Liability Insurance for Gun Owners?

This is a discussion on Liability Insurance for Gun Owners? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Heard this one driving to work this morning. The one line that made me mad was about responsible gun owners that lock their weapons and ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43
Like Tree20Likes

Thread: Liability Insurance for Gun Owners?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array mano3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    915

    Liability Insurance for Gun Owners?

    Heard this one driving to work this morning. The one line that made me mad was about responsible gun owners that lock their weapons and store the ammo in other rooms would get a much lower premimum than the 'hot head' that keeps his gun near his bedside.

    They then contradict themselves saying that since criminals don't obey the law, they won't buy gun insurance!

    Should Gun Owners Have To Buy Liability Insurance? : Planet Money : NPR
    US Air Force, 1986 - 2007

    "To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them..." George Mason

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Member Array GetSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    332
    While I don't agree with there premise of liscense fees or premiums based on the size of your "arsenal" I do agree we should be responsible for our guns. Guns should be secured in a safe and god forbid a ND or your child playing with an unsecured gun causes loss of life or property the gun owner should be held accountable. If you paralyze a sole income provider with a missed shot in a justified shoot you should be responsible for that person and thier now financially distraught family. I think it's prudent to have insurance to cover issues like this.

  4. #3
    Member Array Yarg28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    179
    removing all of the politics from it, I actually think I would be interested in having insurance during a justifiable shoot. I mean, to me, I'm carrying to protect. So, if I inadvertently harm somebody, even while protecting others I would feel terrible. I know that you cant "unparalyze" somebody but at least I could save their family some amount of hardship. I'd still feel awful but at least its another level of preparedness.

    I'm not interested in the politics of it at all since it just seems like more over-reaching for the most part. It would be different if anybody could point me to one program that the government managed better than...i'm just going to stop...it's too close to lunch to have an aneurysm over politics.

    g
    BigCityChief likes this.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array SigPapa226's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    588
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarg28 View Post
    removing all of the politics from it, I actually think I would be interested in having insurance during a justifiable shoot. I mean, to me, I'm carrying to protect. So, if I inadvertently harm somebody, even while protecting others I would feel terrible. I know that you cant "unparalyze" somebody but at least I could save their family some amount of hardship. I'd still feel awful but at least its another level of preparedness.

    I'm not interested in the politics of it at all since it just seems like more over-reaching for the most part. It would be different if anybody could point me to one program that the government managed better than...i'm just going to stop...it's too close to lunch to have an aneurysm over politics.

    g
    Don't you already have universal protection for anyone that might be shot accidentally??

    Its called Obamacare & solves all the worlds problems.
    Ten Bears: It's sad that governments are chiefed by the double tongues. There is iron in your words of death for all Comanche to see, and so there is iron in your words of life. No signed paper can hold the iron. It must come from men.

  6. #5
    Ex Member Array humblenutto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    107
    Liability insurance for cars is one thing. With cars, first off, you do not need insurance if you are not driving on public roadways. Forcing gun owners to have insurance that do not take guns out of their homes is like forcing ranch/farm owners to pay insurance on vehicles that never leave their private land. Second, insurance for vehicles is needed because very few people intend to get into a wreck on purpose. Vehicle accidents are called accidents for a reason. Vehicle accidents are far more common place than gun accidents. A vehicle on a public roadway is in constant use as a tool. A firearm being in public as a concealed weapon is not in constant use. Vehicles in public use have a higher percentage of being part of a accident that causes property loss or human harm. Concealed weapons in public have a almost zero percent of causing property damage or human harm on a daily basis.

    Liability insurance is also required for vehicles because accident costs are higher than the average person can afford to pay. While firearm accidental discharging can have high costs, it's not on average the same as vehicle costs. Not only that, in many states if you can show you can afford to pay any form of damages out of your own pocket (like being a really rich person with millions in spendable cash) you are not required to pay for insurance.

    Insurance for firearm ownership only has 2 real agendas.
    1) Is becomes a form of tracking and registration
    2) Is places an additional cost on firearm ownership which may subsequently make firearm ownership out of the reach of those with monetary problems.

    A one time purchase of a cheap hi-point gun and a box of ammo can be afforded by anyone wanting a firearm for self protection. A continued premium payment that must be made at regular intervals while a person owns a firearm may place an undue financial burden on a gun owner that is not financially well off.

    Everyone should be adamantly against insurance for firearm ownership.
    mano3 and noway2 like this.

  7. #6
    Member Array Olduser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Fly Over Land
    Posts
    299
    And insurance companies are salivating over another revenue stream that can be manipulated like how many miles do you drive one way to work, etc.
    Clodbert likes this.
    "The only thing I'm an expert about is my experience."

