Say Anything Blog

The gun control nuts know they’ll never be able to ban guns entirely.  They know that not only is public opinion against them, the Supreme Court has also upheld the 2nd amendment as an individual right.  But they’re taking a cue from the anti-smoking gestapo.  If you can’t ban it, regulate it to death.  Make it so difficult to purchase, own and carry a gun that even people who would be inclined to do those things won’t because they don’t want to deal with the hassle.

The latest effort in that vein is this law which would require gun owners to carry a $1,000,000 insurance policy.

Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Provides that any person who owns a firearm in this State shall maintain a policy of liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person. Provides that a person shall be deemed the owner of a firearm after the firearm is lost or stolen until such loss or theft is reported to the police department or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the owner resides. Provides that the Department of State Police shall revoke and seize a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card previously issued under this Act if the Department finds that the person to whom such card was issued possesses or acquires a firearm and does not submit evidence to the Department of State Police that he or she has been issued in his or her name a liability insurance policy in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person. Effective January 1, 2010.

I’m sure trial lawyers and insurance brokers are drooling at the idea of this law.  Millions of gun owners having to open up new insurance policies?  Million dollar policies available for trial lawyers to sue every time a stolen gun is used in a crime?  It’s a dream for those people.

A nightmare for practitioners of 2nd amendment rights, however.  Which is the whole point.