Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

better

(884 posts)
20. Thanks for the education on that!
Sun Oct 8, 2017, 10:28 PM
Oct 2017

Well if the insurance companies won't offer such a product, then that's a whole different ballgame.
Guess some things really aren't best left to private enterprise. Who knew?

Recommendations

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

Well, your car insurance would not likely cover you for things that happen... TreasonousBastard Oct 2017 #1
Insurance will cover what ever insurance companies decide it will cover hack89 Oct 2017 #2
I love the idea tymorial Oct 2017 #3
Yeah, taxing a right. Not exactly a liberal idea GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #4
Licenses are required in some states tymorial Oct 2017 #8
Washington state? ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #11
I pay sales tax on everything I buy. GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #14
Seattle has an extra tax on ammunition and firearms sales ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #61
Imagine a tax on abortion FBaggins Oct 2017 #28
False equivalency nt tymorial Oct 2017 #40
Please expound on this... GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #42
There is no right to own guns...and a future court will change that ruling...the idea that militia Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #48
Right now Heller is the law of the land per the Supreme Court NickB79 Oct 2017 #55
I don't have a crystal ball, but I believe it will change...the militia argument was always bullshit Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #71
You are incorrect GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #69
There is no such right and when sanity returns...the militia argument will be discarded as Dredd Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #70
Women would still seek alternatives - another state, Ilsa Oct 2017 #58
For over 200 years it was not an individual right. safeinOhio Oct 2017 #25
Incorrect GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #45
"Supports the individual right" safeinOhio Oct 2017 #46
I don't agree and with these sort of shootings...it will be less and less. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #49
That's not historically accurate ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #59
You all make good points. Thanks for that! better Oct 2017 #5
The difference is sarisataka Oct 2017 #6
It still seems to me better Oct 2017 #9
They would be very willing to cover gun owners sarisataka Oct 2017 #16
And crimes committed with stolen guns? krispos42 Oct 2017 #17
Easy peazy. If the gun is stolen there is no insurance coverage. brush Oct 2017 #24
I don't have the slightest hint of an answer to that problem yet. better Oct 2017 #26
Murder insurance, interesting idea, think of all the good that The Purge does...... Not Ruth Oct 2017 #7
It seems that intentionality would be a key piece petronius Oct 2017 #10
Let me start by saying... better Oct 2017 #18
If criminals could cover their victims' injuries, the mob and corner boys would love it. X_Digger Oct 2017 #12
Take it one step further... Sancho Oct 2017 #13
That's not the case at all Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #53
If you had a required license...and insurance similar to auto (with no fault; medical, etc.) Sancho Oct 2017 #54
Simply proposing many of these "solutions" ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #62
Just think about it...make it harder for dangerous people to easily get guns. Sancho Oct 2017 #64
Just a couple of quick follows ups ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #65
The Connecticut legislature held hearings on this after Sandy Hook. NutmegYankee Oct 2017 #15
Thanks for the education on that! better Oct 2017 #20
You've used the wrong parallel Sailor65x1 Oct 2017 #19
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this... better Oct 2017 #23
The insurance NRA offers is voided upon conviction or pleading guilty Kaleva Oct 2017 #21
Insurance law is one of my areas. TomSlick Oct 2017 #22
Make that a campaign issue, 2018, 2020 and see how that works out for us. nt Purveyor Oct 2017 #27
It won't work for us. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #50
$50K in expenses causes $500M in economic damage exboyfil Oct 2017 #29
Great Thread! But what if the shooter has brain damage that prevents "intent" as defined by the... JoeOtterbein Oct 2017 #30
Its black letter law that you cannot insure intentional acts hardluck Oct 2017 #31
Even if the act is by an adjudicated mentally ill person? JoeOtterbein Oct 2017 #32
Yup hardluck Oct 2017 #33
Or, if a person can be found incompetent because of mental impairment then why can't their JoeOtterbein Oct 2017 #34
Ill give you an answer when I have access to my computer hardluck Oct 2017 #35
Thanks, you have been very generous already! I hope you understand I'm just trying to find a way for JoeOtterbein Oct 2017 #36
Totally get it and happy to help hardluck Oct 2017 #37
Thanks again. Take your time. We are all learning more from your posts. JoeOtterbein Oct 2017 #38
And what if the POTUS said that the guy in the car crash was a "sick and demented man"? JoeOtterbein Oct 2017 #39
Please excuse my layman's knowledge of the law, but can you clarify for me... better Oct 2017 #41
The California Code does not come from Moses on a mountain, you know jberryhill Oct 2017 #51
Thank you for the edification hardluck Oct 2017 #68
Insurance should be pretty cheap if you base it on car style policies. ileus Oct 2017 #43
Personally, I would raise the in loco parentis age Nevernose Oct 2017 #44
Cool so some 17 year old takes your baseball bat and assaults another person with jmg257 Oct 2017 #60
Clearly you dont need a gun at all Nevernose Oct 2017 #63
Of course I don't need a gun at all. And you are also right...people shouldn't just leave their guns jmg257 Oct 2017 #67
But if you kill someone while driving drunk or a dependent does...there will be no coverage as it is Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #47
Even if you get them to somehow cover intentional acts you are still Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #52
This is a desperate backdoor way of trying to get past Cosmocat Oct 2017 #56
At the very least they should have it for accidental treestar Oct 2017 #57
They are actually less common Lee-Lee Oct 2017 #66
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So that talking point abo...»Reply #20