San Jose to require gun owners to carry liability insurance

[UsualName]

What other constitutional rights require insurance? How could you make a constitutional right dependent on whether or not someone could afford to pay a fee to possess it? Words can cause riots. How would you feel if the government started taxing people for the right to use freedom of speech?

I hope this will be struck down in court. California is a beautiful state, but I would never want to live there.

So you’re absolutely welcome to get another “arm” if you wish to avoid the insurance on a gun. Might I suggest a slingshot.

There’s already taxes on guns and bullets, constitutionally speaking insurance is the same thing.

Newspapers are already taxed, so are movies and music. It’s all the same.

As far as not wanting to live in California, this is the framework for the nation to combat our National embarrassment of out of control gun violence. We need to make sure the people who bought guns still possess them.

 

[userque]

Every constitutional right is somewhat unique, but I don't support requiring a fee to possess any of them.

But you support auto insurance, simply because driving is not a constitutional right.?!

What real difference does it make [wrt insurance, and the benefits thereof?]

 

[UsualName]

Every constitutional right is somewhat unique, but I don't support requiring a fee to possess any of them.

26% of murders don't involve firearms. Maybe we should require everyone to carry general liability insurance just in case they do something that creates financial harm for someone else.

Why would we address 1/4 of the problem before we address 3/4?

 

[UsualName]

The law is racist, it disproportionately impacts low income and minorities.

Man if this is what the right walks into court with they are going to get waxed.

 

[UsualName]

Yeh, sure.

Maybe you can pay for it with infrastructure funds. Seems to be the trend these days.

Maybe free speech liability insurance too before using social media.



San Jose gun owners. I am sure they will sign right up.

Or we could just continue with the anarchy I guess.

 

[userque]

More: https://www.semelriskconsultants.co...e-professional-liability-insurance-our-guide/

 

[UsualName]

Bad idea imho. Taxing law abiding firearm owners for no good reason.

How about taxing criminals instead?

Democrats = "if it moves, tax it"

Are you serious with this?

 

[Wallet]

Man if this is what the right walks into court with they are going to get waxed.

Well it’s worked for Democrats for years.

We’re not talking about cars, jobs, whatever’s. Your wanting to tax constitutional rights.

 

[Cuddles]

There's a lot of hypocrisy here.

Cons have been perfectly fine w/poll taxes, voter ID cards that cost time and money, and bunch of other disenfranchising shit that has monetary value to those disenfranchised (longer lines, longer drives, hiring drivers, etc...).

This of course will be struck down by this SCOTUS as you can't tax a right enshrined in the constitution, just wish this SCOTUS had any shame after the two decisions last week.

 

[Scataphagos]

How would insurance company underwrite that risk?