Next big thing in gun control? 7 ques...

Next big thing in gun control? 7 questions about mandatory gun insurance

Posted in the Minneapolis Forum

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#1 Mar 26, 2013
Yeah. This would work. For the lawyers and the criminals. Think about it. Someone enters your home. You shoot but fail to kill. Now the criminal has recourse to sue you because you are forced to by gun insurance. And ultimately, the lawyers make out.

"Not surprisingly, the National Rifle Association is opposed to liability insurance, calling it an “economically discriminatory” measure that would tax a constitutional right.

“You don’t have to carry insurance to exercise any other constitutional right,” NRA spokeswoman Stephanie Samford told Reuters.

Other pro-gun groups are similarly opposed, saying it unfairly taxes law-abiding Americans and may make it prohibitively expensive to own a gun, thereby infringing on Second Amendment rights.

"As proposed, legislation currently under consideration in state legislatures makes “no distinction between acts that were accidental or unintentional versus those that are intentional and illegal,” he says.“That is a major distinction in the world of insurance. Insurers do not insure illegal acts. We cannot insure acts of murder, acts of intentional violence.”

http://news.yahoo.com/next-big-thing-gun-cont...
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#2 Mar 26, 2013
You have increased insurance premiums for various breeds of dogs, why should gun nuts get a pass, again ?? Oh right, you want society to suffer for your regular stupidity.

Ps- Thanks for the apology, next time perhaps you can do it like a man.... if you happen to see one to mimic...

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#3 Mar 26, 2013
“You don’t have to carry insurance to exercise any other constitutional right,” NRA spokeswoman Stephanie Samford told Reuters."

In this world of litigation happy people and their lawyers, it is advisable, if you are say, a member of the media, to carry insurance for things like libel or slander suits, but it is not and should never be required by law. The federal government does not have the power to force you to purchase a product. And as mentioned above, no one should be required to carry insurance to exercise their constitutional rights.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#4 Mar 26, 2013
You have the right to carry & pay consequences, if your "rights" infringe on your neighbor's, friends, or ANYONE ELSE...
Wade Gustafson

Saint Paul, MN

#5 Mar 26, 2013
cantmakeitup wrote:
“You don’t have to carry insurance to exercise any other constitutional right,” NRA spokeswoman Stephanie Samford told Reuters."
In this world of litigation happy people and their lawyers, it is advisable, if you are say, a member of the media, to carry insurance for things like libel or slander suits, but it is not and should never be required by law. The federal government does not have the power to force you to purchase a product. And as mentioned above, no one should be required to carry insurance to exercise their constitutional rights.
"The federal government does not have the power to force you to purchase a product." You would rhink that is the case, but it is not. Google 'Obamacare'.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#6 Mar 26, 2013
You would rhink ??

Poor dip wad, you SHOULD think.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Obama's America 2 hr LIbEralS 96
shoot me 9 hr cowboy chris 2
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 11 hr IB DaMann 35,529
spinning ball of scum 22 hr NOI 1
i might start drinking 23 hr Jack Jim 2
Right now!!!!!!! Jun 28 space ace 3
Orlando Jun 27 OK Barry 40

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages