Will more guns create a safer society?

[Derideo_Te]

Given that we have statistics on accidental injuries and deaths why should gun owners be exempted from having insurance for that eventuality?

Mandating gun insurance is the equivalent of a "poll" tax for exercising a right....and we already have laws for accidentally injuring people, or killing them....there are legal and civil consequences...

You just want to pound on legal gun owners....

All rights come with responsibilities. Paranoids like you don't want to accept accountability for your gun fetish. Grow up and take responsibility and then you might earn a little respect. The majority of this nation, including responsible gun owners like myself, are in favor of background checks.

 

[Derideo_Te]

As a responsible gun owner you are already assuming accountability. The problem we are dealing with is that amongst the 8- million gun owners there are those who are not as responsible as you are. Given that we have statistics on accidental injuries and deaths why should gun owners be exempted from having insurance for that eventuality?

Well ... I understand your point ... But insuring your weapons against possible use just pays for injuries. It doesn't supply accountability for the irresponsible behavior ... It just pays for mitigating circumstances. I would rather gun owners be criminally accountable for negligence should the circumstances support such a charge.

And remember that vehicular homicide is a criminal charge and not a civil charge regarding compensation exclusively.

.

I am not advocating removal of criminal liability. I can be charged with vehicular homicide even if I do have insurance. The difference being that if my firearm discharges accidentally I am not charged but any victims are covered by my insurance. If I deliberately shoot someone then I am criminally liable and my insurance would not exonerate me for my actions.

 

[2aguy]

The majority of this nation, including responsible gun owners like myself, are in favor of background checks.

Okay, responsible guy....please point out which mass shooting was stopped by federally mandated background checks....

Okay, responsible guy....please explain which gang related murder was stopped by federally mandated background checks....

Back ground checks sound good...that is why people who only remotely look at the issue support them...they don't stop crime, they don't stop mass shootings....but they sure do sound good....

 

[Derideo_Te]

Here is a history lesson as one political group, the democrats, tried to deny rights to another group....blacks....the same applies to mandating prohibitive insurance policies on gun owners trying to exercise their 2nd amendment rights...

Poll tax United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

After the right to vote was extended to all races by the enactment of the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, many Southern states enacted poll tax laws as a device for restricting voting rights.

This is what mandatory insurance would do....

Hogwash!

You are alleging that insurance coverage for firearm related accidents spread across a pool of 80,000,000 people would be prohibitively expensive. Law suits are way more expensive than insurance.

 

[2aguy]

Paranoids like you don't want to accept accountability for your gun fetish.

irrational people like you simply want those mean guns to go away....no matter who suffers for it...

 

[BlackSand]

I am not advocating removal of criminal liability. I can be charged with vehicular homicide even if I do have insurance. The difference being that if my firearm discharges accidentally I am not charged but any victims are covered by my insurance. If I deliberately shoot someone then I am criminally liable and my insurance would not exonerate me for my actions.

But that is covered under insurance ... If you accidentally discharge a firearm injuring someone else or yourself on my property ... My home owner's insurance will cover that injury. I am not sure if it would compensate death (just don't know if it does) ... But I know it covers injury.

.

 

[2aguy]

You are alleging that insurance coverage for firearm related accidents spread across a pool of 80,000,000 people would be prohibitively expensive. Law suits are way more expensive than insurance.

Your'e alleging that mandatory insurance won't be used to price guns out of the hands of the poor and middle class....mandatory fees and training class fees already price guns out of the hands of a lot of poor people...who live in the shooting galleries created by gun banning democrats....the criminals still get the guns...their poor victims can't afford to own a gun....or to carry it....

 

[Derideo_Te]

The majority of this nation, including responsible gun owners like myself, are in favor of background checks.

Okay, responsible guy....please point out which mass shooting was stopped by federally mandated background checks....

Okay, responsible guy....please explain which gang related murder was stopped by federally mandated background checks....

Back ground checks sound good...that is why people who only remotely look at the issue support them...they don't stop crime, they don't stop mass shootings....but they sure do sound good....

I used that as an example to point out that paranoid gun fetishists like yourself are a minority and don't get to dictate policy. The power is shifting away from the NRA as more of these mass shootings occur. You can only blame the mentally ill so many times before We the People will ask why you paranoid gun fetishists won't accept reasonable steps to stop them.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I am not advocating removal of criminal liability. I can be charged with vehicular homicide even if I do have insurance. The difference being that if my firearm discharges accidentally I am not charged but any victims are covered by my insurance. If I deliberately shoot someone then I am criminally liable and my insurance would not exonerate me for my actions.

