Gun owners should have insurance, JIC

[JakeStarkey]

defcon and etc. simply are concrete thinkers, needing to be told what to think.

The requirement will be the law of the land by 2020.

Criminalizing decent, law abiding citizens who harm nobody but exercising their right reinforced by the Constitution.

There is no criminalizing at all if you obey a constitutional, common sense law. Gun insurance is exactly that.

 

[dblack]

Show us the right you have from being financially responsible for your silly, stupid, or criminal actions with guns?

There is no such right.

That's correct. You have no right to not be required to have insurance if you own guns.

That's not the same thing. Which is why you had to write another sentence. Fakey fakin'.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You tried to pretend you were smart and failed, dblack.

You will have gun insurance eventually or you will be fined.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I will be at the shooting club later day and will inquire about insurance and guns required of the owner.

 

[dblack]

You tried to pretend you were smart and failed, dblack.

You will have gun insurance eventually or you will be fined.

Blow me, ad hom dweebie. I don't even own any guns.

 

[9thIDdoc]

The law already requires both car and gun owners to be responsible for their actions.

 

[dblack]

The law already requires both car and gun owners to be responsible for their actions.

That's the thing. Mandatory insurance has nothing to do with holding people accountable. Laws and courts work fine for that. And signing an insurance contract isn't taking responsibility. It's enlisting someone else to take responsibility for you. It's paying for the ability to be irresponsible and avoid accountability for your actions.

 

[defcon4]

I will be at the shooting club later day and will inquire about insurance and guns required of the owner.

What you are going to shoot? Slingshot? Your fallacy in comparing sooting range insurance (what is for the purpose in case of accidents) with "gun ownership insurance" (which is gun a registration attempt) is ridiculously childish.

 

[strollingbones]

i dont have time for 8 pages of bullshit but didnt a company do this in va....if you shot someone they would pay for your defense etc

 

[strollingbones]

ask the range about their workmans comp insurance? i wonder what rate they pay....just for the fuck of it def..just for the fuck of it

 

[dblack]

i dont have time for 8 pages of bullshit but didnt a company do this in va....if you shot someone they would pay for your defense etc

Maybe. I don't think the issue here is the viability, or advisability, of insurance for gun owners. It's whether our right to own guns should depend on maintaining such insurance.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Name an insurance company that offers such a product.

Just about all of them, actually. Directly from my (former) insurance agent: homeowners' insurance covers accidental shootings.

 

[Jarlaxle]

We are responsible for what we do with guns, cars, etc.

Insurance requirements are perfectly sensible and legal.

Those two sentences contradict each other.

That's just to show you that Fakey is an "independent thinker" <<< was that an oxymoron?

No...Fakey is just a regular old moron.

 

[jon_berzerk]

S. Morales wrote, "Same arguments can be said for vehicles! Vehicles don't kill people, people driving them kill people, which is why they NEED insurance, JIC they on purpose or ACCIDENTALLY kill someone, or damage other people or things.

Gun owners should have insurance too, JIC they, you know, kill a bunch of people in the movie theater, or school, or whomever. On purpose or accidentally."

This makes sense. You own a gun, you own the responsibility to use it properly

,
Kill a bunch of people accidentally? Way to go Jake…
JIC as Jubilee International Church?

If you driving a car kills a buncha people by accident, you better have your insurance.

Same with a gun, bub.

JIC: just in case for the illiterate.

Just another method of making sure poor people can't afford firearms, right farkey?

yup