Ed Compulsory insurance for gun owners.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

My sister is in actuary and I asked her the same question some times ago. Her answer : it does not matter, they are insuring for the risk, not for the dog breed, not for the owners. Thus, the risk, showing that some dog breed indeed trigger that risk more often, reflect the actuaries.

Just a wild guess, but if .38 are far more in accident and payout by insurance, than say a 357 (independent of value insurance) then the former, the .38, will get higher "gun" premium.

And higher than a Thompson submachine gun, because fewer of those are currently being used in garages in Chicago?

 

[Aepervius]

And higher than a Thompson submachine gun, because fewer of those are currently being used in garages in Chicago?

Maybe. Who knows. Some of the formula I saw used to calculate premium looked so horrendus and complicated (car insurance) and spread over pages of references to statistics...

heck maybe the time of the season when the weapon is bought is also a frigging factor.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Maybe. Who knows. Some of the formula I saw used to calculate premium looked so horrendus and complicated (car insurance) and spread over pages of references to statistics...

See cartoon below.

heck maybe the time of the season when the weapon is bought is also a frigging factor.

No doubt. Some guy buys his first 450/400 nitro express rifle the day hunting season opens? Make him pay ALL his premiums in advance.

 

[CORed]

Not really. I am most interested in whether or not other countries have a scheme like this. I don't think this will bill pass.


As far as I know a person does not need insurance to simply own a car but they do need it to drive it on public roads.

Ranb

I think this is correct, but, since this is determined by state laws in the US, there may be exceptions. I'm not sure if all states even have mandatory liability coverage for cars.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

One note. You can get a citation for operating a motor vehicle even if it's not on a public road in some states. I suspect those states would demand more in the way of insurance as well.

Two note. Public parking lots are NOT except from the traffic laws. Some people love to say "it's a parking lot, there are no laws!" One lady told me this after she hit my insured because he wasn't getting out of her way fast enough.

 

[casebro]

Can we guesstimate our own actuarial? 100 million gun owners, X number of accidents, y number of dollars?

But then minus the lower cost of other insurance that currently covers Z much ? Because I guess that current liability coverage does cover a bunch?

And does anybody really think the gangbangers and drug dealers, and those with violent pasts,who account for 95% of gun crime, will ever buy insurance? Do you REALLY think murderers or muggers are concerned with breaking insurance laws?

 

[casebro]

Does the proposed legislation cover accidents only? Intentional legal use? Intentional illegal use?

Does it require there to be insurance companies that off the coverage? If not, 2A will come into the equation.

 

[Giordano]

Can we guesstimate our own actuarial? 100 million gun owners, X number of accidents, y number of dollars?

But then minus the lower cost of other insurance that currently covers Z much ? Because I guess that current liability coverage does cover a bunch?

And does anybody really think the gangbangers and drug dealers, and those with violent pasts,who account for 95% of gun crime, will ever buy insurance? Do you REALLY think murderers or muggers are concerned with breaking insurance laws?

Exactly- the lack of insurance is another, pretty easy to prove law violation that should make it easier for the law to go after these low lives. They were able to prove that Al Capone hadn't followed the tax laws sent him to prison on that basis; it was much harder to convict him directly of his racketeering activities.

 

[BStrong]

One note. You can get a citation for operating a motor vehicle even if it's not on a public road in some states. I suspect those states would demand more in the way of insurance as well.

Two note. Public parking lots are NOT except from the traffic laws. Some people love to say "it's a parking lot, there are no laws!" One lady told me this after she hit my insured because he wasn't getting out of her way fast enough.

I've encountered that a bunch of times.

I once happened upon a group of guys that were engaged in a bit of the old sideshow exhibition of speed action in a parking lot on private property, and the driver of the car doing donuts was very surprised that I could stop him, cite him and/or arrest him and that he was actually beholden to observe the CVC while driving on private property.

If he had been better informed he might have pulled a runner, which would have turned a bad situation worse, and I only wrote him for the violation rather than take him into custody.

It happens often with vehicle accidents too, and there are a few insurance companies that will attempt to run that game on a claimant too.

 

[BStrong]

Exactly- the lack of insurance is another, pretty easy to prove law violation that should make it easier for the law to go after these low lives. They were able to prove that Al Capone hadn't followed the tax laws sent him to prison on that basis; it was much harder to convict him directly of his racketeering activities.

So it would be like 18 USC 922 (R) ?

If it's like that, a stacking charge that's there to be thrown out in a plea bargain it wouldn't be worth the effort.

 

[Giordano]

Does the proposed legislation cover accidents only? Intentional legal use? Intentional illegal use?

