• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Dangerous and unconstitutional: NJ governor bans sale of insurance to gun owners

mikeyp

NES Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
14,511
Likes
29,550
Location
Plymouth
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
Dangerous and unconstitutional: NJ governor bans sale of insurance to gun owners

Just when we thought that no one could out do California or New York in the category of idiotic gun-control measure, in walks New Jersey. Here is their latest attempt to circumvent the 2nd Amendment and discourage responsible gun use by trying to make self-defense too costly a choice.

We’re just learning about an executive order that the governor issued in September that effectively banned the sale of insurance products that provide liability coverage to gun owners making it virtually impossible for concealed carry holders in New Jersey to get coverage.

Governor Phil Murphy’s order specifically said the state should, within 30 days, take all appropriate action “to prohibit and/or limit the sale, procurement, marketing, or distribution of insurance products that may serve to encourage the improper use of firearms,” according to a press release from the governor’s office.

As a result of this latest bout with lunacy, the U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) announced in early October that it would have to:

“Pull their services off the shelf for New Jersey gun owners.”

While USCCA, and other groups like them, is not an insurance company, the organization (of which I am a member) does offer concealed-carry liability insurance to its members in the event they are compelled to use their weapons in self-defense.

The problem is that states like New Jersey want to regulate organizations like USCCA because they list their membership as “beneficiaries” of their coverage, the press release explained.

And for that reason, they’re regulated by the state much like an insurance company.

That means that USCCA had no choice but to pull out of New Jersey or risk doing battle with the state’s Attorney General’s Office.

The governor’s press release proudly touted a consent order for a $1 million fine against one such company that had encouraged “the improper use of firearms,” according to New Jersey’s standard.

“Last week, the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance announced that Lockton Affinity, LLC agreed to pay a $1 million fine as part of a consent order with the department for administering a National Rifle Association-sponsored insurance program in violation of state insurance laws,” the release said.

It went on to justify the attack.

“An investigation by the department found that Kansas-based Lockton Affinity violated various state laws and regulations in administering the Carry Guard insurance program in New Jersey on behalf of the NRA. Offering an insurance product marketed by the NRA that encourages firearm use is a serious violation of public policy and today’s executive order takes steps to limit such policies’ availability in the State.”

Carry Guard insurance was created and marketed to be self-defense coverage for lawful gun carriers but anti-gun activists labeled it “murder insurance” and that’s exactly how the state treated it.

Murphy’s executive order also directed state officials to ask all gun makers or retailers to reveal whether they have adopted best practices to reduce gun violence, and to find out how they screen for straw purchasers, firearms traffickers, and people who have been banned from owning or purchasing firearms.

“This is not intended at day one to be an adversarial act,” the governor said. “This is to express a broad statement of principles and values that matter to us deeply.”

The governor’s office said the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance would scrutinize all liability insurance offered in the state that encouraged the improper use of firearms.

However, the executive order did not define what the state considered “improper use of firearms” other than its obvious objection to concealed carry.

This order eliminates the financial protection that groups like USCCA afford law-abiding citizens of New Jersey. Anyone who uses a weapon to defend themselves, wounding or killing an assailant, will likely face a criminal trial, a wrongful-death civil suit, or both. The battles they face are not easy and they certainly are not cheap.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) said that Murphy’s executive order also exceeds the governor’s authority by trying to regulate interstate commerce.

“The governor views licensed and law-abiding small businesses that are just trying to earn a living and are engaged in the commerce of a constitutionally protected product [as] somehow the problem,” NSSF General Counsel Lawrence Keene said.

New Jersey State Treasurer Elizabeth Maher Muoio is standing behind the governor’s executive order, saying that it is “using the power of our purse strings to set an example for others,” the press release said.

“The executive order being signed today will ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used wisely to procure goods and services from companies that act responsibly when it comes to firearms and ammunition and to create an opportunity for local and county governments who want to follow our lead,” Muoio said.

Much to Muoio’s chagrin, Murphy signed another executive order (also back in September) that leverages the state’s purchasing power to coerce gun retailers, manufacturers, and financial institutions to comply with a more stringent gun-control regime.

Murphy’s order states that gun violence is a crisis with nearly 100,000-gun related incidents in the US, and over 2,000 shootings each year in New Jersey. It goes on to break down the numbers for the Garden State:

280 homicides, 184 suicides, 764 non-fatal interpersonal and 599 accidental shootings per year.

This totals 1,874, which is slightly less than the ‘over 2,000’ indicated in Murphy’s order.

Crowe continues, saying that under the executive order, the state, which purchases an estimated $70 million in firearms and related equipment annually, will refuse to do business with gun manufacturers and retailers that lack policies that deny guns to people with a history of mental illness or domestic abuse.

Retailers that wish to keep the state’s business will be required to prevent, detect and screen for the transfer of firearms to straw purchasers or firearm traffickers.

Murphy’s order will also deny the roughly $1 billion in financial-transaction fees the state pays annually to banks that have relationships with gun manufacturers and retailers that adhere to permissive policies.

New Jersey already has strict gun-control laws in place that require retailers to perform background checks, but the new policy will apply to out-of-state companies that are not bound by New Jersey laws.

