General Discussion

ooky

(10,951 posts)

82. Im not suggesting to cover the actor.

Tue Feb 27, 2018, 12:45 PM

Feb 2018

I’m suggesting to cover the gun itself, so that victims are provided financial compensation. In this case, if your gun gets stolen and a bad actor ultimately uses it to shoot someone, there will be a form of restitution for the victims of a bad actor’s crime, which occured because you allowed him to steal your gun.

Your new example is another false equivalency. Of course no insurance would cover those things. To think so would be silly. We don’t have a widespread problem with people stealing cars and using them to run over people. Its happened, yes, but its a one off type situation. And people aren’t suggesting to ban automobiles to deal with it because it happens so often and nothing is being done about it.

Its about what you are insuring against. I get sick when these shootings occur. I want to do something to help the families of the victims. This is something that could be explored as a possible way we could help them, along with the side benefit of improving the quality of a background check.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

David Hogg shares fellow students plan for gun control on Twitter [View all] johnpowdy Feb 2018 OP

Post removed Post removed Feb 2018 #1

Maybe it is time we start listening to urban youth instead of rural elders on guns. LonePirate Feb 2018 #2

I agree. We need to start listening to our children johnpowdy Feb 2018 #3

Gun ownership is an addiction pangaia Feb 2018 #101

That's pretty good samir.g Feb 2018 #4

Lots of problems: yagotme Feb 2018 #5

The initial costs of most guns already make it a "rich man's" sport, yeah? procon Feb 2018 #7

You can buy expensive guns, yagotme Feb 2018 #8

You do understand that the arguments in favor of stronger gun safety laws procon Feb 2018 #17

How do you know the police qualify for all this? yagotme Feb 2018 #84

Don't move the goalposts. The question is about individual gun owners, not procon Feb 2018 #87

You say you're talking about individual gun owners, yagotme Mar 2018 #109

The problem is that too many people are killed or kill themselves by guns. Sophia4 Feb 2018 #78

There is NO surefire way to prevent killings. yagotme Feb 2018 #85

" Be it by gun, baseball bat, 9 iron, car, or swimming pool. Life is full of risks." pangaia Feb 2018 #103

If you want to reduce the rate of killings, then I would think yagotme Mar 2018 #110

long guns, bump stock, firearms, breech ballistic coefficient... pangaia Mar 2018 #111

Fiddle dee de, fiddle de dum, yagotme Mar 2018 #113

Now you're getting the idea.... pangaia Mar 2018 #114

Could be one reason why this is merely an outline rather than an actual law. LanternWaste Feb 2018 #14

Agreed it is the first step towards a sensible debate exboyfil Feb 2018 #29

Excellent idea. More exposure! And the NRA can stand up its strawmen in the debase. erronis Feb 2018 #41

Put fascism on the debate schedule if it is not already there, pangaia Feb 2018 #104

"Private production of bullets is prohibited." pazzyanne Feb 2018 #23

Are you asking me, or the OP? yagotme Feb 2018 #83

Guns kill. Just like drugs the possession of which is against the law. Sophia4 Feb 2018 #77

Always lots of problems HopeAgain Feb 2018 #102

He has a very thoughtful and sensible plan. procon Feb 2018 #6

How far back are you willing to go? yagotme Feb 2018 #9

There is very little doable about this hack89 Feb 2018 #13

I am not sure if you are in touch with cultural reality on this issue. LonePirate Feb 2018 #31

Here is my personal indicator that change is coming hack89 Feb 2018 #40

Yes....there should be insurance. Why are gun owners not liable for their guns? Kirk Lover Feb 2018 #10

They are. hack89 Feb 2018 #12

No. A lawsuit against an uninsured/judgment proof gun owner isn't worth the paper it's printed on. SunSeeker Feb 2018 #20

Ok. So what do you think will be insured? hack89 Feb 2018 #24

So if insurance is so cheap, why are you opposed to this requirement? SunSeeker Feb 2018 #26

Because it is counter productive hack89 Feb 2018 #28

But the NRA isn't really representing anyone except money launderers and the GOP recipients. erronis Feb 2018 #44

Who do you think is the biggest seller of gun liablity insurance? hack89 Feb 2018 #48

I hate to break the news but those single issue voters ooky Feb 2018 #51

ok. nt hack89 Feb 2018 #52

I dont buy into the insurance is not for intentional crimes argument against insuring guns. ooky Feb 2018 #46

Only if negligence can be proven hack89 Feb 2018 #50

We are not talking the same insurance market. ooky Feb 2018 #53

Mine are insured for their value in case they are stolen hack89 Feb 2018 #55

Yea thats where we dont agree. ooky Feb 2018 #59

But don't we want to stop attacks, not pay victims after the fact? hack89 Feb 2018 #60

Why does it need to just have deterrent value to the shooter to be a viable option? ooky Feb 2018 #65

the problem is an insurance requirement noobareus Feb 2018 #99

Or charging gasoline tax or making childless couples pay real estate taxes, or charging.... marble falls Feb 2018 #100

