Is Mandatory Gun Insurance the Solution to Gun Violence?

[Quantum Windbag]

Insurance on guns isn't a POLL TAX.

A poll tax is a tax imposed on voters.

Besides, having to buy insurance isn't a tax, it's a fee.

And FWIW, the tax should not be imposed on the owners, but on the gun and ammunition manufacturers.

When you buy the piece the tax is part purchase cost.

Isn't fair? you say?

I agree

Few taxes are really fair.

You want to put a insurance fee on guns and ammunition and call it a tax. Just curious, what is the government supposed to do with it when they collect it? The idea behind the insurance is to pay for injuries caused by accident or negligence, like the liability insurance you are required to have on your car. This type of insurance might make sense,k but calling it a tax and putting the government in charge of it would be stupid. That would make the government liable for every bit of gun violence in the country, and people who are shot by police would be able to sue them, and probably win.

 

[GHook93]

 

[GHook93]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

Or put everyone on a list, like in this clip!

 

[eman1355]

Why can't we just make people responsible for their own actions?

 

[GHook93]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

I am responsible for the actions of a gun I sold? Am I also responsible for the actions of a car I sell? People are only responsible for their actions, not the actions of inanimate objects, especially ones they do not own.

And all your houses you sell, so 40 years from now if the 4th sucessive owner neglected the roof and it caves in killing a family of four who are renting the home, THEN YOUR HEARTLESS ASS IS LIABLE!!! I don't give a shit that you couldn't check the roof, since you have no property rights over the house anymore, that roof caved it, SO YOUR ASS IS GRASS!!!

 

[Sallow]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

No to bullet tracking and no to gun tracking. That just makes it easier to find out who has guns when it's time to take them away.

Naw.

I sorta think the opposite. A few gun shop owners taking a needle for a murder their "business transaction" caused would make them a whole lot more responsible.

 

[Sallow]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

I am responsible for the actions of a gun I sold? Am I also responsible for the actions of a car I sell? People are only responsible for their actions, not the actions of inanimate objects, especially ones they do not own.

And all your houses you sell, so 40 years from now if the 4th sucessive owner neglected the roof and it caves in killing a family of four who are renting the home, THEN YOUR HEARTLESS ASS IS LIABLE!!! I don't give a shit that you couldn't check the roof, since you have no property rights over the house anymore, that roof caved it, SO YOUR ASS IS GRASS!!!

No a bad idea.

I think the Romans may have had a law stating that if a structure killed anyone..the architects were liable.

Ever been to Split? People still live in the apartments of the palace of Diocletian.

 

[GHook93]

My personal opinion is that if Poll Taxes violate the 14th Amendment then so would Mandatory Insurance. Of course Gun grabbers have never actually cared what the Constitution says.

Depends what the mandatory insurance is for! If its a right, like gun ownership or living (in the case of mandatory health insurance), then mandatory insurance is unconstitutional. However, if its a privilege, like driving a car, then mandatory insurance is consitutional!

 

[Sallow]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

Or put everyone on a list, like in this clip!

Yep.

One of the most realistic depictions of war, evah!

 

[GHook93]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

No to bullet tracking and no to gun tracking. That just makes it easier to find out who has guns when it's time to take them away.

Naw.

I sorta think the opposite. A few gun shop owners taking a needle for a murder their "business transaction" caused would make them a whole lot more responsible.

So when these gun store owners start refusing to sell guns to blacks and latinos, because they commit more crimes per capita then whites, therefore, it would be more responsible to refuse to sell blackie and brownie guns are you going to bitch and mone? ABSOLUTELY!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No.

Gun and bullet tracking is the solution.

Followed by total responsibility for the actions of a gun you sold..or own.

No to bullet tracking and no to gun tracking. That just makes it easier to find out who has guns when it's time to take them away.

Naw.

I sorta think the opposite. A few gun shop owners taking a needle for a murder their "business transaction" caused would make them a whole lot more responsible.

Why do you think the seller of a firearm holds any blame when someone commits a crime with a gun? When the seller goes through proper steps the gun is out of their hands and nothing is their fault after that.

 

[GHook93]

I am not giving up my Saiga 12 with the 20 round barrel or my Springfield XDM 9mm with a 19 round clip!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

My personal opinion is that if Poll Taxes violate the 14th Amendment then so would Mandatory Insurance. Of course Gun grabbers have never actually cared what the Constitution says.

Depends what the mandatory insurance is for! If its a right, like gun ownership or living (in the case of mandatory health insurance), then mandatory insurance is unconstitutional. However, if its a privilege, like driving a car, then mandatory insurance is consitutional!

The original proposition I read about was for people who have a carry permit, that would make some sense.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here we go again. So why is this even a question? Why are they trying to forec the law abiding citizen to hand over their guns? Do the gun grabbers think a criminal will go out and get insurance for their guns?

Is Mandatory Gun Insurance the Solution to Gun Violence?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Here we go again. So why is this even a question? Why are they trying to forec the law abiding citizen to hand over their guns? Do the gun grabbers think a criminal will go out and get insurance for their guns?

Is Mandatory Gun Insurance the Solution to Gun Violence?

I don't care thats funny

 

[MHanson]

Here we go again. So why is this even a question? Why are they trying to forec the law abiding citizen to hand over their guns? Do the gun grabbers think a criminal will go out and get insurance for their guns?

<url link invalidated due to some board regulation ...>

In a society that entertains itself with movies with extreme violence, I take the stand that I will never own a weapon. Or see another movie where that is the primary "entertainment." Go on and shoot me, animals. I know where I'm going when I die. Do you?

Sadly those who choose to "defend" their homes have children, how many of the children killed themselves or their friends accidentally? Was it really worth it, compared to the crime rate in your area?

