San Jose to require gun owners to carry liability insurance

[LS1Z28]

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

I'm all for addressing the 3/4 of the problem, but I don't see this approach being effective. It's estimated that gang activity accounts for roughly 80% of violent crime. It's also estimated that 65% of guns used for violent crime are illegally owned.

How would requiring insurance from law abiding gun owners get firearms out of the hands of violent gang members that aren't even allowed to own them? I agree with you that we need to address the problem, but this proposal misses the mark. We need to focus on closing the loopholes that allow convicted felons to obtain firearms.

 

[Wallet]

The answer is really simple. Use a firearm in the commission of a felony, 30yrs mandatory, 1st offense, no early parole.

Guarantee results.

 

[UsualName]

There is no constitutional right that is taxed. You are retarded, do not pass go, and definitely don't contribute meaningfully to politics.

You didn't answer my question chief paste eater. Do we tax the first?

Of course we tax the first amendment. You pay taxes on movies, video games, news papers.

But we already pay taxes when we buy a gun anyway so the point is moot. It’s already established.

Oh, and nothing amuses me more than getting called an retarded by an actual retard. Thanks.

 

[UsualName]

The answer is really simple. Use a firearm in the commission of a felony, 30yrs mandatory, 1st offense, no early parole.

Guarantee results.

Doesnt work. Texas has one of the highest gun homicide rates and the death penalty.

 

[Tony Stark]

The answer is really simple. Use a firearm in the commission of a felony, 30yrs mandatory, 1st offense, no early parole.

Guarantee results.

The legal owner of that gun should get a sentence of 1/3rd of that for thier negligence in allowing the criminal to get thier gun.

That will stop a lot of guns from getting into the hands of criminals,guaranteed.

 

[UsualName]

I'm all for addressing the 3/4 of the problem, but I don't see this approach being effective. It's estimated that gang activity accounts for roughly 80% of violent crime. It's also estimated that 65% of guns used for violent crime are illegally owned.

How would requiring insurance from law abiding gun owners get firearms out of the hands of violent gang members that aren't even allowed to own them? I agree with you that we need to address the problem, but this proposal misses the mark. We need to focus on closing the loopholes that allow convicted felons to obtain firearms.

So, I’ve already addressed this having insurance is fine but the real teeth of this provision would be that there is an accountability for retaining possession.

To curb the street gun violence we have to stop the flow of guns moving from legally purchased to illegally sold. There’s something called the iron pipeline that runs guns usually purchased in large scale from southern states to northern cities. Being accountable with an insurance for purchasing 12 guns a month make those sorts of trades unprofitable and drastically reduce the illegal guns used on the streets.

 

[Cuddles]

So, I’ve already addressed this having insurance is fine but the real teeth of this provision would be that there is an accountability for retaining possession.

To curb the street gun violence we have to stop the flow of guns moving from legally purchased to illegally sold. There’s something called the iron pipeline that runs guns usually purchased in large scale from southern states to northern cities. Being accountable with an insurance for purchasing 12 guns a month make those sorts of trades unprofitable and drastically reduce the illegal guns used on the streets.

It's the same shit as illegal immigration. Punish the offenders, do nothing about those feeding the problem. It's why they oppose e-verify, it's why they oppose closing down the gun fair and private sale loopholes.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Doesnt work. Texas has one of the highest gun homicide rates and the death penalty.

Also, your skin color dem voters tend to get locked up disproportionately because...well...they are disproportionately using guns when committing felony.

Can't have that. Clearly, James Madison's fault.

 

[Wallet]

The legal owner of that gun should get a sentence of 1/3rd of that for thier negligence in allowing the criminal to get thier gun.

That will stop a lot of guns from getting into the hands of criminals,guaranteed.

So my house is broken into and robbed, firearms stolen, and I’m partly to blame? Don’t think so.

I’ll agree, felons should not be in possession of a firearm, and knowingly selling, giving a felon a gun should be against the law. ( Or is it already?)

If I legally sell a firearm, why do I carry any liability for another’s actions?

There’s plenty of laws on the books to properly deter crime, they just need to be enforced.

 

[UsualName]

It's the same shit as illegal immigration. Punish the offenders, do nothing about those feeding the problem. It's why they oppose e-verify, it's why they oppose closing down the gun fair and private sale loopholes.

E verify was in the immigration reform package republicans shot down under Obama. Republicans aren’t serious about stopping illegal immigration.