Firearms/ gun owner's insurance

[sarisataka]

7. Perhaps the same who pay for costs

For everything else, all of us. I haven't smoked a day in my life but I pay costs for those who do. Same for alcohol, cars, drugs and everything else that has a cost to society. If a responsible party can be identified we have them pay restitution. What they cannot pay everyone else contributes whether they want to or not.

Since there is no way to go back and charge the original purchases of those 400 million we can only look forward. Last year a record 23 million guns were sold. Based on your 700 million figure that means we would have to add $30.43 to each new gun. That's it, done, one time fee and insurance companies can say they are off the hook because there is a fund for damages they have been paying.

The trouble is that funds one year. To keep the fund solvent, the gun industry must continue to sell at that rate. Now if we accept those that say more guns equal more violence, we need to increase the funds coming in because an increase in violence will increase costs. There are two ways to do that One, increase the amount charged per gun- so putting more and more people out of the ability to afford a purchase. Two, sell more guns.

If your solution is number one, then I am correct and it is to simply make guns restricted to the rich and powerful. Or is it the second and you want to devise a scheme to increase gun sales beyond already record levels?