San Jose votes for guns fee and liability insurance

[CuttingEdge]

If it was a right it wouldn't be able to be taken away.

That is the dumbest quote I have ever heard.

It cannot be taken away, that is the whole point. We as American's can build our own ghost and zip guns, 3D print weapons, and all because of what the 2nd amendment says.

Where you are getting confused is on limitations. If a person does certain criminal acts, by doing so they give up those rights because they have proven they cannot be trusted with the rights they were given.

This is no different than the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. If you do criminal acts like murder, you have proven you cannot adequately handle those rights granted to you, and you will go to jail for the rest of your life, or face execution. You still are born with those three rights.

It is no different with guns. Make poor life choices and limitations are put in place. However, for someone like me who has a clean background, anything is possible. I can even get fully automatic weapons and equip them with suppressors. I have to apply for special permission, but the burden is on the government to prove I cannot have them.

 

[WillJ8787]

How it started:



How it's going:

https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/1219600_022516-kgo-tent-city-sf-img.jpg?w=1280&r=16:9
http://survivingsacramento.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/homeless-camp.jpg
https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/e0c081f0-07b4-11e8-91a7-c9cefea16f7a-780x481.jpg

Yep, things are right on track in the Golden State.

What this got to do with what we are talking about....sit down and have a banana

 

[Adre]

Unconstitutional.

You wouldn’t know the Constitution if it were shoved up your ass sideways.

 

[GothTalk]

You wouldn’t know the Constitution if it were shoved up your ass sideways.

Lots of rage......but no argument as to how taxing a right is actually constitutional so long as it's on the right that "shall not be infringed." ..... imagine that

 

[phrodeau]

Lots of rage......but no argument as to how taxing a right is actually constitutional so long as it's on the right that "shall not be infringed." ..... imagine that

Yeah! The Constitution says I get a free gun, and I want it now!

 

[GothTalk]

Yeah! The Constitution says I get a free gun, and I want it now!

Yea you do that!!

 

[Rightguide]

I would still like for gun ownership to be treated like car ownership. Gun owners
should be registered, they should be required to submit the result of a ballistics test
to the FBI, and they should be required to take a course and be tested on the proper
use of a gun, and the laws pertaining when and how a gun can be legally used.

There's a difference between a privilege and a right. How about we require you to have a working knowledge of the Constitution before we allow you to vote, or a diploma of some kind before your First Amendment right to speak your mind in public is allowed, and pay a yearly tax to do so?

 

[The_Trouvere]

There's a difference between a privilege and a right
How about we require you to have a working knowledge of the Constitution before
we allow you to vote, or a diploma of some kind before your First Amendment right
to speak your mind in public is allowed, and pay a yearly tax to do so?

I have read the U.S. Constitution more times than Trump. When a campaign aide
tried to explain the Constitution to Trump, his eyes glazed over, indicating
indifference and incomprehension.

When Trump had trouble reading a part of the Constitution out loud, he
complained, saying that is was "like a foreign language."

I disapprove of parts of the Constitution, especially the Second Amendment. I
want gun ownership to be regarded as a privilege granted reluctantly by the
government, rather than a right.

The First Amendment gives me the right to explain my rejection of the Second
Amendment.

 

[JohnnySavage]

The United States has not had to endure ground warfare since the Civil War because
we have Canada to the north of us, Mexico to the south of us, the Atlantic Ocean to
the east of us, and the Pacific Ocean to the west of us.

... You are like the Oracle of Afghanistan!

"This land shall never be invaded by a country 6,000 miles away because we are land-locked and protected by our geography"

Dumbass.

 

[Fermina_Daza]

I suspect that Liability insurance for gun owners would be much cheaper than most folks imagine. It would be massively profitable for insurers because they know that only the good guys will buy coverage. If say, 100 million gun owners bought liability insurance at $50 per annum that'd be $5 Billion which would pay a lot of claims.

The smart way to underwrite the risk however, would be to insist that all households and businesses carry TP liability cover for all risks excluding only things like earthquake, revolution, war, stuff like that - no need to mention guns at all. Most commercial covers currently issued are already broad enough

Of course it would be a huge pot of funds for lawyers to get stuck into.

