Illinois HB0687, $1,000,000 Insurance - Page 5

Illinois HB0687, $1,000,000 Insurance

This is a discussion on Illinois HB0687, $1,000,000 Insurance within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by kentuckycarry ... For anyone to tell me that they will come and take my guns because I may not be able to ...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 74 of 74

Thread: Illinois HB0687, $1,000,000 Insurance

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array rhinokrk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by kentuckycarry View Post
    ... For anyone to tell me that they will come and take my guns because I may not be able to afford the insurance any longer, for whatever reason, is a scary thought. Just one more way Illinois can take away your rights.
    If I want to carry a million dollar policy to protect myself, thats MY business.
    Exactly my point.
    Get the U.N. out of the U.S.
    Get the U.S. out of the U.N.


  2. #62
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    I have only two words to add:

    Debtor's prison.

  3. #63
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,884

    Stuff happens

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinDooley View Post
    So you're saying that if I don't have any assets that can be taken from me by a civil suit, I should still shell out money for insurance so that if someone decides to sue me I'll be able to give them money (via my insurance).
    It is a matter of fundamental morality. You should be prepared to take care the legitimate expenses and damages caused by your actions. If you should become unfortunate enough to have a negligent discharge of your weapon which harms someone, you should be able to do something to ease their burden due to the problem you caused.

    That btw is the purpose of purchasing insurance. You don't buy car insurance because you intend or expect to have a serious auto accident. You buy it because you might "by accident" (They call them auto accidents for a reason) harm some else. In that event you are liable and could end up living in extreme poverty if you do not have insurance.

    Same principle applies to guns and insurance. You are liable for bad things that happen from your ownership of a gun. So, carry personal liability insurance. It is inexpensive.

    Yes, I know, even a couple hundred bucks is hard for lots of folks to cough up. We have precisely that problem with mandatory auto insurance and the cops issue many a ticket to folks caught driving without insurance.

    It just might be that if you can't afford the insurance, you shouldn't own the gun.

    I still think the legislation is a lousy idea, but it does make a certain amount of sense.

  4. #64
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    It is a matter of fundamental morality. You should be prepared to take care the legitimate expenses and damages caused by your actions. If you should become unfortunate enough to have a negligent discharge of your weapon which harms someone, you should be able to do something to ease their burden due to the problem you caused.
    Exactly.

    That btw is the purpose of purchasing insurance. You don't buy car insurance because you intend or expect to have a serious auto accident. You buy it because you might "by accident" (They call them auto accidents for a reason) harm some else.
    They call them collisions, not accidents. And many people buy automobile insurance because they are forced to buy it to avoid breaking the law.

    In that event you are liable and could end up living in extreme poverty if you do not have insurance.

    Same principle applies to guns and insurance. You are liable for bad things that happen from your ownership of a gun. So, carry personal liability insurance. It is inexpensive.

    Yes, I know, even a couple hundred bucks is hard for lots of folks to cough up. We have precisely that problem with mandatory auto insurance and the cops issue many a ticket to folks caught driving without insurance.
    No insurance should be mandatory.

    [QUOTE]It just might be that if you can't afford the insurance, you shouldn't own the gun.[QUOTE]

    It might just be that you should not be forced to buy insurance.

  5. #65
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,884

    It just might be...

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    It might just be that you should not be forced to buy insurance.
    Oh, but it was done by the state legislature. Maybe you should go cry to the Federal Courts that your state is abusing your rights. Oh, I forgot, it is up to the people to vote those evil 'slators who are in the pocket of the evil insurance companies out!!!!

    I know a man whose daughter was killed when her car was rear-ended and shoved into an oncoming cement truck. The woman who caused the accident had no insurance, not that money could make him whole. He had to pay for the funeral from his own pocket.

    I don't think gun owner's insurance per IL's proposal is O.K., but I do think anyone who owns a gun should have personal liability insurance. BTW, own a dog, you should have personal liability insurance too. Your kid rides a bicycle with which he might run into someone or something-- you need personal liability insurance.

    IF you are a renter, the stuff is remarkably inexpensive, and it could save your hide if you ever get a kitchen fire that damages your landlord's property.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Array KevinDooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    That btw is the purpose of purchasing insurance. You don't buy car insurance because you intend or expect to have a serious auto accident. You buy it because you might "by accident" (They call them auto accidents for a reason) harm some else. In that event you are liable and could end up living in extreme poverty if you do not have insurance.
    Not the way I see it. Insurance is to protect my assets and my ability to provide for my family. The insurance I carry will cover the ACTUAL damages should anything I do happen. $1M of extra coverage is not a morality issue... it is designed to placate our litigation-happy society, and I'm not going to be a part of it...
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

    The will to win is worthless if you do not have the will to prepare. -Thane Yost

  7. #67
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,884

    Some collisions are accidents, some aren't

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    Exactly.

    They call them collisions, not accidents.
    Some collisions are accidents; some aren't. They can call them whatever they want. IN the end, someone is going to get blamed for the event and have to pay for the damages. That someone better have had the mandatory insurance or they will be in big trouble--no doubt how big depends on your state's law.

    Fortunately, gun accidents (uh, negligent discharges) are relatively rare events compared to the number of gun owners and guns owned. Insurance should therefore be quite inexpensive; even if it has to be created as a new product separate from homeowners or renter's policies.

  8. #68
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Some collisions are accidents; some aren't. They can call them whatever they want. IN the end, someone is going to get blamed for the event and have to pay for the damages. That someone better have had the mandatory insurance or they will be in big trouble--no doubt how big depends on your state's law.