But that is covered under insurance ... If you accidentally discharge a firearm injuring someone else or yourself on my property ... My home owner's insurance will cover that injury. I am not sure if it would compensate death (just don't know if it does) ... But I know it covers injury.

.

What if you are not on your own property? What if you are concealed carrying and your gun goes off in a shopping mall?

 

[2aguy]

But that is covered under insurance ... If you accidentally discharge a firearm injuring someone else or yourself on my property ... My home owner's insurance will cover that injury. I am not sure if it would compensate death (just don't know if it does) ... But I know it covers injury.

BlackSand...you can explain it all day long to him....it won't matter...he just wants to punish gun owners....he wants guns to be too expensive to own...and mandatory insurance would be a step in that direction....any accidents are already covered under the law...and if you cause injury or death, you will be punished with jail, fines, and civil suits...

So, it isn't about liability...it is about denying access to guns...
.

 

[2aguy]

I used that as an example to point out that paranoid gun fetishists like yourself are a minority and don't get to dictate policy. The power is shifting away from the NRA as more of these mass shootings occur. You can only blame the mentally ill so many times before We the People will ask why you paranoid gun fetishists won't accept reasonable steps to stop them.

You are wrong on several things...mass shootings are not on the rise for one, another thing...support for gun control measures are at an all time low...even after Sandy Hook, when the anti gunners dragged out the bodies of those dead children to try to pass their irrational gun control measures...

In U.S. Continuing Record-Low Support for Stricter Gun Control

 

[BlackSand]

What if you are not on your own property? What if you are concealed carrying and your gun goes off in a shopping mall?

In the state of Louisiana, your vehicle is an extension of your home (in regards to firearms) ... So I don't know about the specifics in other states. I can assure you that none of my firearms have ever just "gone off" ... They fire as the result of me pulling the trigger. In the account of other irresponsible behavior by other gun owners ... If the circumstance involves criminal charges (unlawful discharge of a firearm etc...) then they should be prosecuted.

Shopping malls are like homes and insured the same as just about any private property. Public buildings, property (National Parks etc...) and roadways are where you may not be covered by insurance.

.

 

[2aguy]

And it isn't just the mentally ill that are the problem....people watching the looters and arsonists in Ferguson help people realize that the police will not be there to protect them...that is why you saw the increase in gun buying in Ferguson just before the Grand Jury came in....People will understand the need for guns when they realize that guns aren't the problem...criminals are...

 

[Derideo_Te]

mass shootings are not on the rise for one, another thing

The FBI is credible, you aren't!

http://online.wsj.com/articles/mass-shootings-on-the-rise-fbi-says-1411574475

Mass shootings are happening more often, resulting in more deaths and usually ending before police get to the scene, according to a Federal Bureau of Investigation study released Wednesday.

The FBI identified 160 shootings from 2000 through 2013 that fit its definition of "active-shooter" events—"an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area."

There were an average of 16.4 active-shooter incidents a year between 2006 and 2013, up from an average of 6.4 a year from 2000 to 2006. A total of 486 people were killed and 557 wounded in the incidents.

 

[2aguy]

Here are the most recent numbers showing the decline in support for gun control....women are becoming wise about guns as well...

Support For New Gun Control Laws Plummets Especially Among Women - Katie Pavlich

Less than half of Americans, 47%, say they favor stricter laws covering the sale of firearms, similar to views found last year. But this percentage is significantly below the 58% recorded in 2012 after the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, spurred a nationwide debate about the possibility of more stringent gun control laws. Thirty-eight percent of Americans say these laws should be kept as they are now, and 14% say they should be made less strict.

 

[2aguy]

I already posted showing how wrong the FBI study is....do I need to do it again....?

 

[2aguy]

Remember, the FBI is now run by Eric holder...the guy who sold guns to Mexican drug cartels so they could blame gun deaths in Mexico on American guns....

