Buy as many guns as you like .... but

[SoCalDem]

In my town there is a roving "auto-checkpoint". The location varies, but they stop every car and you have to produce valid driver's license, registration AND insurance. If you cannot do it, there is a parking lot full of tow trucks on hand to impound your vehicle.

It's a drag and a half to get "caught" in this thing, but it does three things:

1..It gets unlicenced, uninsured, unregistered cars/drivers off the road for a while
2. It generates income for the community by virtue(?) of the fines to be paid
3. It probably scares people into getting registration, licensing updates and insurance

Nuisance aside, it makes people aware of the vehicle laws and nudges people to either comply or become a passenger.

I KNOW that driving is not a constitutional right, but neither is killing/maiming another (and that is a definite end-result of a weapon used in the manner it is designed to be used).

I do not see well-regulated militias starting up anytime soon, but gun ownership is apparently not only constitutionally, but divinely designated, so why not at the very LEAST, make their acquisition and ownership more in line with modern living?

There was a time when auto ownership was all that was required to get out there and drive your brains out.. Somewhere along the line, the mayhem that was created by "some" necessitated a more common-sense approach to these potentially deadly possessions.

So...

buy a weapon, but first:

pass a REAL background check..one that's on FILE and can be re-checked,updated as necessary

buy insurance for potential mayhem caused by the possession

register/re-register/re-license every 2 years (like smog checks for cars)
.........proves continued insurance
.........proved continued location of the possession

the insurance should be a broad liability policy that would be sufficient to cover burial/medical care/damages ... for each weapon

I am not suggesting that door-to-door sweeps be done to "get the guns", but when there is a domestic violence report, a crime committed, a protective order issued, any guns would be "impounded" until the situation is resolved.

[Bay Boy]

1. What would you like to discuss here?

Auto-checkpoints or gun control?

[derby378]

2. I don't seem to remember our rights being subject to underwriting by State Farm

If there's a little clause in the Constitution that says so and applies the same practice to the other amendments, I wish he'd share it with us.

[Hoyt]

4. Most states require permits for the 4% who "need" to carrying a lethal weapon (or two) in public.

Compliance should be checked.

I do think you are right, that you should be required to produce proof of liability insurance that will cover every weapon you are inclined to carry in public to protect yourself from whatever threat you fear, every gun in your car, and every gun you store and/or display at home. Good idea, and insurance companies will perform a thorough background check.

Ideally, folks will give up the idea of packing in public and accumulating more and more guns.

[SayWut]

5. I can't wait for the Progressive commercials.

[Hoyt]

7. Yeah -- Wayne LaPierre, Teddy Nugent, George Zimmerman, etc., hawking lethal weapons insurance.

[derby378]

14. You know better than to try to put words in my mouth

And you also know, deep down in your heart, that liability insurance for merely possessing a gun is unconstitutional and just plain wrong.

[wercal]

3. I hate to break it to you...

....but these checkpoints aren't really meant to check people's insurance.

They are on a fishing expedition for DUI's, drug trafficking, warrants, and other serious crimes.

I don't particularly like them. I was kinda sorta psuedo detained at one, because they didn't believe my story about having an out of state tag (which was 100% true and legitimate by the way). I felt a wee bit like my constitutional rights were being violated.

The supreme court doesn't agree with me, as they have upheld the government's ability to do roadblocks...but its not an issue without controversy. So, it doesn't make for a good analogy.

[Progressive dog]

6. At a minimum, each weapon should require insurance

If you choose to purchase a weapon and ammunition to exercise your right, then paying for the damage that might be caused by your weapon should be part of the cost.
Society (government) has no obligation to pay for the costs of gun damage any more than it is obligated to pay for the cost of guns, ammunition, or shooting ranges.

[sarisataka]

8. Good idea

the police can have roving person checkpoints, they can stop you to check for weapons. if you have 1 just show registration and proof of insurance. well they are at it the can check your ID to make sure you are not wanted and if not a born or naturalized citizen you can show them your green card.

it will get unlicensed uninsured weapons off the street

protect the community by capturing wanted criminals

and scare people into having their papers and citizenship in order

any problems?

[Common Sense Party]

9. Amerika, the Home of the Cowed nt

[madville]

11. They will use and abuse such authority

Every person won't just be checked for guns, "we need to frisk you for our and your safety", "got any drugs or paraphernalia on you?", etc.

[sarisataka]

13. I have no doubt

it would be both abused and racially applied.

There are some on DU who would like such an authoritarian state and have seriously proposed such. I would rather the stop and frisk master roll up the "Patriot Act" and smoke it via his sphincter.

[HereSince1628]

10. Aren't most of the injuries and deaths associated with criminal use of the gun?

Accidents aren't really the same as anything following purposeful criminal use. It's hard for me to see insurers agreeing to payout for insureds behavior that are intentional and criminal.

[guardian]

12. Define

a "REAL background check". How will it differ from the current background check.

As for the rest of your plan it is extremely regressive. You are just making it expensive for the 99% to buy and own firearms. Tell me, in what other walks of life do you favor the 1%??

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. The disproportionate racial impact of those checkpoints is well known

Not sure how any liberal could support them

[Crepuscular]

16. Hmmm

Not big on the idea of "roving checkpoints", kind of reminds me of traveling in the former Eastern Bloc, where police would board a train asking everyone for their "papers". Also seems kind of overkill to impound someones car because they forgot to put the new proof of insurance in their wallet.

As the post pertains to guns.

No problem with beefed up background checks, fine with me. I would be fine with the creation of a Federal firearms owners license that would require a rigorous background check, including mental health screening and which would be needed to purchase guns or ammo. A 5 year renewal period seems reasonable.

Requiring insurance? Would not be a big deal to me personally as I carry an Umbrella liability policy that would cover me. The idea of extending personal liability to a gun owner, if the gun is stolen by someone and used in a crime does not fly with me, unless there were some major extenuating circumstances that showed severe negligence on the part of the gun owner.

[Logical]

17. Shit, why not allow warrant-less random searches of houses. I bet we would find illegal.....

gun, music, pot, building code violations, illegal animals, etc.

WTF!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. Only if its racially and ethnically neutral

Those in SoCal are clearly trolling for illegals. Even LAPD changed their policy on it.