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,041
    It would be an incredible injustice to be a victim of unwise gun use, and then not be able to receive reasonable tort reparations. That is what liability insurance is for.

    In theory, I think firearm insurance is entirely reasonable. If firearm owners are, in aggregate, safe then the premiums should be reasonable
    Mental illness incidents are used to threaten gun rights.
    The March of Dimes headed off the Universal Iron Lung coverage debate, just sayin'.
    Alternately, for those with a toolshed and ideas.


  9. #8
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    14,637
    Who's to know how many guns or how much ammo I have and how I store both? NOTB.
    Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone. Oh, to be young again.
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array chuckusaret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,627
    Again this is nothing more then an additional tax on the law abiding gun owners to pay for the damages done by the uninsured criminal and to continue to place more financial restrictions on legal gun ownership. Case in point, my last two fender benders, not my fault, were with uninsured motorist. Both were undocumented aliens, without insurance and a DL. What was their punishment, a ticket requiring them to appear in court. Did they appear? No, but i did with an attorney. Yep, the cost of my insurance increased on renewal.

    I would also suggest that everyone should check their auto and homeowners insurance policies prior to purchasing " gun" insurance.
    US Army 1953-1977

    ‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
    — Abraham Lincoln

  11. #10
    Member Array 3wggl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Milky Way
    Posts
    203
    A lot of folks might already be covered for such accidents. Your Homeowners liability coverage will often pay out in the event a firearm related accident injures someone in your home. Shootings that occur inside a vehicle, or from inside a vehicle (drive-bys), have been settled by some insurers in some states under auto liability coverage. A drive-by would be considered an intentional act (excluded) but insurers still might pay out to secure a release or because a recent trial in the state set a precedent.
    mano3 likes this.

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array mano3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    915
    Yes, I see the whole idea as another way to register gun owners.
    US Air Force, 1986 - 2007

    "To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them..." George Mason

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,757

    Liability Insurance for Gun Owners?

    I heard the same report as the OP. It made me very angry. It won't work. It is nothing more than a backdoor means to register, regulate, and disarm people while avoiding the legal issues of infringing on the 2nd. After thinking it through and arguing the subject several times on dailykos, I have determined that my objection to this is stronger than to any of the other ridiculous controls being proposed.

    I am also getting really sick and tired of being the target of these antis. I have reached the point where it is clear to me that gun owners need to go on the offensive and cram our proverbial fist down their throats by getting our rights enshrined and upheld in no unequivocal terms. It is time to set "shall not be infringed in stone". We need to stop reacting and instead act. If we don't the anti's and their backers will continue to assault us with these ludicrous propositions.
    This citizen, who has done nothing wrong has had just about ENOUGH of being blamed for the actions of mad men.

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array kapnketel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Northern Kentucky
    Posts
    1,709
    I have 35 years in th eclaims and insurance business. You buy insurance for the world that is not fair, not for the one that is. I have personally denied coverage in firearm related incidents under homeowners policies, it isvery iffy as to coverage. At best traumatic and drawn out. While I do not like the tone of the reprot, if coverage is available it would be worth looking at. If you have assets (home, car, savings etc.) they all can be wipoed out by what we would all thingk is a crazy event.

    I'm not sying the system sucks, I work in it everyday. Kinda like Ed Norton-I work in the sewer but it is a living.
    BigCityChief likes this.
    I'd rather be lucky than good any day

    There's nothing that will change someone's moral outlook quicker than cash in large sums.

    Majority rule only works if you're also considering individual rights. Because you can't have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper.

  15. #14
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    905
    Would we also be paying into an uninsured gun owner pool like we do for uninsured motorists?

    So the criminals and gang-bangers get a free ride?

    Bad idea to require it. If some insurer wants to make it available, fine. Isn't this the kind of thing an umbrella liability policy should cover?
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

  16. #15
    Distinguished Member Array shadowwalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Ghost Ridge USA
    Posts
    1,269
    I got into a little talk that a anti said all gun owners should have insurance because he felt that his taxes were higher because of cost of BGs getting patched in the hospital but I told him I thought that criminals should have to buy insurance so that if they got shot doing a crime that there bills were covered and if a anti was robbed he could show at court and get a copy of his carrier so he could be made whole again also his medical expense would be covered if he got the crap beat out of him or shot by the bad guy

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

best homeowners insurance for gun owners
,
firearms umbrella insurance
,
florida 2nd amendment liability insurance
,
gun owners who are hot heads
,
insurance liability for gun owners, florida
,
liability umbrella insitance covering gun shootings
,

npr gun insurance

,
penalty for uninsured gun owners
,
second line gun liability insurance
,
umbrella insurance for gun owners
,
umbrella liability gun
,
why we don't have liability insurance for guns
Click on a term to search for related topics.