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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

sarisataka

(18,600 posts)

4. If it is not a ban, it is at least

Reply to jmbar2 (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 23, 2021, 05:28 PM

Apr 2021

Intended as a restriction. Much like the proposals to tax ammo at $5-$5000 per round the goal is to make it unaffordable to all but the elite.

Now let's examine your proposal for a one time insurance payment. A gun can easily last 100 years. How much would the payment be to cover any potential harm in that span? $5? $100? $10,000? An argument could be made for each of those.

Also, have you considered the unintended consequences of this idea?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Firearms/ gun owner's insurance [View all] sarisataka Apr 2021 OP

re: "...limit ownership to those of means." discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2021 #1

The purpose is not a backdoor ban jmbar2 Apr 2021 #2

"The purpose is not a backdoor ban" The purpose is a de-facto means test for gun ownership... friendly_iconoclast Apr 2021 #3

If it is not a ban, it is at least sarisataka Apr 2021 #4

OK, I turn the question back to you jmbar2 Apr 2021 #5

Perhaps the same who pay for costs sarisataka Apr 2021 #7

How would you go about.... RotorHead May 2021 #9

all gun owners and dealers need to be in a risk pool IbogaProject Apr 2021 #6

I don't want to pay Hawker123 Apr 2021 #8

Bumping for relevance sarisataka Jul 2021 #10