House bill would require gun owners to have liability insurance

[LoginName]

No matter how big the fail will be, they never give up, do they?

House Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.) has introduced a bill that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance.

The Firearm Risk Protection Act, unveiled Friday, would require gun buyers to have liability insurance coverage before being allowed to purchase a weapon, and would impose a fine of $10,000 if an owner is found not to have it. Service members and law enforcement officers, however, would be exempt from the requirement.

“We require insurance to own a car, but no such requirement exists for guns," Maloney said in a statement. "The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade, but gun fatalities continue to rise.”

Maloney said auto insurance carriers incentivize drivers to take precautions to reduce accidents, but no such incentives exist for firearm owners.

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” she said. “Adequate liability coverage would also ensure that the victims of gun violence are fairly compensated when crimes or accidents occur."

This is the second time Maloney, who is one of the biggest gun control advocates in Congress, has introduced the legislation. A few weeks ago she reintroduced legislation that would require sellers to obtain a background check for all guns sold at gun shows.

The Gun Show Loophole Closing Act, long championed by former Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), would subject anyone selling or transferring a gun to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and require that transfers be reported to the attorney general.

http://thehill.com/regulation/243425-house-bill-would-require-gun-owners-to-carry-insurance

 

[the_shootist]

Insurance for cars is not a national requirement. Her argument is moot

 

[Jim85IROC]

Plus we've all had car insurance for much longer than 10 years, so the reduction in fatalities within the last 10 years is absolutely unrelated... hell, having insurance doesn't change your chance of dieing in a car accident anyway!

Loony bitch.

 

[Reptile]

People who would buy insurance for a gun are not the people going around shooting people.

The need to focus on the criminals who are mostly the ones doing the killing.

I am sure all the gang members and drug dealers will be calling up to buy insurance on the guns that they can not legally own anyway.

This would be great for the insurance business since they would have a huge income and very little being paid out on behalf of legal law abiding gun owners.

 

[LoginName]

Not at all surprised with this...


H.R.2546 - Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2015

Rep. Lynch, Stephen F. [D-MA-8]* 05/21/2015
Rep. Tsongas, Niki [D-MA-3]* 05/21/2015
Rep. Grijalva, Raul M. [D-AZ-3]* 05/21/2015
Rep. Clark, Katherine M. [D-MA-5]*

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2546/cosponsors

 

[Whutmeworry]

It's a total non-starter. The more the antis lose, the more ridiculous their proposals become.

 

[the_shootist]

People who would buy insurance for a gun are not the people going around shooting people.

The need to focus on the criminals who are mostly the ones doing the killing.

I am sure all the gang members and drug dealers will be calling up to buy insurance on the guns that they can not legally own anyway.

This would be great for the insurance business since they would have a huge income and very little being paid out on behalf of legal law abiding gun owners.

Precisely, would a robber be sure he had liability insurance before he robs a store? This has major fail written all over it

 

[allen-1]

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” she said. “Adequate liability coverage would also ensure that the victims of gun violence are fairly compensated when crimes or accidents occur."

Idiot. Insurance won't cover criminal acts.
This particular idiocy was floated here in CT and was shot down by the insurance industry.
Fcking tools always think that more laws are the answer to every problem.

 

[EC1]

Not at all surprised with this...


H.R.2546 - Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2015

Rep. Lynch, Stephen F. [D-MA-8]* 05/21/2015
Rep. Tsongas, Niki [D-MA-3]* 05/21/2015
Rep. Grijalva, Raul M. [D-AZ-3]* 05/21/2015
Rep. Clark, Katherine M. [D-MA-5]*

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2546/cosponsors

I can see it now .gov rebates to those that are considered poor or can't afford it, otherwise it would be discriminatory.

 

[Christian]

Well if we're to equate gun liability insurance with auto insurance and they are to be treated the same sure, no problem. If that were the case and I had an "accident" with one of my firearms that would mean all I have to pay was a deductible, get dinged a point or two(depending on the severity of the accident), and not have to worry about going to jail ever again so long as nobody died right?

There should be some rules in place like in the courts that if you propose a new bill and it doesn't pass whoever proposed/backed it should have to pay back the taxpayers the amount it cost for it to go through the process, I'd be willing to bet all this nonsense would end pretty quickly. If they truly believed in their BS they should have no problem putting their money where their mouth is. Maybe then some things could get done in DC for once.

 

[Hoover]

Gun deaths are rising? Maybe she missed the 1960's, 70's, 80's,....

You should see her when the do committee coverage. She is the definition of a limosine liberal. She has that obnoxious NYC bitch look perfected. She's a back bench nobody.

