I’m not talking about homosexual Geico agents.
I’m not even talking Obamacare.
I read something being discussed in the leftosphere after the murders in Tuscon.
He said it made more sense to sidestep the entire gun control controversy and instead pass state laws that require anyone who owns a gun to carry insurance. If they have risk factors (like teenagers in the house), their rates go up. If one of their kids sneaks a gun out of the house and gets caught, or uses it to commit a crime, the insurance gets canceled for some meaningful period of time — say, 10 years.
And if someone steals your gun and you don’t report it in a 24-hour window of you finding out, your insurance is suspended.
If you have a rifle and it’s only used for hunting, low rates. If you have a Glock and you carry it in an open-carry town or state, your rates will be very high — because odds are so much higher that innocent bystanders may get caught in a shootout.
Homeowners could be required to carry gun insurance as long as they’re still paying on a mortgage, because a gun accident or misuse could result in a large legal judgment against the house.
Oh yeah, and you have to buy coverage for each gun you own.
Now, thankfully, it is only being discussed as an “idea” on the leftosphere. But what if Obamacare is found to be hunky-dory constitutionally? These folks do meet with the A-Lister Democrats quite often.
I do like the idea of every home having a safe for their firearms, but there is no way I’d want it mandated. I also think that CCW insurance is a good idea, but likewise, I would not want it mandated.
I lurk at a number of moderate-to-hard leftist blogs and sites regularly. Honestly, I’d estimate the number to be near the number rightosphere sites I visit. I do it to keep an eye out for crap like this.
My biggest source of entertainment/lament this last week has been scrolling through their posts, which have been alternating between “We’re the true defenders of the Bill of Rights” self-congratulation and the calls to restrict individual rights in regards to saving life and defending property.
I like how the proposed rates are a wet dream for gun grabbers, as if the actuaries at insurance companies would be getting their numbers for their tables from the Brady Campaign or something.
Considering the extremely low frequency of accidents & incidents among responsible gun owners (you know, the kinds of gun owners who would obey the law & purchase insurance), I would think that you could pick up a policy for about $100 a year.
Strange thing happened at the supermarket, I had my sidearm attached to my hip and look at that, it didn’t just leap out and start shooting up the place! I guess that should qualify an increase in rates. Nothing like legally mandating insurance to enforce bigotry.