You bring up some interesting thoughts. If you get in an accident involving your motor vehicle, your insurance provider typically provides legal counsel for you. So having liability insurance for your firearm might actually work to your benefit should, God forbid, you ever have to use it in a self-defense situation. Self-defense statutes like Stand Your Ground may protect you from criminal prosecution, but even that is not guaranteed.

Injured folks can and have sued civilly for their personal injuries, even when their own actions put them at risk. Should their claim eventually be dismissed, you still incurred (likely) the cost of an attorney and in some states filing fees and court costs. Yes, it makes attorneys and insurance companies that much more profitable, but insurance is one of those things you don’t really miss - until you really need it.

Anyway, back to my regularly-scheduled airiness.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

That is the dumbest quote I have ever heard.

It cannot be taken away, that is the whole point. We as American's can build our own ghost and zip guns, 3D print weapons, and all because of what the 2nd amendment says.

Where you are getting confused is on limitations. If a person does certain criminal acts, by doing so they give up those rights because they have proven they cannot be trusted with the rights they were given.

This is no different than the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. If you do criminal acts like murder, you have proven you cannot adequately handle those rights granted to you, and you will go to jail for the rest of your life, or face execution. You still are born with those three rights.

It is no different with guns. Make poor life choices and limitations are put in place. However, for someone like me who has a clean background, anything is possible. I can even get fully automatic weapons and equip them with suppressors. I have to apply for special permission, but the burden is on the government to prove I cannot have them.

Sorry, you're wrong. If someone commits a felony they lose the legal ability to have guns.

 

[Rightguide]

I have read the U.S. Constitution more times than Trump. When a campaign aide
tried to explain the Constitution to Trump, his eyes glazed over, indicating
indifference and incomprehension.

When Trump had trouble reading a part of the Constitution out loud, he
complained, saying that is was "like a foreign language."

I disapprove of parts of the Constitution, especially the Second Amendment. I
want gun ownership to be regarded as a privilege granted reluctantly by the
government, rather than a right.

The First Amendment gives me the right to explain my rejection of the Second
Amendment.

One big non sequitur.

 

[Rightguide]

You wouldn’t know the Constitution if it were shoved up your ass sideways.

There's one thing I know, if you tried you be eating it.

 

[pecksniff]

When Trump had trouble reading a part of the Constitution out loud, he
complained, saying that is was "like a foreign language."

Well, it's all 18th-Century legal parlance. A foreign language to most Americans, then and now.

 

[BidudeinWi]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/26/us/san-jose-gun-law-wednesday/index.html

It will, like all the other ludicrous LibTard anti-2A laws, be struck down by the SCOTUS! But in the meantime, keep mentally masturbating Butters and while your at it, see if you can locate your Canadian President. The pussy is playing hide n seek because the people of your Country hate that little bitch and his little bitch policies! Not sure what city in Canada is the Capital, don’t care either, but that LibTard can’t be found there!

 

[HisArpy]

You bring up some interesting thoughts. If you get in an accident involving your motor vehicle, your insurance provider typically provides legal counsel for you. So having liability insurance for your firearm might actually work to your benefit should, God forbid, you ever have to use it in a self-defense situation. Self-defense statutes like Stand Your Ground may protect you from criminal prosecution, but even that is not guaranteed.

Injured folks can and have sued civilly for their personal injuries, even when their own actions put them at risk. Should their claim eventually be dismissed, you still incurred (likely) the cost of an attorney and in some states filing fees and court costs. Yes, it makes attorneys and insurance companies that much more profitable, but insurance is one of those things you don’t really miss - until you really need it.

Anyway, back to my regularly-scheduled airiness.

This is the fallacy trap that most fall into.

You cannot insure against a criminal act. Thus, if you're prosecuted criminally for something you allegedly did, your insurer will not indemnify you even if you're found not guilty. Just as a car insurance company will not defend you for intentionally driving your car into a parade, no insurer will defend someone accused of intentionally shooting someone. Even the specialized gun owners insurance available from several sources will not cover this.

Civil liability is also not fully covered. "Intentional harm" is not "negligence" and therefore isn't covered. As an example, knowing you have an STD, and then having unprotected sex with someone who then catches your STD, isn't covered by personal liability insurance because it's an intentional act. Insurance only covers "accidents" caused by "negligence."


Finally, criminals don't care.