun hunters to have liability insurance, in exchange for this, the insurance companies are completely in charge of registering weapons, restricting equipment, and testing, training, and screening gun owners?
    So how does your proposal meet with the phrase shall not infringe?
    bigsky109 likes this.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  10. #9
    Member Array Clodbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    205
    Don't let people who want to restrict the rights of gun owners get in your head. All of their ideas are bad and not worth consideration. There's no benefit to additional requirements or restrictive legislation. Don't fall for it.

  11. #10
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,279
    Paying an insurance company to tell me what I can or cannot do strikes me as an unusually poor plan. Remember when liability insurance became mandatory for pit bull owners? Owning a pitbull effectively became a crime.
    "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."
    Tuco

  12. #11
    Member Array tet4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    183
    Insurance is another barrier to entry that anti gun people want to put up. Plain and simple. Not only is it unnecessary since the vast majority of ccw people can manage to carry a gun safely without huge amounts of effort, but it removes the risk from the person and moves it to the insurance company. People will be less careful, attorneys will become sue happy, prices on guns and insurance will go up, and then the government will try to take over the whole thing, you know, to keep costs down. Is that what you really want?

    Insurance is a valuable tool. But mandatory insurance or insurance provided by another person is a complete disaster.

  13. #12
    OD*
    OD* is offline
    Moderator
    Array OD*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Coopersville
    Posts
    10,929
    No thank you.
    "The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper

    "Diligentia Vis Celeritas"

    "There is very little new, and the forgotten is constantly being rediscovered."
    ~ Tiger McKee

  14. #13
    Member
    Array dling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    429
    Individual liability insurance by choice (not required) yes. Registering, licensing, training, screening absolutely not. ...shall not infringed.

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    8,016
    So, you are also in favor of hammer insurance, pick-axe ins., screwdriver ins., pocket knife ins, leftovers/food poisoning ins.,
    compound bow ins., poison house cleaner ins., swimming pool ins., trampoline ins., lawnmower ins., snowblower ins.,

    GIMME A BREAK!
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array Ksgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,900
    Not no! but Hail NO!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

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

,
gun liability insurance moral hazard
,

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.