Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   5 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Automobiles have to be insured. Why not guns?

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Funny 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

- Advertisement -
Automobiles have to be insured. Why not guns?

If you own a gun you have to have insurance for any damage that weapon may cause. If you have more than one gun you need a policy for each one. 

If your son goes nuts your insurance will pay for it. 

You can still keep your gun. You can still wave it around like an idiot. You can still fire it. But now you are going to pay for the privilege. 

Different types of guns will require different coverage. If you want to have an automatic weapon which fires two hundred rounds a minute that will cost you more than a single shot .22    
- Advertisement -

Like an automobile accident your premium will go up every time you have a claim whether it's your fault or not. Let us be clear. There will still be insane rampages. Insurance is not going to stamp that out. But nor is anything else. This will not discriminate between good or bad gun owners. It will not discriminate between good or bad people. Insurance is designed to take money from everyone. 

Compliance could be ensured by access to the gun application database. It could also be attached to your home or car insurance. 

- Advertisement -
Unfair? Unreasonable? Well I haven't hurt anyone in my car but it still costs me two thousand bucks a year just to get into it. The NRA is always going on about responsible gun ownership so they should welcome it. 

An incident like Newtown will create a billion dollar lawsuit in which the owners, suppliers, importers, manufacturers and advocates will become defendants. Insurance companies will love this. They will provide an important ally for the legislation. The only people who will be offended will be the collectors with arsenals of assault weapons. Some may see this as an expansion of government. Perhaps. Think of it as like the Homeland Security Department only for children."

 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Automobiles have to be insured. Why not guns?

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
3 people are discussing this page, with 5 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Need to purchase such insurance an encumbrance to ... by Matthew Jacobs on Friday, Jan 4, 2013 at 12:03:10 AM
aren't I required to have car insurance? Is that a... by Rob Groce on Saturday, Jan 5, 2013 at 1:16:17 AM
Here is why you dont.  Then your government w... by brian scott on Friday, Jan 4, 2013 at 7:56:20 AM
doesn't the government already have a listing of g... by Rob Groce on Saturday, Jan 5, 2013 at 1:17:42 AM
Owning a gun is NOT a privilege, It is our right a... by brian scott on Friday, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:00:34 AM