And now, with each of the Democratic candidates swearing that they will immediately sign legislation into law that takes away guns from law-abiding citizens, they refuse to acknowledge that criminals who perpetrate these acts of violence do not follow the law to begin with.

But I am not sure that Congress needs to do anything. I think that the mainstream media and social media are working equally as hard to suppress the firearms industry by effectively silencing 2A voices, limiting their exposure and reach and in some instances, downright banning them.
 
Since no insurance company in the history of ever will cover an illegal act, this *should* have zero effect, right?

Ha ha ha!

Seriously, I'll be here all week.

Don't forget to tip your waiter or waitress!
 
wasn't forcing every gun owner to get insurance one of the things the left wanted? now they don't?

it seems like they want the threat of sueing every gun owner who ever has to defend themselves to hopefully discourage people from buying guns...

Step 1. Pass law that requires all gun owners have insurance.
Step 2. Pass law that such insurance is illegal or otherwise impossible to get a company to offer.
 
Another edict from some f***head politician. Why are we even bothering to have elections? I mean if the Constitution of the United States is now something to just do end rounds to, why does anybody bother?
 
And how does Gov Murphy's protection detail manage liability?


Oh yeah, forgot their use of force is always justified.
 
Another edict from some f***head politician. Why are we even bothering to have elections? I mean if the Constitution of the United States is now something to just do end rounds to, why does anybody bother?

Unfortunately the left have figured out that they don't actually have to worry much about stuff like courts shooting them down, constitution, rule of law, and other antiquated notions. They just do whatever the eff they want and see what they can get away with. Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They never get in trouble if they're told no. There is absolutely no criminal or other consequences for doing stuff like this. It takes years just for the rare chance of actually getting a court to hear it. If a court never hears it, they win. If a court does hear it, the court could very well agree, and they win. And even if they lose in court, there is nothing to stop them from keeping on doing it.
 
Unfortunately the left have figured out that they don't actually have to worry much about stuff like courts shooting them down, constitution, rule of law, and other antiquated notions. They just do whatever the eff they want and see what they can get away with. Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. They never get in trouble if they're told no. There is absolutely no criminal or other consequences for doing stuff like this. It takes years just for the rare chance of actually getting a court to hear it. If a court never hears it, they win. If a court does hear it, the court could very well agree, and they win. And even if they lose in court, there is nothing to stop them from keeping on doing it.

This lack of any consequences is the root of the problem.
 
They want to require it, and then make it impossible to obtain.

wasn't forcing every gun owner to get insurance one of the things the left wanted? now they don't?

it seems like they want the threat of sueing every gun owner who ever has to defend themselves to hopefully discourage people from buying guns...
 
Step 1. Pass law that requires all gun owners have insurance.
Step 2. Pass law that such insurance is illegal or otherwise impossible to get a company to offer.
They want to require insurance that protects the shootee but prohibit that which protects the shooter.

The troubling thing about this is not the gun issue, but the concept that the state is taking the position that the process for someone presumed innocent is in fact punishment.
 
so these gun control measures are not persecution? This is such an abuse of power I'm not even sure how it can be allowed.
 
Last edited:
They want to require insurance that protects the shootee but prohibit that which protects the shooter.

The troubling thing about this is not the gun issue, but the concept that the state is taking the position that the process for someone presumed innocent is in fact punishment.

The process IS becoming the punishment. Avoiding the whole thing is probably the smartest thing someone can do now.
 
Dangerous and unconstitutional: NJ governor bans sale of insurance to gun owners


We’re just learning about an executive order that the governor issued in September that effectively banned the sale of insurance products that provide liability coverage to gun owners making it virtually impossible for concealed carry holders in New Jersey to get coverage.

So how many people in NJ actually have a CCW permit ???
Maybe a dozen or so ???
And those people are all extremely well connected, so it's a moot point.
 
We really need to begin, in earnest, discussions about ejecting states from the "Union" .
The only problem with that is if it happened, China would swoop right in with huge sums of money to buy the politicians. There was talk of a Calexit after Trump won and while California has an economy larger than many countries, the government of the state (Silicone Valley) would do deals with China that would make them rich beyond the dreams of avarice, but in return the tech products made that would be sold to Americans and the world the Chinese would have access to the data.

I mean, we're nearly at that point now, but the benefit of that is California and these tech companies are in the jurisdiction of the US and Trump is aware of what's going on and slowly antique Senators like Mitch McConnell are understanding the danger of the ties between these tech companies in Silicone (Siciliancon) Valley and China are to the US.

We all think that removing states from the Union is the answer, but there are a lot of unintended consequences that will happen if such things happen.
 
.... the state, which purchases an estimated $70 million in firearms and related equipment annually, will refuse to do business with gun manufacturers and retailers that lack policies.....

These companies should grow a set of balls and refuse to sell to the State of New Jersey. When the Governor and politicians realize their personal body guards and the police can't get ammo or replacement parts for their guns, I bet they might rethink their position.
 
I, for one, feel much safer that if a gang-banger shoots me in Joisey, I'm screwed and if I get hit by a stray round from a CCW that is protecting his family, I can't even collect on that either. Good job, Joisey.
 
Back
Top Bottom