Those aren't Constitutionally protected rights Abnredleg Mar 2018 #105

You don't think gas taxes or license requirement interfere with the right to free movement... marble falls Mar 2018 #106

Background checks are legal Abnredleg Mar 2018 #108

owning an auto isn't a constitutional right noobareus Mar 2018 #107

Owning a gun isn't an explicit Constitutional right, either, joining "a well regulated militia" is. marble falls Apr 2018 #116

They have to pay for gun, ammo and license in order to shoot a gun. Fla Dem Mar 2018 #115

That's a fundamental principle of insurance. You can't wish it away, and 'study it'. X_Digger Feb 2018 #73

What is a fundamental principle of insurance? (What do you mean by that?) ooky Feb 2018 #75

The fundamental principle is that you can't cover an intentional act (by the covered). X_Digger Feb 2018 #80

Im not suggesting to cover the actor. ooky Feb 2018 #82

Not sure exactly what you are seeking hardluck Feb 2018 #90

Thanks for a thoughtful response hardluck. ooky Feb 2018 #91

The gun isn't the insured. The owner of the policy, is. X_Digger Feb 2018 #92

This message was self-deleted by its author ooky Feb 2018 #93

So, okay x digger ooky Feb 2018 #94

I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time taking such a half-assed idea seriously. X_Digger Feb 2018 #95

I dont care what you think or what you want. ooky Feb 2018 #96

So, no answer to the pimp or local corner boy taking out such a policy? X_Digger Feb 2018 #97

Nothing like a solution grounded in legal, political and cultural reality. hack89 Feb 2018 #11

Empty and petulant criticisms are fun! LanternWaste Feb 2018 #15

For the past 20 years we have seen a steady liberalization of gun laws in America hack89 Feb 2018 #16

Nevertheless, they persisted IronLionZion Feb 2018 #21

When gun control recovers the ground lost since the federal AWB expired hack89 Feb 2018 #25

You seem to be paying a lot of attention right now. SunSeeker Feb 2018 #27

Idle chatter on the internet is not "a lot of attention". hack89 Feb 2018 #30

The Florida kids are doing just that--engaging with the real world. SunSeeker Feb 2018 #33

I applaud them for their efforts hack89 Feb 2018 #35

I'm waiting for a great American university to give this kid a full scholarship onetexan Feb 2018 #18

I'm waiting for voters to give him a new job. calimary Feb 2018 #49

not yet, let him go get a college education onetexan Feb 2018 #67

I love it! SunSeeker Feb 2018 #19

The outline is good except pazzyanne Feb 2018 #22

It's a beginning point for negotiation. I see it as rather modest as first offer seeking compromise flamin lib Feb 2018 #34

Actually, it isn't. Straw Man Feb 2018 #45

Agree. pazzyanne Feb 2018 #58

Reinforce? Straw Man Feb 2018 #42

And I am just saying pazzyanne Feb 2018 #57

Yea ok Watchfoxheadexplodes Feb 2018 #32

I thought I heard something rattling . . . nt flamin lib Feb 2018 #38

With only minor differences this is how the Military treats guns. They seem to know a lot about gun flamin lib Feb 2018 #36

This message was self-deleted by its author flamin lib Feb 2018 #37

Minor differences? Straw Man Feb 2018 #47

It's a good starting place. TygrBright Feb 2018 #39

Not really. Straw Man Feb 2018 #43

GEEE, just like owning a car... or a house... IllinoisBirdWatcher Feb 2018 #54

Stop already .... Lurker Deluxe Feb 2018 #63

Not to be picky, but everyone submits to these obvious regulations... IllinoisBirdWatcher Feb 2018 #68

Guns are already "Well Regulated" Motownman78 Feb 2018 #69

Which is why there is no Constitutional prohibition against IllinoisBirdWatcher Feb 2018 #72

But they do not ... and do not have to Lurker Deluxe Feb 2018 #70

Thanks for the reply. IllinoisBirdWatcher Feb 2018 #71

What did you want. Insistence on registration only if one plans on using it on the public. boston bean Feb 2018 #81

I like it! Responsible gun ownership. MuseRider Feb 2018 #56

Excuse me ... Straw Man Feb 2018 #62

Blah blah blah MuseRider Feb 2018 #86

Nice rant. Straw Man Feb 2018 #88

Don't care. MuseRider Feb 2018 #89

That's obvious. Straw Man Feb 2018 #98

That's going nowhere at light speed. Bonx Feb 2018 #61

minngal marieo1 Feb 2018 #64

Gun fetishes must be denormalized as drunk driving or smoking in the workplace were. hunter Feb 2018 #66

I can hear all the palms slapping foreheads among Democrats in office. aikoaiko Feb 2018 #74

I would add no guns for those convicted of domestic violence or violent acts. Sophia4 Feb 2018 #76

He'll either grow up to be POTUS - raven mad Feb 2018 #79

Kick and Recommend! Go, kids, Go! blake2012 Mar 2018 #112