Gun Liability Insurance Bills Aren’t the Answer, Says Insurance Industry

[petronius]

69. I think that's a somewhat inaccurate framing: policy-holders aren't being

"held responsible" for the misdeeds of others, they're the victims of those criminal acts (through the medium of the insurance company). And the people who defraud the insurance companies retain all the responsibility for that act - none of the responsibility transfers to the policy-holders, just the victimization.

But what the gun-insurance advocates are proposing is something different: it's an insurance scheme that would be almost 100% designed to pay off those violent-crime-created claims (analogous to the fraudulent claims of your car insurance comparison), and barely at all related costs produced by the policy-holders themselves. That, in contrast to the car analogy, is a very real transfer of responsibility/liability onto the innocent.

What it sounds like Robb is proposing is most like a private copying levy, in which all purchasers of recordable media pay a surcharge in order to provide royalties to content providers that is intended to replace revenue lost due to private copying. Personally, I think all such schemes are improper, due to the inevitable unfairness to consumers not responsible for the illegal behavior...