Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:53 PM

How about requiring gun owners to carry insurance?

We are now at the point where guns kill more children than cars. The more lethal the weapon, the higher the insurance. Just like sports cars cost more to insure than a Corolla.
If there is a shooting at a business, the business may get sued. How about making gun owners bear some of the financial burden?
Some may argue that all gun owners shouldn’t have to bear the cost because of what some may do, but that applies to all types of insurance. No?

56 replies, 1487 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

56 replies	Author	Time	Post
How about requiring gun owners to carry insurance? (Original post)	tulipsandroses	Jun 23	OP
It won't cover any illegal acts	hack89	Jun 23	#1
Point taken but it may force gun owners to take more care of locking up their guns	tulipsandroses	Jun 23	#9
Home owners insurance covers guns in the home	hack89	Jun 23	#12
Because the goal should be preventing them from being shot in the first place?	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#22
Then pass strict storage laws.	hack89	Jun 23	#24
Are you not familliar with the NRA's stance on that as infringement?	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#25
So are you saying no gun laws will ever be passed?	hack89	Jun 23	#28
You are the one saying it is simple to just pass a law.	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#31
Also I think you might be playing a bit naive when you say "not complicated"	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#26
In a blue state like NY and MA it is not complicated	hack89	Jun 23	#29
Whether it is a blue state or not SHOULD MAKE NO DIFFERENCE!	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#30
Not saying I support any of this	hack89	Jun 23	#33
Additionally they just struck down NY????	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#32
NY simply has to fix its concealed carry law	hack89	Jun 23	#34
A few problems:	Zeitghost	Jun 23	#2
Good point. It would not cover illegal acts	tulipsandroses	Jun 23	#10
In most cases	Zeitghost	Jun 23	#15
Not covering illegal/intentional crimes makes insurance useless	Model35mech	Jun 23	#39
So if I Took Out a Life Insurance Policy on an Individual Then Facilitated Their Demise...	ruet	Jun 23	#44
NO! That is not at all what I am saying	Model35mech	Jun 23	#49
It would depend on the cost of insurance.	Dysfunctional	Jun 23	#3
Guns	JustAnotherGen	Jun 23	#5
Actually there is no license to own a tank, none.	thatdemguy	Jun 23	#7
See there ya go	JustAnotherGen	Jun 23	#13
Blacks need to organize like the Black Panthers did in the 60s,	Dysfunctional	Jun 23	#21
Disagree	JustAnotherGen	Jun 23	#23
I hear the NFAC needs a new leader.....	Fla_Democrat	Jun 23	#56
Then tax the hell out of ammo -- like they do cigs. nt	allegorical oracle	Jun 23	#19
Not constitutional	DetroitLegalBeagle	Jun 23	#20
Not sure if any insurance carriers will want to increase their lines to include liability	MenloParque	Jun 23	#4
It wouldn't likely effect their bottom lines much	DetroitLegalBeagle	Jun 23	#6
Isn't covered or cannot be covered?	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#27
cannot	Lurker Deluxe	Jun 23	#41
But much the same as a car	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#42
Might be worth the gamble for them. We have more guns than people	tulipsandroses	Jun 23	#11
Your creating a new lucrative avenue for insurance	RANDYWILDMAN	Jun 23	#8
In general	JustAnotherGen	Jun 23	#14
There is no mandatory insurance for anything ...	Lurker Deluxe	Jun 23	#16
Car insurance, Pit bull insurance	tulipsandroses	Jun 23	#37
Not mandatory	Lurker Deluxe	Jun 23	#38
How about the ACA requiring people to carry health insurance?	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#43
Not mandatory.	Lurker Deluxe	Jun 23	#46
Right. Ok.	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#47
Ok, so ...	Lurker Deluxe	Jun 23	#50
Not the same category but a template for use.	Aroundabout23	Jun 23	#52
Fair enough. But the gun nuts want to be able to carry in public	tulipsandroses	Jun 23	#48
It might stand a chance in a different time	Lurker Deluxe	Jun 23	#51
I've always thought that this was the approach to take	CanonRay	Jun 23	#17
Do you think a $1 million policy would be expensive?	NickB79	Jun 23	#35
Your guess is	sarisataka	Jun 23	#36
Then make it 100 million.	CanonRay	Jun 23	#40
So really it's more about guns	sarisataka	Jun 23	#45
I'm saying make it difficult and expensive to own guns.	CanonRay	Jun 23	#53
Depends	sarisataka	Jun 23	#54
People apparently believe that this insurance would so prohibitively expensive	MichMan	Jun 23	#55
Been asking that question for years. Make gun owners bear some heavy duty responsibility. nt	allegorical oracle	Jun 23	#18

Response to tulipsandroses (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:56 PM

hack89 (39,060 posts)

1. It won't cover any illegal acts

so it will not cover most gun violence. And it will have absolutely no impact on criminal gun violence - if someone is willing to commit a violent crime then I suspect they are not concerned about insurance requirements.

How about requiring gun owners to carry insurance?

1. It won't cover any illegal acts

9. Point taken but it may force gun owners to take more care of locking up their guns

12. Home owners insurance covers guns in the home

22. Because the goal should be preventing them from being shot in the first place?

24. Then pass strict storage laws.

25. Are you not familliar with the NRA's stance on that as infringement?

28. So are you saying no gun laws will ever be passed?

31. You are the one saying it is simple to just pass a law.

26. Also I think you might be playing a bit naive when you say "not complicated"

29. In a blue state like NY and MA it is not complicated

30. Whether it is a blue state or not SHOULD MAKE NO DIFFERENCE!

33. Not saying I support any of this

32. Additionally they just struck down NY????

34. NY simply has to fix its concealed carry law

2. A few problems:

10. Good point. It would not cover illegal acts

15. In most cases

39. Not covering illegal/intentional crimes makes insurance useless

44. So if I Took Out a Life Insurance Policy on an Individual Then Facilitated Their Demise...

49. NO! That is not at all what I am saying

3. It would depend on the cost of insurance.

5. Guns

7. Actually there is no license to own a tank, none.

13. See there ya go

21. Blacks need to organize like the Black Panthers did in the 60s,

23. Disagree

56. I hear the NFAC needs a new leader.....

19. Then tax the hell out of ammo -- like they do cigs. nt

20. Not constitutional

4. Not sure if any insurance carriers will want to increase their lines to include liability

6. It wouldn't likely effect their bottom lines much

27. Isn't covered or cannot be covered?

41. cannot

42. But much the same as a car

11. Might be worth the gamble for them. We have more guns than people

8. Your creating a new lucrative avenue for insurance

14. In general

16. There is no mandatory insurance for anything ...

37. Car insurance, Pit bull insurance

38. Not mandatory

43. How about the ACA requiring people to carry health insurance?

46. Not mandatory.

47. Right. Ok.

50. Ok, so ...

52. Not the same category but a template for use.

48. Fair enough. But the gun nuts want to be able to carry in public

51. It might stand a chance in a different time

17. I've always thought that this was the approach to take

35. Do you think a $1 million policy would be expensive?

36. Your guess is

40. Then make it 100 million.

45. So really it's more about guns

53. I'm saying make it difficult and expensive to own guns.

54. Depends

55. People apparently believe that this insurance would so prohibitively expensive

18. Been asking that question for years. Make gun owners bear some heavy duty responsibility. nt