Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Our guns are already covered under our homeowners Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #1
No, they aren't bongbong Jan 2013 #3
This is why we need 50-state castle doctrine laws. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #22
Castlr doctrine laws have helped escalate the killings. rustydog Jan 2013 #49
Not everyone always has those options available. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #55
Then build a safe room Glitterati Jan 2013 #59
How about this: OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #67
How about.... Glitterati Jan 2013 #68
I don't value possessions more than life. That's why I would call the cops and wait. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #77
Sadly, I've been there Glitterati Jan 2013 #91
Sorry to hear... glad you were all able to escape. ((())) nt OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #107
How come the "human life > possessions" equation is never applied to the home invader? Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2013 #98
You might want to read the post right above yours. Glitterati Jan 2013 #101
Except you didn't answer, you just restated the premise (which obviously others find lacking) Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2013 #103
Whatever Glitterati Jan 2013 #104
A conversation implies 2 or more perspectives being discussed Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2013 #105
Kpete is talking about liability insurance. pangaia Jan 2013 #5
LOL, that's theft insurance, not liability. kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #56
Well they sit in a safe. Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #73
I have posted on this idea before bongbong Jan 2013 #2
Well Recursion Jan 2013 #4
Sort of assumes that people who are responsible are rich...nt joeybee12 Jan 2013 #6
Make semi-automatic weapons... Puha Ekapi Jan 2013 #7
They would have to be prohibitively high premiums for insurance companies to bite. n/t Tempest Jan 2013 #8
Totally regressive -- only those with money will own gins obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #9
The "point" isn't to promote equality NoOneMan Jan 2013 #28
The point is only the rich will be armed obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #41
So gun violence will be more likely to follow the rich NoOneMan Jan 2013 #45
Our Constitutional rights are not subject to underwriting by State Farm derby378 Jan 2013 #10
So what? I have to cover my vehicle Glitterati Jan 2013 #12
Driving is not a Constitutional right derby378 Jan 2013 #13
So what? Glitterati Jan 2013 #15
There's a battery of lawyers on both sides of the debate... derby378 Jan 2013 #18
You will lose Glitterati Jan 2013 #23
If that's your argument, I've already won derby378 Jan 2013 #35
Dream on Glitterati Jan 2013 #36
Sorry. And if you keep fighting us on reasonable restrictions and insurance requirements, many of us kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #64
That we are! Glitterati Jan 2013 #70
Bring me some reasonable restrictions and then we can talk derby378 Jan 2013 #74
Bwahahahahahaha Glitterati Jan 2013 #75
Thank you, I'll be here all decade. Try the London broil. derby378 Jan 2013 #79
Yes it should. It's a dangerous toy. Each and every gun should carry $10 million in liability kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #61
Neither is shooting anyone...other than an invading army. Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #27
The Supreme court upheld the health insurance individual mandate rbixby Jan 2013 #33
Except that health insurance is still not a right in America derby378 Jan 2013 #37
AND upheld insurance road block checks for cars Glitterati Jan 2013 #38
It's a liability policy. What if the shooter isn't liable? lynne Jan 2013 #69
The state can force you to purchase insurance taught_me_patience Jan 2013 #16
Exactly. Glitterati Jan 2013 #17
Read that ACA ruling again derby378 Jan 2013 #19
The supreme court ruled the penalty is a defacto tax taught_me_patience Jan 2013 #21
Okay, a $5000 tax on gun owners who don't buy insurance rbixby Jan 2013 #34
This message was self-deleted by its author rbixby Jan 2013 #31
Bullets kill. Opinions do not. kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #58
Regressive.... Xolodno Jan 2013 #11
So is car insurance. Glitterati Jan 2013 #14
Actually, auto insurance is not required in all states - lynne Jan 2013 #72
I did say Glitterati Jan 2013 #80
Actuarially, handguns would carry the largest premiums and assault rifles very little. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #20
If insurance rates were "rooted in statistics" alone Glitterati Jan 2013 #24
I wouldn't be surprised if the actuary tables came out with the bolt actions needing... JVS Jan 2013 #39
That's just silly kudzu22 Jan 2013 #25
It would have to be single premium policy.... Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #26
good point. the advantage of this is that it also directly addresses those who claim their weapon is maggiesfarmer Jan 2013 #30
gun liability samsingh Jan 2013 #29
If the interest is increasing public safety... markpkessinger Jan 2013 #32
Several things insurance can do afterwards divineorder Jan 2013 #92
I like it libodem Jan 2013 #40
Do you have a permit for your television? I don't derby378 Jan 2013 #50
no libodem Jan 2013 #53
Insurance rates are determined by actuarials. Xithras Jan 2013 #42
Health Care coverage was just upheld by the Supreme Court Glitterati Jan 2013 #43
For a different reason Xithras Jan 2013 #44
I disagree Glitterati Jan 2013 #46
Money = life and death defacto7 Jan 2013 #47
So only the rich will be able to legally afford guns, and we'll force DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav Jan 2013 #48
Oh, puuuuuuuuulease! Glitterati Jan 2013 #52
I think health insurance and home/apartment insurance should all have additional riders Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #51
How do you get criminals to pay their fair share? hack89 Jan 2013 #60
I suggest its in the price of guns... Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #65
There are 300 million guns in circulation right now hack89 Jan 2013 #71
no problem. we still increase the price of guns Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #76
You do realize government doesn't have that power? nt hack89 Jan 2013 #81
sure it does, its called a tax Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #85
There already is such a tax hack89 Jan 2013 #96
Magical thinking. Mimosa Jan 2013 #110
Mandatory liability insurance of a bare minimum of $1 million PER GUN, kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #54
AMEN! Glitterati Jan 2013 #57
Absolutely the best post/reply I've read today Glitterati. smccarter Jan 2013 #83
Thanks! n/t Glitterati Jan 2013 #86
Simply brilliant. Straw Man Jan 2013 #87
Oh, honey! We ARE paying Glitterati Jan 2013 #89
No, "we" are not. Straw Man Jan 2013 #93
Oh yes, we are Glitterati Jan 2013 #94
I thought we were talking about insurance. Straw Man Jan 2013 #95
Reading comprehension Glitterati Jan 2013 #100
Apparently your snark is intended to convey ... Straw Man Jan 2013 #106
Thank you for rationality and logic. Mimosa Jan 2013 #109
Yikes. As if corporations don't control enough... Mimosa Jan 2013 #108
This sound familiar... Trekologer Jan 2013 #62
Seems to me that if there was a market and money in such an insurance product - lynne Jan 2013 #63
there are already home insurance riders for guns... Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #78
I just don't see how you could market it unless it was mandatory. CJCRANE Jan 2013 #88
As far as I'm concerned where gu safety is concerned, liability insurance is a non-negotiable item RomneyLies Jan 2013 #66
Gun liability insurance is crucial, but also provides another check and balance..and re-registration libdem4life Jan 2013 #82
I don't see how making it so only rich people can have guns is "the middle ground" n/t Taitertots Jan 2013 #84
I think it's a good idea in itself, but not as a tax or penalty. CJCRANE Jan 2013 #90
Maybe all should be required to carry a $1M umbrella liability policy aikoaiko Jan 2013 #97
It isn't a middle ground, it is a poll tax. TheKentuckian Jan 2013 #99
No, it's a responsibility tax Glitterati Jan 2013 #102
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Middle ground idea on gun...»Reply #40