politicans want mandatory insurance on guns

#51
#51
lawgator1 said:
No, since guns result in injury or death, when it is used negligently, misused, or used by someone other than the original purchaser, it is not fair to everyone else that we pay for that.

You should pay for costs caused by your gun. Period.
Click to expand...

"It's not my fault you're fat. You should pay for the negligent use of pork rinds."

PS: Constitution. Good luck (not really.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#52
#52
lawgator1 said:
No, since guns result in injury or death, when it is used negligently, misused, or used by someone other than the original purchaser, it is not fair to everyone else that we pay for that.

You should pay for costs caused by your gun. Period.
Click to expand...
You being such an advocate for free Healthcare and hard working Americans footing the health bill for the lazy, I am shocked you actually posted this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#53
#53
BearCat204 said:
You being such an advocate for free Healthcare and hard working Americans footing the health bill for the lazy, I am shocked you actually posted this.
Click to expand...

Especially considering I had just pointed out the ACA.

He is also ignoring the fact that he's by and large shifting responsibility. If a criminal steals my gun and commits an act of violence with it, it is his responsibility.

I would be interested to know if lg would say a rape victim was 'just asking for it' because she was dressed a certain way. Was she responsible, or is the rapist responsible?

LG can pretty this up any way he wants, the fact of the matter is that he doesn't want people owning guns, and he thinks this is a bona fide way of circumventing our constitutional rights to a large degree.
 
#55
#55
BearCat204 said:
You being such an advocate for free Healthcare and hard working Americans footing the health bill for the lazy, I am shocked you actually posted this.
Click to expand...

Doesn't fit his let the government control our lives agenda.
 
#56
#56
Just read that article. The OP's headline is misleading, the article has far more to with insurance than legislation - you guys are arguing over a blogger "creating" news rather than reporting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#57
#57
Septic said:
Just read that article. The OP's headline is misleading, the article has far more to with insurance than legislation - you guys are arguing over hyperbole.
Click to expand...

Just attempting to see what it feels like to be LG for a few posts with faux outrage and misleading remarks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#61
#61
lawgator1 said:
No, since guns result in injury or death, when it is used negligently, misused, or used by someone other than the original purchaser, it is not fair to everyone else that we pay for that.

You should pay for costs caused by your gun. Period.
Click to expand...

Negligence is already covered in the criminal codes of all 50 states.

Misuse is either just a synonym for negligence (in which case, see above) or a caustic term you are substituting for accident. Accidents happen yet accidents ought not be punishable (whether regarding cars, guns, animals, etc.). Paying for the result of an accident is punishment; being on the receiving end of an accident is life.

As for things that happen because others use the gun, in cases in which prices ought to be paid, why isn't the user (the other) the one paying this price?

Not all bad things that happen to occur must be "made good". Anyone who thinks such things is an an imbecile.

If I somehow possessed the acumen to cure cancer, yet was unaware of my own potential, and chose a career as a moronic litigator instead of a medical researcher, you're line of BS reasoning would make it the case that I would owe reparations to all cancer victims and their families. After all, I ought to have had assumed that I might have the potential to cure cancer, and whether or not that actually happened, I ought to have pursued all outlets to do so.

Instead, I chose not to, and, yes, that comes at a risk to myself (I could end up with cancer) and others. Yet, I don't owe a dammed penny to those that end up with cancer, unless I was aware of my acumen, aware of the solution, and I suppressed the solution.

Persons ought not be held responsible for accidents. Accidents are beyond their control. Negligence, correctly understood (not as enunciated by some litigators and politicians), is blameworthy because it involves awareness.

A gunowner can and should think that by taking proper precautions, unintended harm will not occur.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#62
#62
Grand Vol said:
Just attempting to see what it feels like to be LG for a few posts with faux outrage and misleading remarks.
Click to expand...

Ahh. Ok then...

I read it and was wondering why the hell this is even in the political section.
 
#64
#64
Wouldn't home owners insurance cover that? If it's detached goods and your house is blown away in a tornado or burns down, I'm sure insurance covers contents in the home as well.
 
#65
#65
Septic said:
Just read that article. The OP's headline is misleading, the article has far more to with insurance than legislation - you guys are arguing over a blogger "creating" news rather than reporting it.
Click to expand...

Liberal ideas must be crushed like a cockroaches when they first rear their nasty little heads. Otherwise you'll be infested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#66
#66
Septic said:
Ahh. Ok then...

I read it and was wondering why the hell this is even in the political section.
Click to expand...

It is an item that rears its ugly head from time to time in the gun control arena, so it probably fits here better than another forum.
 
#67
#67
utvolpj said:
No, the person using the gun negligently or illegally should pay the costs. You're not paying anything extra today
Click to expand...


But for the purchase, it would never have occurred. You opt to put the gun in the stream of commerce, you pay for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#70
#70
lawgator1 said:
But for the purchase, it would never have occurred. You opt to put the gun in the stream of commerce, you pay for that.
Click to expand...

Always blame the law-abiding citizen instead of the criminal. Why not blame the gun designer? Better yet, all blame should rest with the raw material suppliers since without them the guns can't even be produced. That seems as logical as any stance you have on this issue.

The simple answer is to blame the one using the gun improperly or illegally. KISS. Look it up
 
#73
#73
lawgator1 said:
But for the purchase, it would never have occurred. You opt to put the gun in the stream of commerce, you pay for that.
Click to expand...

Piss poor decisions made in the voting booth have caused more death and destruction than all of the civilian owned firearms combined. You start a movement for a poll tax or voter education requirements and I'll support your insurance requirement. Deal?
 
#74
#74
utvolpj said:
Always blame the law-abiding citizen instead of the criminal. Why not blame the gun designer? Better yet, all blame should rest with the raw material suppliers since without them the guns can't even be produced. That seems as logical as any stance you have on this issue.

The simple answer is to blame the one using the gun improperly or illegally. KISS. Look it up
Click to expand...


The criminal pays the criminal penalty. As injury due to the criminal is foreseeable, it is fair to impose liability for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#75
#75
YorkVol said:
I would need to insure my manly charisma, it is pretty deadly I hear.
Click to expand...

daduntsh.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top