- Thread starter
- #561
However, society has built in responsibility for motorists..insurance.
Society needs to build in responsibility for gun owners..insurance.
There already is built in responsibility for guns it's just in different forms. In auto accidents it's dealing insurance. In gun accidents it's dealing with the law.
So shooting victims should be entitled to nothing except the satisfaction that the person that shot them is in jail? May be satisfying but doesn't pay the bills now does it.
What is the argument against liability for guns since you've drawn the parallel so clearly between the two...
If both are such deadly weapons and all...
There are two arguments against liability insurance. First, you shouldn't have to pay for Constitutional rights. Second, why guns? Why not just require everyone to carry liability insurance? You can injure, maim and murder people in so many ways. Only a tiny percent of guns harm people.