    Fortunately, gun accidents (uh, negligent discharges) are relatively rare events compared to the number of gun owners and guns owned. Insurance should therefore be quite inexpensive; even if it has to be created as a new product separate from homeowners or renter's policies.

    I figure if someone does decide to offer it the cost will be very high. If you look at most insurance policies they do not normally cover willful or negligent actions.

    If the insurance did become available it probably could only be afforded by the upper middle class. But then we really don't want the lower class types armed anyway.

    Michael

  9. #69
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,884

    Willful v negligent acts

    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    I figure if someone does decide to offer it the cost will be very high. If you look at most insurance policies they do not normally cover willful or negligent actions.

    If the insurance did become available it probably could only be afforded by the upper middle class. But then we really don't want the lower class types armed anyway.

    Michael
    There is willful and there is negligent and then there is something else.

    If you run a red light you auto insurance will cover you with few exceptions. So, negligence by itself is actually exactly why you have insurance. You might negligently let a fire get started in your home, or negligently do something which causes a visitor to fall while in your home. Insurance almost always covers ordinary acts of negligence.

    Deliberate and wilful acts which are crimes, won't be covered.

    Yes, one big problem with the IL law is the inclusion of deliberate use of a weapon as something that must be covered. But then, doesn't the NRA already offer inexpensive insurance provided that you didn't commit a crime?

    The more rare an event, the easier it is to get companies to jump in and offer the product. Negligent shooting and criminal shootings by licensed gun owners (CC) are extremely rare events.

    I'm with everyone else here in that I mistrust the IL motives, and also suspect some deal making with IL insurers to boost their business, but as individuals we should be carrying appropriate liability insurance --whether you want to look at it as protecting yourself or protecting your "victim" doesn't really matter. You break it, you own it applies. And sometimes it owns you.

  10. #70
    Member Array DLRM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cordova, TN
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post

    I know a man whose daughter was killed when her car was rear-ended and shoved into an oncoming cement truck. The woman who caused the accident had no insurance, not that money could make him whole. He had to pay for the funeral from his own pocket.
    Did he not have Uninsured Motorist insurance? If he did, it would have paid out to him since the woman was uninsured. Then again, some states don't require it so...

    Either way...a terrible, tragic story.

    I strongly believe in insurance. We are maxed out with everything and have a 2 million dollar umbrella. Some people feel that this is just inviting people to sue us but, God forbid we are the cause of something that destroys a family, at least the insurance will pay for it instead of us.

    But it's also because we are in a litigious society. Small rear end accident results in payment for doctors, missed work, spouses unable to fulfill their "duties" to the other spouse, and the other spouse suing because they aren't being fulfilled.

    I still maintain there is a family member, lobbyist, or political contributor who will benefit from this bill passing.
    Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? -- Patrick Henry

  11. #71
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,884

    Likely you are right

    Quote Originally Posted by DLRM View Post

    I still maintain there is a family member, lobbyist, or political contributor who will benefit from this bill passing.
    It is Illinois. What else would you expect?

    Seriously, very little legislation happens that doesn't have behind the scenes business interests pushing it.

    I could go on for pages on this issue with regard to one specific topic. (Typed rant deleted, you guys don't need to hear it.) END RANT!!!

  12. #72
    Ex Member Array Acecool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Private
    Posts
    195
    Yeah... ha..ha... Like the criminal is going to have any of that!

  13. #73
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    ....

    Deliberate and wilful acts which are crimes, won't be covered.

    ....
    And in many cases, even if they are not crimes.

    I'm not sure I understand where the impression that insurers can be forced to pay for willful acts comes from.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  14. #74
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    There is willful and there is negligent and then there is something else.

    If you run a red light you auto insurance will cover you with few exceptions. So, negligence by itself is actually exactly why you have insurance. You might negligently let a fire get started in your home, or negligently do something which causes a visitor to fall while in your home. Insurance almost always covers ordinary acts of negligence.

    Deliberate and wilful acts which are crimes, won't be covered.

    Yes, one big problem with the IL law is the inclusion of deliberate use of a weapon as something that must be covered. But then, doesn't the NRA already offer inexpensive insurance provided that you didn't commit a crime?

    The more rare an event, the easier it is to get companies to jump in and offer the product. Negligent shooting and criminal shootings by licensed gun owners (CC) are extremely rare events.

    I'm with everyone else here in that I mistrust the IL motives, and also suspect some deal making with IL insurers to boost their business, but as individuals we should be carrying appropriate liability insurance --whether you want to look at it as protecting yourself or protecting your "victim" doesn't really matter. You break it, you own it applies. And sometimes it owns you.

    "Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Provides that any person who owns a firearm in this State shall maintain a policy of liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person"

    It seems that is exactly what the bills authors want covered.

    Michael

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Ammo and Insurance
    By volfan in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: January 22nd, 2010, 11:00 PM
  2. Liability Insurance
    By Kahrdoor in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 17th, 2010, 01:11 AM
  3. Gun insurance
    By Pro2A in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: September 1st, 2009, 10:34 PM
  4. Illinois One Million $ Gun Insurance Policy
    By Bart in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 20th, 2009, 02:03 AM
  5. Insurance
    By DaveInTexas in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 18th, 2008, 12:31 AM

Search tags for this page

1,000,000 insurance premium to have a gun
,
concealed carry liability insurance
,

illinois if hb 0687

,
illinoishb 1263
Click on a term to search for related topics.