The incredibly flawed FBI study on active shooters CPRC original research - Crime Prevention Research Center

"The figure using the FBI data pretty much summarizes their claim: from 2000 to 2013, fatalities from public shootings in the US have grown by an average annual rate of 16.4%. While the FBI reportprovides graphs illustrating “active shooting incidents,” not mass shootings, given the way that the report was written, the media has understandably interpreted the report as implying that mass public shootings have massively increased over time. To get a rough idea of the media coverage look at these headlines:

“Mass Shootings on the Rise, FBI says,”Wall Street Journal
“F.B.I. Confirms a Sharp Rise in Mass Shootings Since 2000,” New York Times
“FBI: Mass shooting incidents occurring more frequently,” CNN
“FBI study: Deaths in mass shootings increasing,” BBC
“Mass Shootings surge in U.S. over last seven years: FBI study,” New York Daily News
“FBI report shows increase in mass shootings since 2007,” Fox News
“Mass shootings in U.S. have tripled in recent years, FBI says,” Los Angeles Times
“Mass shooting incidents have doubled since 2000: FBI,” Washington Times
“FBI releases report examining mass shootings,” Washington Post
But instead of a 16 percent annual growth in fatalities, the actual growth rate is less than one percent and even that small growth rate is heavily dependent on just one year, 2012. The Obama administration’s FBI report obtained its result by manipulating the data: including non-mass shootings, missing mass shooting cases, and selectively picking the period of time that they examined. Part of the abstract of the CRPC’s latest report describes what the Obama administration did:

But the FBI made a number of subtle and misleading decisions as well as outright errors. Once these biases and mistakes are fixed, the annual growth rate in homicides is cut in half. When a longer period of time is examined (1977 through the first half of 2014), deaths from Mass Public Shootings show only a slight, statistically insignificant, increase – an annual increase of less than one percent.

The FBI’s misleadingly includes cases that aren’t mass shootings – cases where no one or only one person was killed in a public place. While the FBI assures people that it “captured the vast majority of incidents falling within the search criteria,” their report missed 20 shootings where at least two people were killed in a public place. Most of these missing cases took place early on, biasing their results towards showing an increase.

The rest of the CPRC report is available here. Given how broad the FBI’s measure of shootings is, it is useful to point out that murders have gone down significantly between 2000 and 2013, falling from 5.5 to 4.7 per 100,000 people."

So again, you are wrong....

 

[Derideo_Te]

I used that as an example to point out that paranoid gun fetishists like yourself are a minority and don't get to dictate policy. The power is shifting away from the NRA as more of these mass shootings occur. You can only blame the mentally ill so many times before We the People will ask why you paranoid gun fetishists won't accept reasonable steps to stop them.

You are wrong on several things...mass shootings are not on the rise for one, another thing...support for gun control measures are at an all time low...even after Sandy Hook, when the anti gunners dragged out the bodies of those dead children to try to pass their irrational gun control measures...

In U.S. Continuing Record-Low Support for Stricter Gun Control

This is why you lack all credibility.

Your link was from November 22, 2010!

Look what happened after Sandy Hook.

Americans Want Stricter Gun Laws Still Oppose Bans

 

[Alex.]

As a responsible gun owner you are already assuming accountability. The problem we are dealing with is that amongst the 8- million gun owners there are those who are not as responsible as you are. Given that we have statistics on accidental injuries and deaths why should gun owners be exempted from having insurance for that eventuality?

Well ... I understand your point ... But insuring your weapons against possible use just pays for injuries. It doesn't supply accountability for the irresponsible behavior ... It just pays for mitigating circumstances. I would rather gun owners be criminally accountable for negligence should the circumstances support such a charge.

And remember that vehicular homicide is a criminal charge and not a civil charge regarding compensation exclusively.

.

I am not advocating removal of criminal liability. I can be charged with vehicular homicide even if I do have insurance. The difference being that if my firearm discharges accidentally I am not charged but any victims are covered by my insurance. If I deliberately shoot someone then I am criminally liable and my insurance would not exonerate me for my actions.

That is mixing apples and oranges, there is civil liability and criminal liability. Also, the terms of the insurance policy dictate whether there will be coverage.

 

[Derideo_Te]

What if you are not on your own property? What if you are concealed carrying and your gun goes off in a shopping mall?

In the state of Louisiana, your vehicle is an extension of your home (in regards to firearms) ... So I don't know about the specifics in other states. I can assure you that none of my firearms have ever just "gone off" ... They fire as the result of me pulling the trigger. In the account of other irresponsible behavior by other gun owners ... If the circumstance involves criminal charges (unlawful discharge of a firearm etc...) then they should be prosecuted.

Shopping malls are like homes and insured the same as just about any private property. Public buildings, property (National Parks etc...) and roadways are where you may not be covered by insurance.

.

As I have said before you are a responsible and well trained gun owner. The same is not true for all of the other 80 million. So the problem is what happens when one of their CC weapons goes off accidentally while they are walking down the street?