 

[StevieP]

Service members and law enforcement officers, however, would be exempt from the requirement.
...
...

Maloney said auto insurance carriers incentivize drivers to take precautions to reduce accidents, but no such incentives exist for firearm owners.

a) some animals are more equal to others
b) not 'accidentally' shooting yourself or anyone else is a pretty strong incentive in and of itself.

 

[VTHunter]

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” she said.

How does a government mandated requirement encourage a free market result?

 

[robjax]

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” she said. “Adequate liability coverage would also ensure that the victims of gun violence are fairly compensated when crimes or accidents occur."

Idiot. Insurance won't cover criminal acts.
This particular idiocy was floated here in CT and was shot down by the insurance industry.
Fcking tools always think that more laws are the answer to every problem.

She means the family of the thug who was shot to death during a home invasion.

But thinking about it...if it exempts me from personal liability maybe it's not a bad thing. Guy breaks in my house and gets planted the insurance pays the bill. The other thing is does is it advertises gun ownership. Insurance companies will make commercials to advertise their rates for gun owners thus advertising that "you too" can own a gun. And young people will see these commercials and the seed is planted...

 

[Varmint]

Violate the constitution and reward their insurance company cronies all in one bill, who says politicians are idiots?

 

[Fixxah]

Take it out of my taxes you stupid bitch.

 

[yanici]

She means the family of the thug who was shot to death during a home invasion.

But thinking about it...if it exempts me from personal liability maybe it's not a bad thing. Guy breaks in my house and gets planted the insurance pays the bill. The other thing is does is it advertises gun ownership. Insurance companies will make commercials to advertise their rates for gun owners thus advertising that "you too" can own a gun. And young people will see these commercials and the seed is planted...

You're kiddin', right?

 

[milktree]

“We require insurance to own a car..."

Um.. no, we don't.

We require insurance to drive a car on public roads. Ownership and possession have nothing to do with it.

 

[robjax]

You're kiddin', right?

lmao..of course i'm kidding. Should have put some 'sarcasm' there. Well not kidding about the thug's family being rewarded. I think that part would be true.

 

[Obie1]

My main problem with this is that there is no such verb as "incentivize," therefore the entire proposal is moot. Bam, editored.

 

[HARRYM]

The insurance companies have stated repeatedly that you can't get insurance for illegal or criminal behavior.
You can insure a gun against theft
You can be insured if your gun injures you in an accedent

Sandy Hook was a criminal act that was not, nor will it ever be, an insurable event.

People killing people with guns is not, nor will it ever be, an insurable event.

 

[the_shootist]

The insurance companies have stated repeatedly that you can't get insurance for illegal or criminal behavior.
You can insure a gun against theft
You can be insured if your gun injures you in an accedent

Sandy Hook was a criminal act that was not, nor will it ever be, an insurable event.

People killing people with guns is not, nor will it ever be, an insurable event.

That's all that needs to be said and this bill dies. Will anyone actually say it?

 

[Picton]

I thought Linsky tried one of these back in '13... State level, but IIRC it got no support at all.

 

[Pete85]

My main problem with this is that there is no such verb as "incentivize," therefore the entire proposal is moot. Bam, editored.

At least a few blatant lies in her statements and that's the part that sticks out? Grammar Nazi!

According to the FBI, firearms deaths have been decreasing at least since 2007, not increasing as she claims.

There is no federal law requiring you to have insurance in order to own a car. There isn't even a federal law requiring you to have insurance to drive a vehicle on public roads.

I could probably go on, but that should be more than enough to discredit her.

 

[saltydude]

This is one of those things that has failure and complication written all over it.
The insurance companies won't want to do offer it cause all these "consolidated" Co's offer coverage for everything now. People will cancel, throw a fit etc.
.gov will have to force them. More legal issues, unconstitutional BS, State by State issues. and so on and so on.

 

[the_shootist]

This is one of those things that has failure and complication written all over it.
The insurance companies won't want to do offer it cause all these "consolidated" Co's offer coverage for everything now. People will cancel, throw a fit etc.
.gov will have to force them. More legal issues, unconstitutional BS, State by State issues. and so on and so on.

The insurance companies should love it. Collect the premiums from the sheep then deny every claim that is related to violence. A win/win

 

[saltydude]

The insurance companies should love it. Collect the premiums from the sheep then deny every claim that is related to violence. A win/win

I don't think it's that easy.

 

[the_shootist]

I don't think it's that easy.

I was being factious

 

[Wendell]

shall not be infringed.

 

[Dadstoys]

The insurance companies made it very clear they wanted nothing to do with this crap.
So are they planning of forcing them to cover?