So that talking point about gun liability insurance not insuring illegal acts...

[better]

18. Let me start by saying...

that I did not even remotely perceive your use of the word "you" as being directed at me. But I salute you for going out of your way to avoid the possibility of misinterpretation. I try to practice diligently such care at avoiding sending a conversation off the rails by mere omission. After a couple of decades of practice, I at least succeed most of the time. I do tend to use a lot of words as a result, though, I have noticed.

As for what I envision, I would have to say that it is a new kind of insurance policy. A firearm owner's liability insurance policy. And it would be regulated in such a way as to mandate coverage of the risks most applicable to the object being covered. Naturally, if the object being covered is a firearm, the risks associated with it include risks committed with intent, and that risk would have to be factored into the cost of coverage.