HR.1369 Gun Owner Liabiltiy Insurance - REALLY; er NO

[Trooper]

A huge problem though, would be if firearms insurance became common place it would become much easier to sue somebody for using a firearm in a self-defense situation. If a criminal can sue for breaking a leg while robbing your home, I'm sure the family could sue if you shot him in self-defense.

It is basically the same situation that an LEO deals with. If a cop does a righteous shooting, he still gets sued. And the taxpayers pay as they provide the insurance.

It is the same with making everyone who gets into a shooting incident go through a grand jury hearing. That was make it like the cops have to do with a shooting review board.

 

[Sainte]

I would not mind it, especially if it would pay for legal costs if I have to go to court to prove that it was a righteous shooting.

Wonder if the NRA could provide it at a reasonable cost?

And as part of that insurance policy, you have to list all guns you own....

Imagine if you shoot someone with an uninsured, unregistered gun.

 

[Hayseed_40]

To me it is not about the pros/cons of having the insurance - it is the fact the government would mandate the insurance. That is the ass chapping substance there.

 

[Sainte]

Just like obamacare.....

 

[beararms1776]

To make this fair and to be eligible for required coverage, you must agree to no more than 1 shot fired and must be a rubberized bullet or blanks.

 

[Trooper]

Look once people started suing the cops, then the cops started doing review boards to cover their butts, it was a matter of time before the rest of us got hit.

 

[Liberty's Teeth]

I guess this BS will never stop.