HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Liability insurance for g...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 10:53 AM

 

Liability insurance for gun owners compared to Poll Tax

The same Democrat Party that gave us the poll tax is trying to require fees for constitutional rights.

Thanks to the "individual mandate" Democrats in Congress may try to push the same scheme.

http://www.facebook.com/congressmanstevestockman

12 replies, 1127 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply Liability insurance for gun owners compared to Poll Tax (Original post)
michigandem58 Feb 2013 OP
EternalOptimist Feb 2013 #1
The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2013 #2
Fumesucker Feb 2013 #4
rdharma Feb 2013 #10
dballance Feb 2013 #12
sinkingfeeling Feb 2013 #3
Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #5
The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2013 #6
libtodeath Feb 2013 #7
guninsuranceblog Feb 2013 #8
The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2013 #11
Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2013 #9

Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 10:59 AM

1. Big difference

 

There is a difference between infringing upon someone's voting rights (the ability to have a representative democracy) and infringing upon the right to be an asshat gun lover (the ability to accidentally shoot someone, intentionally kill someone, get your gun stolen and used in a crime, basically contribute to a culture of fear. )

tax the guns
tax the insurance
tax the bullets

I would love to live in a gun free world but since I won't get what I want, deal with you not getting a gun in every hand Mr. LaPierre.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:00 AM

2. "Democrat Party"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:04 AM

4. That's a difficult tic to completely banish n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:40 PM

10. "Democrat Party"?

 

Mega dittos, TVO! I guess I'm not the only one who noticed that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 04:42 PM

12. That is Usually a "Tell" That You're Dealing with a Right-Winger

I'm curious now to read their other posted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:00 AM

3. Like I'm going to support Steve Stockman's warped view of anything! So, why

shouldn't a gun owner be required to carry massive liability insurance? I have $millions of liability insurance as a home owner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:05 AM

5. He is the Congressman that thinks Ted Nugent is a fine human being and Patroit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:08 AM

6. In states that have a general sales tax, you pay that tax when you buy a gun or ammunition.

Should those items not be subjected to sales tax because gun ownership is a "constitutional right"? Free speech is a constitutional right. Maybe there should be no sales tax on newspapers, magazines, internet connections, telephone services, etc., but there is. The right to travel is a constitutional right, too, but you have to buy car insurance; you pay a fee to get a drivers license and to get license plates for your car, and you paid a sales tax when you bought the car.

Read a little history: The poll tax was found unconstitutional because it was applied only to black people to prevent them from voting. State laws imposing the poll tax included a grandfather clause, which allowed any adult male whose father or grandfather had voted in a specific year prior to the abolition of slavery to vote without paying the tax.

And I hope you are merely quoting the odious Congressman Stockman, not presenting this tripe as your opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:10 AM

7. Fail

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:24 AM

8. Poll Taxes also a specific insurance plan for guns

Poll taxes were not found to be unconstitutional. The 24th Amendment specifically bans them and was adopted to do so. There is no similar amendment for other rights or for guns.

Getting insurance in place to protect victims is my interest and Iím glad to see it discussed. It would be good to see insurance adopted that would provide for victims, encourage safe practices, discourage guns from transferring into illegal hands and not overburden legal gun owners. Ordinary liability insurance only does a small part of this job; but it is possible to have insurance that would accomplish these goals. A good model is the no-fault car insurance in several states that protects hit and run victims with varying limits from about $10,000 in Florida up to unlimited lifetime care, if needed, in Michigan with others such as New York State in-between.
I would like to see in the public discussion a specific system for insurance to compensate victims and have insurance companies discourage passage of guns out of legal hands by loss, theft or diversion. Manufacturers would be mandated to have insurance that would cover persons hurt in a manner similar to automotive no-fault insurance. The insurers would only be able to relinquish responsibility if a new insurer took over when the weapon is sold. This would continue and insure that some insurer was on the hook no matter how the gun changed hands.
It would eliminate the need for the government to track owners or enforce the buying of insurance below the manufacturer level. I think it would be more politically feasible than a universal registration system. Of course, insurers would put in conditions to limit losses. This and provision of benefits to victims are the point of the system. The cost would be low because the total number of persons injured by guns is much smaller than by cars and injuries not deaths are the major cost to insurers. Tracing the guns involved in incidents is a problem and would require a database needing to have only the name of insurers and gun identifiers, with a great preference to having scans of test fired cartridges or bullets as an additional identifier. Uninsured guns could have a pool similar to uninsured motor vehicles.

You can see more details at my blog http://guninsuranceblog.com
A specific posting: http://www.guninsuranceblog.com/cars-and-guns/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guninsuranceblog (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:50 PM

11. Actually, poll taxes were found unconstitutional

in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections in 1966. The 24th amendment applied only to federal elections, but Virginia was still imposing poll taxes in state elections. The Supreme Court used the 14th Amendment to find state poll taxes unconstitutional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to michigandem58 (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:25 AM

9. So that's where you've been, Allen West!

Nice, umm, pale?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread