Insurance requirement for gun ownership

[Sunburn74]

San Jose mayor: Gun owners should cover the cost of gun violence | CNN

My gun control proposals include two measures that no other city nor state in the United States has ever tried: mandatory gun insurance to support victims, and mandatory gun fees to compensate taxpayers, writes Sam Liccardo. As with many other Silicon Valley innovations, we intend to implement...

www.cnn.com

Basically take the costs society pays for gun violence, and distribute it to all gun owners in the form of a tax and an insurance requirement.

Effect: would make it easier for police to take guns away from irresponsible people, allow insurers to get guns away from high risk individuals as premiums would be higher for them, and would make people generally behave safer lest they become uninsurable.

Legal? Not legal? Not sure. You can't do this sort of thing with voting (insurance in order to vote?)but can you do it with guns? Hard to say. Gun ownership already has fees and taxes associated that have been accepted as ok so it doesn't seem like a stretch to me.

 

[brycejones]

You could certainly argue that insurance would be part of a "well regulated militia". Hell there are companies that already cater to this market.

 

[TheVrolok]

I would support it.

 

[MtnMan]

Again, something to penalize the law-abiding gun owners.

The streets are full of uninsured vehicles, although mandated, often driven by people that don't have a driver's license, because they don't fucking care they are breaking the law. I've only had a handful of traffic accidents over the years, but about 25% of them the other party (at fault) did not have insurance. Thus, I carry uninsured coverage. A penalty (thou wise investment) on the law-abiding owner/driver.

Most people that use guns in crimes or commit murder, can't legally own a gun in the first place. I'm pretty sure they won't purchase any insurance either.

 

[Sunburn74]

Again, something to penalize the law-abiding gun owners.

The streets are full of uninsured vehicles, although mandated, often driven by people that don't have a driver's license, because they don't fucking care they are breaking the law. I've only had a handful of traffic accidents over the years, but about 25% of them the other party (at fault) did not have insurance. Thus, I carry uninsured coverage. A penalty (thou wise investment) on the law-abiding owner/driver.

Most people that use guns in crimes or commit murder, can't legally own a gun in the first place. I'm pretty sure they won't purchase any insurance either.

Penalize is an interesting term. Everything can be called a penalty because any sort of initiative or tax has winners and losers. If the government raises taxes to build roads, whoever is paying those taxes will claim "you're penalizing me". A tax was just proposed here in my area to make Pre-K free. I can already afford pre-k. Why should I pay for other people's pre-k? They are penalizing me! But are they? Its a tax. All taxes/initiatives have winners and losers and its a matter of what works best for society as a whole.

The streets are full of uninsured drivers but this does allow for police officers to get them off the streets if they encounter them. However right now if the cops encounter a dangerous individual with a gun, there are really very few mechanisms they can use to get the gun away from them. Insurance also is a mechanism to get people to drive responsibly and to get the necessary training they need. Its also a mechanism to get bad guys off the street (they don't have insurance, but then further investigation reveals more serious crimes and activity: warrants for example)

I'm guessing from your language you'd prefer that everyone who wasn't a gun owner carry gun violence insurance just like you carry uninsured coverage. That just seems wrong to me. I liken guns more to smoking. Several states have raised taxes on tobacco products so as to pass on the societal costs of smoking to those who are actually doing the smoking, even though not every smoker gets sick and many non-smokers get sick because they're around smokers who don't care about their neighbors health. That seems to me the fair way to do it.

I think one interesting thing that would happen is insurance companies would quickly figure out who responsible gun owners are and who aren't, something society hasn't been able to do because congress has blocked research. Then premiums would be priced accordingly. So you responsible guys would pay practically nothing whilst the high risk guys would pay through the nose, like with car insurance. I mean, its ridiculous how little 70 year old ladies in rural counties are paying for car insurance compared to say a young teenager in a big city.

 

[MtnMan]

The streets are full of uninsured drivers but this does allow for police officers to get them off the streets if they encounter them. However right now if the cops encounter a dangerous individual with a gun, there are really very few mechanisms they can use to get the gun away from them. Insurance also is a mechanism to get people to drive responsibly and to get the necessary training they need. Its also a mechanism to get bad guys off the street (they don't have insurance, but then further investigation reveals more serious crimes and activity: warrants for example)

Yes it does. If the cop knows that a person stopped for whatever reason is not insured, they impound the vehicle. If a person does not have a driver's license, they don't allow them to drive off.

Car Insurance Basics

To get the best policy for your needs and the best price, it’s crucial to understand how car insurance works and what to watch out for.

www.thebalance.com

States impose penalties on drivers who fail to maintain the minimum level of insurance. Impounding vehicles is one of the most effective penalities, in the sense that it gets uninsured drivers off the road immediately.

 

[Moonbeam]

I have gun violence insurance. It's called a gun.

Jesus, forgive me. What was I thinking. I'm supposed to be a card carrying liberal not a packing psychotic conservative.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Again, something to penalize the law-abiding gun owners.

The streets are full of uninsured vehicles, although mandated, often driven by people that don't have a driver's license, because they don't fucking care they are breaking the law. I've only had a handful of traffic accidents over the years, but about 25% of them the other party (at fault) did not have insurance. Thus, I carry uninsured coverage. A penalty (thou wise investment) on the law-abiding owner/driver.

