28 Feb

Pennsylvania Democrat’s Gun Control Insurance

                                       

Representative Ronald Waters of Pennsylvania is a Democrat serving part Delaware and Philadephia Counties (you know, the ones that voted 100% for Obama in the last election).

This month, he submitted House Bill 521 that has been referred to the Judiciary Committee and is expected to die there. However, it’s still important to point out what this bill does and highlight the gun control schemes being thrown about legislatures around the country.

Waters’ bill would require every person licensed to carry a concealed firearm to purchase and maintain $1 million in “firearm liability insurance.” Anyone not possessing such insurance would be banned from defending themselves with a concealed firearm.

In essence, the bill translates a firearm into a virtually living thing. It is meant to “satisfy any judgment for personal injuries or property damages arising out of NEGLIGENT OR WILLFUL ACTS INVOLVING USE OF AN INSURED FIREARM,” emphasis mine. Interestingly, however, the insurance CANNOT cover unlawful acts. So, if your gun is stolen and used in a crime, your insurance won’t help you I guess.

So, supposing this were the law of the land in Pennsylvania, if I use my insured gun in a “willful” and presumably lawful act, what do I need insurance for? Negligence is obvious, but the rest makes no sense.

Under the bill, any law enforcement officer may conduct an “inspection” of the firearm and insurance policy to ensure it meets the law. If it does not, or the individual doesn’t have the required insurance, the officer is required to immediately CONFISCATE the firearm until the owner provides proof of insurance. He then has ten days to obtain that insurance or his concealed carry license will be revoked.

Theoretically, once the license is revoked the agency is required to return the firearm to the owner and inform him that he may no longer carry in public. He will then be forced to pay a $1,000 fine. A second offense would result in a $5,000 fine. And, if you’re unlucky enough to get caught a third time, you will be charged with a 3rd degree misdemeanor and subject to a $10,000 fine. Each offense after that is a 2nd degree misdemeanor and $15,000 fine.

All this just for the right to exercise your constitutionally guaranteed right to self-protection.

This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment. Bookmark the permalink. Thursday, February 28th, 2013 at 11:05 am
| 463 views

12 Responses to Pennsylvania Democrat’s Gun Control Insurance

  1. johngalt says: 1

    Great idea. Let’s place economic sanctions on the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens. Once again, the poor are going to take it up the rear!

    And CJ, you are correct. If I use a firearm in a responsible manner, and legally, then why would I ever have to worry about having insurance? And to add to that, if I was a criminal, who carried a weapon illegally, or used it to commit a crime, do you think I’m really going to be worried about not having insurance for having the firearm? Is that fine and probation threat really going to stop me from robbing the bank, or the neighbor, or the liquor store? Is it going to stop me from deciding to kill someone else with that firearm?

    I swear, every time you think you’ve heard the stupidest thing ever, you get smacked in the face with something even more stupid. Take Biden’s new advice on shooting your shotgun through a closed front door. Can someone please remove this guy’s membership to the human race now?

    ReplyReply
  2. MOS 8541 says: 2

    remember, that stupidity and ignorance travels faster than the speed of sound. A waiver, however, would be created for all politician, union workers, hollywood producers and anyone who donated more than $5 to the idiots last campaign.

    ReplyReply
  3. FAITH7 says: 3

    “So, supposing this were the law of the land in Pennsylvania, if I use my insured gun in a “willful” and presumably lawful act, what do I need insurance for? Negligence is obvious, but the rest makes no sense.

    This type of off the cuff thinking by the left usually doesn’t make any sense….they are more used to ‘feeling’ not thinking… in the end more people suffer from the stupidity of it all… seriously, where do these people come from???

    Insufferable idiots…

    ReplyReply
  4. MOS 8541 says: 4

    you can see stupidity and ignorance before you hear it.

    ReplyReply
  5. Petercat says: 5

    I don’t believe that this man has done his homework.
    He probably thinks that requiring one million dollars worth of insurance would be so expensive that it would price most CCW holders out of the market.
    Stupid, feel-good nonsense. Proposed by a man who has no understanding of how insurance actually works.
    There are so few judgements against individuals for willful and/or negligent damages each year that a million dollars’ worth of insurance would cost about $10.00.
    Just another brain-dead liberal who believes that the best way to prevent crime is to create criminals out of law-abiding citizens.

    ReplyReply
  6. Budvarakbar says: 6

    @Petercat: You are leaving out the fact that this is about FIREARMS!!!! — ding! ding! ding! ding! — buzzword!!! – buzzword!!! — throw in the portability factors, the theft factors – the mother’s/father’s gun factors — the burglary factors — etc etc etc — every factor they come up with will be another power of ten – or more on the premium — you will be talking 100′s of bucks per policy PER firearm. AND — CCW holders have their firearms out in the public arena – where any number of factors could cause them to be separated from their CCW owners.

    This ain’t the old slippery front steps slip-and-fall BS – no one steals someone else’s slippery front steps and forces someone else to slip and fall on them

    You need to think some more

    ReplyReply
  7. Smorgasbord says: 7

    If the law abiding individual has to carry $1,000,000 of insurance, how much should the crooks have to carry?

    ReplyReply
  8. Budvarakbar says: 8

    @Budvarakbar: I left out the uninsured / underinsured policy riders that would be required — and of course the program would be administered by the feds. – aint gonna get much for $10.00

    ReplyReply
  9. CJ says: 9

    And what happens to someone from another state that has a CHL that is recognized in PA. Does that person need to purchase insurance just for PA if it’s not required in their state?

    ReplyReply
  10. FedUp says: 10

    Leaving aside the obvious – TERM LIMITS – I think our elected officials who dream this crap up and also vote for it should take an immediate pay cut (to fund my insurance) and carry a sign with the large letters… STUPID POLITICIAN!

    This also applies to the ignorant people in CONgress who think Guam will tip over if too many soldiers are in one place, and the new crowd pleaser – Maxine Waters who is braying that the Sequester will cut 170 million jobs when there are only 135 – 143 million jobs in total. Is it any winder that we are in the mess we are in???

    ReplyReply
  11. Steve R says: 11

    Eternal vigilance is the key word. We must keep in mind these idiots will never stop, they’re like a baby that will keep crying until they get their way. I can’t even stand to listen to them any more. it’s like they open their mouth and all that come out of it is BS.

    ReplyReply
  12. Smorgasbord says: 12

    @Steve R: #11
    Try using the “MUTE” button. Whenever obama, pelosi, reid, etc., come on the TV, I hit the “MUTE” button, and they sound so much better. Whoever invented it should get the Nobel “PEACE” prize, as in peace and quiet.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>