How many children were so miserable they found it so easy to take their own lives?

Legislating responsibility is no easy matter, I realize. And even if those who are responsible outnumber the ones who are irresponsible, do you really think the answer is to open the doors to every single person?

I do not want to live in a society where everyone is free to carry a concealed weapon without some guarantee that person has some responsibility. And having insurance is not enough.

Move to the UK, they are banning chef's knives and requiring ID to purchase pizza cutters, you should feel very comfortable.

Funny thing though, gun violence is going up there.

May we have some documentation please? All I found was advertisements to buy chef's knives and pizza cutters, with no references to such security measures.

Since you also refused to give references to the gun violence, that will take me more time to verify, since you also refused to give that as well.

And no, you are stuck with me. I am as much as a citizen of the United States as you are, and all because I do not believe the same as you, I have every much right to live here as you do. You want to deport me? Convince the authorities I'm an illegal alien. Good luck.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In a society that entertains itself with movies with extreme violence, I take the stand that I will never own a weapon. Or see another movie where that is the primary "entertainment." Go on and shoot me, animals. I know where I'm going when I die. Do you?

Sadly those who choose to "defend" their homes have children, how many of the children killed themselves or their friends accidentally? Was it really worth it, compared to the crime rate in your area?

How many children were so miserable they found it so easy to take their own lives?

Legislating responsibility is no easy matter, I realize. And even if those who are responsible outnumber the ones who are irresponsible, do you really think the answer is to open the doors to every single person?

I do not want to live in a society where everyone is free to carry a concealed weapon without some guarantee that person has some responsibility. And having insurance is not enough.

Move to the UK, they are banning chef's knives and requiring ID to purchase pizza cutters, you should feel very comfortable.

Funny thing though, gun violence is going up there.

May we have some documentation please? All I found was advertisements to buy chef's knives and pizza cutters, with no references to such security measures.

Since you also refused to give references to the gun violence, that will take me more time to verify, since you also refused to give that as well.

And no, you are stuck with me. I am as much as a citizen of the United States as you are, and all because I do not believe the same as you, I have every much right to live here as you do. You want to deport me? Convince the authorities I'm an illegal alien. Good luck.

Take your pick


Key points
• Doctors claim long kitchen knives serve no purpose except as weapons
• 55 out of 108 homicide victims in Scotland were stabbed last year
• Police superintendents say a ban would be difficult to enforce


Doctors seek kitchen knife ban - Scotsman.com News


A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.


BBC NEWS | Health | Doctors' kitchen knives ban call

COPS will be ordered to prosecute anyone carrying a blade in a massive crackdown on Britain's knife crime epidemic, Gordon Brown declares today.

Knife crime | Cop crackdown | Gordon Brown | The Sun |News|Sun Justice

As Immigrant Crime Rises In Britain, The UK Government Is Trying To Ban Not Guns, But Knives
VDARE.com: 03/19/09 - As Immigrant Crime Rises In Britain, The UK Government Is Trying To Ban Not Guns, But Knives

 

[editec]

And the government cannot force you to buy a product. Because owning a gun is not a previledge but a right.

They would not be forcing you to buy anything.

If you bought a gum, the insurance fees would be prepaid by the manufacturer. and that cost would be part of the purchase price.

Think of it like a VAT tax on guns.

OH they tryed to use that argument for healthcare coverage, it's failing just as this will fail.

the insurance fees would be prepaid by the manufacturer

So you think the gun manufacturers will eat this lose? No they won't they will pass the charge on to the consumers. Why can't people see this? Adding an extra tax never hurst big busniess it always hurts the consumer.

No I do not think gun manufacturers will eat the costs

Yes, they will pass on the cost to gun buyers

I obviously could see that.

Why did you assume I didn't?

I made it very clear how it would be done.

I made it clear that the cost of that insurance would be part of the purchasing cost.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They would not be forcing you to buy anything.

If you bought a gum, the insurance fees would be prepaid by the manufacturer. and that cost would be part of the purchase price.

Think of it like a VAT tax on guns.

OH they tryed to use that argument for healthcare coverage, it's failing just as this will fail.

the insurance fees would be prepaid by the manufacturer

So you think the gun manufacturers will eat this lose? No they won't they will pass the charge on to the consumers. Why can't people see this? Adding an extra tax never hurst big busniess it always hurts the consumer.

No I do not think gun manufacturers will eat the costs

Yes, they will pass on the cost to gun buyers

I obviously could see that.

Why did you assume I didn't?

I made it very clear how it would be done.

I made it clear that the cost of that insurance would be part of the purchasing cost.

Why do you hate the poor? Why do you think they should not be allowed to defend themself? If you raise the price the consumer will be affected. The poor will not be able to buy a gun and defend themself. And the police are not legally obligaed to protect anyone. So why do you hate the poor?

 

[editec]

OH they tryed to use that argument for healthcare coverage, it's failing just as this will fail.


So you think the gun manufacturers will eat this lose? No they won't they will pass the charge on to the consumers. Why can't people see this? Adding an extra tax never hurst big busniess it always hurts the consumer.

No I do not think gun manufacturers will eat the costs

Yes, they will pass on the cost to gun buyers

I obviously could see that.

Why did you assume I didn't?

I made it very clear how it would be done.

I made it clear that the cost of that insurance would be part of the purchasing cost.

Why do you hate the poor? Why do you think they should not be allowed to defend themself? If you raise the price the consumer will be affected. The poor will not be able to buy a gun and defend themself. And the police are not legally obligaed to protect anyone. So why do you hate the poor?

You presume that the cost of the insurance would be very high.

I don't think it would be.

Or more to my point, I don't think it would have to be very high.

The cost of the prepaid insurance would really depend on who got compensated for gun related events, I suppose.