Notes from the Resistance
House Committee passes two BFA-backed bills to prohibit firearms liability insurance, sales tracking, and registries [More]
“Friends across the aisle” is a lie. Anyone who would propose mandating such clear infringements is my enemy and deserving of my resistance and contempt.
Georgia lawmaker proposes $1 million liability insurance for assault weapon owners [More]
Yeah, well, not gonna happen.
What a fundamentally stupid woman.
[Via Jess]
“Firearm liability insurance” does not exist. By requiring consumers to obtain a product that isn’t available as a condition for legal gun ownership, this bill would essentially ban legal gun ownership by default. [More]
That’s kind of the point.
This reminds me of a story I heard years ago about discriminating against black voters in the Jim Crow (Democrat) South, where the sheriff kept a jar of beans at the polling place and administered an eligibility test to guess how many it contained if they wanted to vote.
[Via cydl]
We got a big win in the state of California today when a major bill, AB3067 was amended to remove nearly all original language that would have forced rental and homeowner insurance companies to report on you to the state. [Watch]
What, the one that exempted gang members…?
[Via Jess]
The latest attempt by ruling Democrats at the Legislature to curb Colorado gun owners comes with crocodile tears. It’s a bill requiring liability insurance for law-abiding citizens exercising their right to keep arms. HB24-1270’s mandate applies even if firearms are under lock and key in the safety of one’s home — and even if kept to protect that home. [More]
And it won’t, of course, apply to the very people who are the problem, that is, Democrat constituents.
Hey, how come when it’s voluntary and market based the bedwetting commies call it “murder insurance“?
[Via Jess]
Some insurance companies currently offer different types of coverage for firearm liability under homeowner, umbrella and renter policies because there is not a specific exclusion. However, most insurers do not offer separate stand-alone gun liability coverage and no insurer would provide coverage for illegal or “criminal” acts, such as mass shootings. [More]
So what we’re talking about is a special punishment tax for the “law-abiding” being fraudulently offered as a sop against violent crime.
Knowing what kind of rights swindlers are behind it could have told us that.
[Via Jess]
The Truth About The USCCA Self-Defense Liability Policy (2023) [Watch]
Interesting breakdown, although I do note this guy has his own financial interest in doing this.
I’d be interested in seeing USCCA and some of the gun video personalities endorsing/sponsored by the company do their own videos that address the points raised.
[Via Jim S]
UPDATE
WarOnGuns Correspondent Ron M emails:
Here’s a USCCA response to that year old YouTube that you posted.
Yes, I have USCCA.
I read the contract.
I sent the contract to my legal provider for review (Legal Shield [formerly PrePaid Legal] which is also a monthly membership service).
Based on that discussion, I asked pertinent questions of USCCA.
I still have my membership with USCCA.
California bill would require all gun owners to obtain liability insurance [More]
They’ll then be able to price it out of the range of those of modest means, pressure insurance companies not to sell it, and for those that still do, pass laws saying they must cancel policies that don’t meet an ever-expanding list of allegations using the old “loophole” scam.
Meanwhile, expect these guys to continue business as usual.
“Skinner” seems an appropriate aptronym.
[Via 1Gat]