I would assume that just like car insurance today, one must be found liable in a court of law before being forced to make a monetary payment to an injured person. Intentional legal use ("they were trying to rob me") would presumably not result in a law judgement against you, and even if the use was questionable, mitigating circumstances could be presented to the jury before a verdict to reduce or eliminate your legal liability (just like proving that one had a stroke while driving).

Intentional illegal use? That really increases your civil liability, gun or car or etc. Why shouldn't it?

 

[Giordano]

So it would be like 18 USC 922 (R) ?

If it's like that, a stacking charge that's there to be thrown out in a plea bargain it wouldn't be worth the effort.

I don't think that is the main goal of this legislation. I was only addressing your point, which suggested that the low life would not get insurance and that would be a reason against the law. I see it as a modest reason, in addition with others, in favor.

 

[BStrong]

I don't think that is the main goal of this legislation. I was only addressing your point, which suggested that the low life would not get insurance and that would be a reason against the law. I see it as a modest reason, in addition with others, in favor.

Actually it wasn't my point, and from a practical viewpoint in dealing with criminal bad actors in the real world, lesser charges involved with typical violent criminal felonies don't serve any purpose as a restriction on criminal acts - an individual inclined towards armed robbery isn't necessarily going to be overly concerned about making sure the tools of his trade are registered and insured.

What a liability insurance scheme would be, is another set of bureaucratic hoops to jump through and it would be depressingly easy to write the law in such a way to restrict access to firearms.

Considering that various localities have already sought to restrict possession of firearms by low income individuals, I don't view this proposal as more than more of the same.

It absolutely wouldn't hinder me, but could certainly be structured to keep a large segment of the working class population from legally possessing firearms.

As I posted above though, I don't believe it will fly.

 

[marplots]

And closer examination would show that the dogs aren't "a naturally dangerous breed", but victims of abusive owners who teach them to fight.

Does it matter? If one breed is more vicious because people implant violence-chips in their heads, so long as it's still identifiable by breed, the stereotype is worth keeping.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I've encountered that a bunch of times.

Thanks for sorting them out. It's worth your life to just get to your car some days around here. And fun thing there is those drivers act like God gave them the right-of-way when they're out of their cars as well. I can read minds at times, like when I see a person tense up as they walk out in front of a car, "If she hits me I'm going to get a bunch of money!" First, people who trade pain for money have a certain name. Second, I've had to tell people that jogging into a crosswalk when a car is lawfully proceeding at the speed limit means you have to pay your own insurance bills. One guy jogged down the sidewalk, made a hard left turn at center block and ran out into the street, where he because acquainted with my insured's windshield. When I told him he had no coverage he said he'd get an attorney. Fine. But I never heard back from him. I wonder how he paid off $123,000 in medical bills without a job?

 

[marplots]

This idea can be extended to other forms of insurance.

Have a gun in the house? Pay more for life insurance.
Have a gun in the car? Pay more for car insurance.
Come off as pro-gun on a forum? Pay more for troll insurance.

Multiple wins here.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This idea can be extended to other forms of insurance.

Have a gun in the house? Pay more for life insurance.
Have a gun in the car? Pay more for car insurance.
Come off as pro-gun on a forum? Pay more for troll insurance.

Multiple wins here.

Have a gun in the house? Pay more for liability insurance. The problem with that is the problem with cell phones. In 2001 the IIHS determined that you were seven times more likely to get into an auto accident if you had a cell phone in the car. Not "if you were using a cell phone while driving", because, of course, nobody ever admitted to doing that. (And yes, with the ubiquity of cellphones that's now a fuzzy facet, and that's why I included the date.)

 

[Metullus]

1) sure no weapon insurance , but then you are not allowed to use your weapon. Ever. Just as display. Like the cars.

Except I can generally use my unregistered and uninsured car on my own property all I want. I can even do so without a driver's license. I just can't take it out on a public road.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Except I can generally use my unregistered and uninsured car on my own property all I want. I can even do so without a driver's license. I just can't take it out on a public road.

I would check your local laws first. Some state laws say "operate a motor vehicle", others say "operate a motor vehicle while on publicly accessible roadways", and a few other variations on that theme. As an example, you can be hit with a citation for "operating a motor vehicle while under the influence" if the vehicle is stationary with the engine off IF you have the keys in the ignition. Some states allow you transit farm equipment on public roads without plates, except that "farm only" trucks have to display tags that state such.

Oh, and the "standard auto insurance policy" in the US, at least when I was referring to it, didn't mention "driver's license" at all.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Question: How many of you owners/shooters have insurance that covers you if a firearm you own is involved in an accidental shooting?