Most people that use guns in crimes or commit murder, can't legally own a gun in the first place. I'm pretty sure they won't purchase any insurance either.

This.

Instead it's just another tax on people who do obey the laws - similar to driving insurance where I don't just need insurance if I cause an accident - but also if the person who causes an accident with me doesn't have insurance.

Defeats the entire purpose.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Even people who obey all laws can cause harm to others ... ie. the guns under cushions that kill their own kids. Or hunting accidents.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I like it (and the fact that our resident clownbaby and gun fetishists are vehemently against it says all I need to know on if it'd be effective at reining in their nonsense).

Also, rich that the surrogate penis strokers are crying "penalization!"

 

[Moonbeam]

I like it (and the fact that our resident clownbaby and gun fetishists are vehemently against it says all I need to know on if it'd be effective at reining in their nonsense).

That's how I know opposition to the death penalty is wrong. So many against it.

 

[nickqt]

Firearm insurance already exists, but mandating it would be nearly impossible. That said, if you can figure out a way to mandate it, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Maybe it tack it onto homeowner/rental insurance and tie it to a domicile. Again, I think there's close to zero chance it would ever happen Federally, or in most States.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Maybe it tack it onto homeowner/rental insurance and tie it to a domicile.

That's where it should be along with other personal liability insurance. And extra for hazardous materials storage of the ammo.

 

[pcgeek11]

This thread is a hoot. Not happening in any near future.

 

[rommelrommel]

How do you plan to insure the people doing the majority of gun violence?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Sounds pretty reasonable to me, maybe we can have the same limits on other Constitutional Rights such as voting, free speech, being secure in our homes etc. If it's legal for one Right, it should be legal for them all.

 

[Dave_5k]

Rather than insurance, just levy taxes to recover at least the direct costs to society from gun violence. As ammunition sales total about 8 billion rounds per year in the US, and direct costs (excluding indirect impacts) exceed $14 billion per year, at a minimum start with a $2 per round tax and import duty, with stiff penalties for evasion. Could gradually ramp up towards the >$25 per round all in cost of gun violence.

The Economic Cost of Gun Violence

In an average year, gun violence in America kills 40,000 people, wounds nearly twice as many, and costs our nation $557 billion.

everytownresearch.org

 

[nickqt]

Sounds pretty reasonable to me, maybe we can have the same limits on other Constitutional Rights such as voting, free speech, being secure in our homes etc. If it's legal for one Right, it should be legal for them all.

You've already come out in favor of taxing voting by making it more expensive for certain groups of people, and anyone can stand on a public sidewalk and scream for free, so what's the problem with having insurance on a gun that is literally an explosive object?

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Sounds pretty reasonable to me, maybe we can have the same limits on other Constitutional Rights such as voting, free speech, being secure in our homes etc. If it's legal for one Right, it should be legal for them all.

Some people probably should get insurance for their mouth.

 

[brandonbull]

San Jose mayor: Gun owners should cover the cost of gun violence | CNN

My gun control proposals include two measures that no other city nor state in the United States has ever tried: mandatory gun insurance to support victims, and mandatory gun fees to compensate taxpayers, writes Sam Liccardo. As with many other Silicon Valley innovations, we intend to implement...

www.cnn.com

Basically take the costs society pays for gun violence, and distribute it to all gun owners in the form of a tax and an insurance requirement.

Effect: would make it easier for police to take guns away from irresponsible people, allow insurers to get guns away from high risk individuals as premiums would be higher for them, and would make people generally behave safer lest they become uninsurable.

Legal? Not legal? Not sure. You can't do this sort of thing with voting (insurance in order to vote?)but can you do it with guns? Hard to say. Gun ownership already has fees and taxes associated that have been accepted as ok so it doesn't seem like a stretch to me.

So how are you going to tax criminals that illegally possess firearms? Maybe we can start taxing the city of Chicago for what seems like daily mass shootings?

 

[brandonbull]

Some people probably should get insurance for their mouth.

And some should add an endorsement for being a moron.

 

[Dulanic]

In Texas I need a license to fish, but to own a gun? That's too far! And now you want insurance too? Madness! 2nd amendment!

I think that's about how it goes right?

 

[brycejones]

And some should add an endorsement for being a moron.

You would be uninsurable

 

[MrSquished]

In Texas I need a license to fish, but to own a gun? That's too far! And now you want insurance too? Madness! 2nd amendment!

I think that's about how it goes right?

The GQP small dicked gun fetishist party is allergic to the words 'well-regulated'

 

[Sunburn74]

So how are you going to tax criminals that illegally possess firearms? Maybe we can start taxing the city of Chicago for what seems like daily mass shootings?

How are you gonna make people who drive illegally get insurance? Maybe you're right and car insurance is a total scam. Basically because people will commit crimes with anything they get their hands on, we should make no effort to tax or regulate anything.

Chiefs' Clark arrested; cops say Uzi spotted in car

Chiefs defensive end Frank Clark was arrested Sunday in Los Angeles on suspicion of having a concealed firearm in a vehicle, according to an LAPD spokesperson.

www.espn.com

Btw I saw this story on ESPN. Sure that guy planned to use his Uzi for self defense only. 2nd amendment!