Friday, March 08, 2013

Punishing the innocent for other's crimes. As usual.


[From Stephen Wegner}
[quote]DC's Still at It: The District would be the first jurisdiction in the country to require gun owners to purchase liability insurance, under a bill being considered by the D.C. Council. The legislation, introduced Tuesday by D.C. Council member Mary M. Cheh, would mandate that gun owners maintain policies of no less than $250,000 in coverage. By requiring insurance, Ms. Cheh said she hopes the law would ensure that money is available to help a gunshot victim pay medical costs and promote gun safety. “I think there ought to be a source of money that they could count on to compensate them for their injuries,” Ms. Cheh, Ward 3 Democrat, said of victims of gun violence... At least six states have introduced similar gun liability insurance legislation over the last several months, with the law proposed in New York requiring insurance of at least $1 million, according to the New York Times. As of mid-February, none of the six states – California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Pennsylvania – had passed the legislation. Ms. Cheh, a constitutional law professor, said she introduced the bill “in an effort to balance reasonable restrictions on the Second Amendment with safe and responsible gun legislation.” She said she hopes insurance companies can promote safer gun ownership by offering lower rates to those who meet certain criteria or follow safety guidelines, but she doesn’t believe that requiring insurance will create a barrier for gun ownership... (With so many possible comments, I'll focus on one: These mandatory-insurance schemes will either keep lower-income people disarmed or force them to own their firearms illegally. Either way, the Progressives pushing them must be aware of those consequences. Never forget that, in the US, the term “constitutional law” does not refer to the Constitution itself but to what the federal judiciary has done to it.)[/quote]
Read that again.  Focus on these two sentences:
[quote]By requiring insurance, Ms. Cheh said she hopes the law would ensure that money is available to help a gunshot victim pay medical costs and promote gun safety. “I think there ought to be a source of money that they could count on to compensate them for their injuries,” [/quote]
How many gunshot victims are shot because they were NOT involved in some sort of criminal activity?  I'm including the "innocent" gang member who is the target of a drive-by shooting in the category of criminal activity - it's their reward for "going stupid places with stupid people to do stupid things".  And, just to continue that thought, how many times are the perpetrators identified, let alone convicted, so that the truly innocent victims of the typical spray-and-pray drive-by shooting could go after their insurance coverage?  (Of course, that also assumes that a drive-by shooter would have taken out the required insurance policy, doesn't it?  Strange that they are expected to comply with this one gun control law, out of the literally thousands they do not comply with already.)
Thus, we see another restriction on law-abiding gun owners being crammed down their throats in an attempt to "do something" about the behavior of those who do not obey the law.

stay safe.


Mike Miles said...

Insurance does many things for the left, It is de facto gun registration, it opens the door to suing gun makers, it adds prohibitive cost to law abiding citizens, it is the beginning of the end for the second amendment.

John Henry said...

More insanity from the mentally and emotionally disturbed left.

If they must have this sort of insurance and don't think it will fly .... it should be USER PAY which means Negroes must carry this type of insurance. it should be optional for the rest of us.

Stupid doesn't begin to cover this proposal.

Trialdog said...

"Liability" insurance. You have it for your car and your home. Liability insurance pays damages caused by your negligence. Accidents. It does not pay for damages caused by your intentional acts. Your auto carrier is not going to pay when you intentionally run into someone and injure them.
A gangbanger shooting someone with his fast and furious gun isn't doing it by accident. So when he complies with the professor's law, the victim isn't going to collect from the gangbanger's insurance carrier.
Fuck Obama

Devil Tongue said...

GAWD, I could not even get through the article without blowing a gasket!

How about this, you stupid twat chink; make it mandatory ALL mentally ill fucks carry a 1M policy with a 2M umbrella (like I have to do as a small business owner) on them selves so that us normal people may sue the fuck out of them when they do with tools what Mother Fuck'in lunitics do! What's next you dip wad, insuring hammers, steak knives, screw drivers, Base Ball bats; where does your liberal lunicy end???


Thanks Wirecutter, for getting my blood pressure to its maximum without a stroke (yet)!

Alexander W. Smith said...

Its sad, Wirecutter. But its what americans want. I'm still trying to figure out why everyone wants to 'save 'merica'. If a country is the reflection of the majority of its citizens, then well... hate to say it, but america is nothing more than a bunch of wining liberals.

sig94 said...

Whoa, whoa, whooooooa. What happened to the free gun shot Obamagangbangercare?

Old NFO said...

All I can say is WTFO??? And 'what' is that insurance going to cost???