More on Mandatory Firearm Insurance
In recent weeks we have been deluged with legislative proposals attacking our Second Amendment Civil Rights in the wake of the horrific murders in Connecticut. One such proposal has been mandatory liability insurance for anyone lawfully owning any type of gun. Lawful gun owners rightfully consider this to be simply another way to tax gun ownership. They are of course correct on that assumption, but this proposal goes much deeper and is much more insidious!
The anti-civil rights movement would gladly add taxes to our ability to lawfully possess guns, but the real purpose for mandatory insurance is to avoid the legislative and regulatory process altogether. The real purpose for insurance is to bring the “power” of the insurance companies against the Second Amendment. What does that mean? Our opposition has crafted a new way to attack us through the potential policies of private insurance companies who make up their own rules as to whom they insure and under what circumstances. Here are some possible examples of how these attacks could happen:
- Mandatory storage laws currently exist in Massachusetts. An insurance company as a condition of coverage could mandate an inspection of how you are complying with those laws. They could easily mandate the most expensive safes or even where those safes are kept.
- If you keep a loaded gun in the home for defensive measures, insurance premiums could be drastically increased or simply not provided.
- As so-called new technologies are proposed for firearms such as GPS locators insurance companies could mandate that all of our guns are “updated” as a condition of insurance.
- These companies could use bogus statistics from groups like the Violence Policy Center as a means of raising premiums for the ownership of certain firearms or deny coverage outright.
- If you have children in your home or perhaps an aging parent or spouse, companies can mandate certain conditions or again deny coverage.
- They could insist that ballistic information about your firearms be submitted to them and in return the government. The excuse used would be to defend a claim by using such info.
- Insurance companies would also be able to go after the industry as well. Federal legislation was passed years ago to prevent the firearms industry to be bankrupted from bogus lawsuits. However, the insurance companies would not bring lawsuits, but instead more insurance “policies” about what can be sold to their customers and how they should be manufactured.
- In the case that an insurance company chooses not to cover people for any reason, the mandatory insurance would then be provided by the government. This would further regulate how you obtain your insurance policy.
These are just a few examples of the real purpose behind mandatory insurance so don’t be fooled that it will simply be an “affordable” and “reasonable” component to “responsible” gun ownership.
*This page is made possible by the membership of GOAL and their generous donations. If you found this page helpful please Join - Support - Donate to GOAL.
Help us make Massachusetts a safer place.