General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Do you support banning semi-autos? Yes or no. [View all]Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)Because what would it really accomplish? It sounds great if you never actually thought about specifics, but while it makes a great talking point it's a horrible policy idea.
Most gun deaths are suicides. Insurance is useless there.
Most gun crime is down by... wait for it... criminals. Guess who won't buy insurance on their guns? Criminals.
So it won't even be a factor in most cases.
Insurance also doesn't cover illegal actions. If you take your car and plow it into a crowd of people intent on killing them your insurance isn't paying their bills.
So we are left only with actual accidents that would be covered. Accidents are around 500 deaths a year from firearms, less than 1%.
So you are covering less than 1% of you gun deaths.
Now what is you unintended consequence? Guess who the only major player selling firearms insurance is? The NRA. Guess who makes money on insurance? The NRA.
Guess what gets you a deep discount on that insurance rate? Being an NRA member.
The NRA currently has around 4,000,000-5,000,000 dues paying members if you believe their numbers. If half the gun owners in the US sign with them to buy insurance you just made their numbers soar by a power of ten and their income rise even more because they are getting insurance profits and membership dues. And you have 50,000,000 people getting their propaganda direct to their homes now too- people likely pissed at being forced to buy the insurance to begin with.
So you are trading insurance that will come into play only for about 1% of shootings for an NRA that grows 10 times richer and more powerful.