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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Guns are now killing as many people as cars in the U.S. [View all]NickB79
(20,397 posts)51. Except that's not how liability insurance works
Liability insurance is specifically exempt from paying out when a criminal act is performed. That's why insurance won't pay out if you, say, burn down your house for the insurance money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liability_insurance#Insurable_risks
Generally, liability insurance covers only the risk of being sued for negligence or strict liability torts, but not any tort or crime with a higher level of mens rea. This is usually mandated by the policy language itself or case law or statutes in the jurisdiction where the insured resides or does business.
In other words, liability insurance does not protect against liability resulting from crimes or intentional torts committed by the insured. This is intended to prevent criminals, particularly organized crime, from obtaining liability insurance to cover the costs of defending themselves in criminal actions brought by the state or civil actions brought by their victims. A contrary rule would encourage the commission of crime, and allow insurance companies to indirectly profit from it, by allowing criminals to insure themselves from adverse consequences of their own actions.
It should be noted that crime is not uninsurable per se. In contrast to liability insurance, it is possible to obtain loss insurance to compensate one's losses as the victim of a crime.
In other words, liability insurance does not protect against liability resulting from crimes or intentional torts committed by the insured. This is intended to prevent criminals, particularly organized crime, from obtaining liability insurance to cover the costs of defending themselves in criminal actions brought by the state or civil actions brought by their victims. A contrary rule would encourage the commission of crime, and allow insurance companies to indirectly profit from it, by allowing criminals to insure themselves from adverse consequences of their own actions.
It should be noted that crime is not uninsurable per se. In contrast to liability insurance, it is possible to obtain loss insurance to compensate one's losses as the victim of a crime.
Mandated liability insurance on firearms would have no impact on the harm done by the illegal use of firearms in the commission of a crime, which would compromise the vast majority of the $250 billion dollar amount you stated. And that's even assuming someone who's apt to commit a violent crime with a firearm would bother to get liability insurance in the first place. If someone were caught in the crossfire of two criminals exchanging gunfire, as in the example you gave, and the shooters by some miracle had insurance, liability insurance wouldn't pay out anyway.
Liability insurance on firearms would mostly just cover acts such as accidental shootings.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
89 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"...changes in gun industry and gun laws could also make a difference in lowering gun deaths."
Hal Bent
Dec 2015
#32
With gun homicides at a 50 year low, that would be quite cheap insurance indeed
NickB79
Dec 2015
#45
"Liability insurance on firearms would mostly just cover acts such as accidental shootings."
Blackjackdavey
Dec 2015
#70
But cars, pools, and alcohol must be regulated because those things are just as deadly!
Initech
Dec 2015
#57
that is what came to my mind. Tobacco kills way more than cars and guns together.
olddad56
Dec 2015
#63