New state bill would require gun owners to have insurance

[Auggie]

SACRAMENTO (CBS SF/BCN) – Two state senators announced a new bill Thursday (Jan. 26) that would require gun owners to obtain liability insurance for the negligent or accidental use of their firearms.

If passed, California becomes the first state in the nation to adopt such legislation.

The bill, SB 8, comes from State Senators Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, and Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, who decided to propose the legislation as the state reels from three mass shootings within days of each other, and five total for the month of January. In total, 27 people have been killed and another 20 injured, making January the deadliest month for mass shootings in California in at least a decade, according to the legislators.

SNIP

Under SB 8, gun insurance in the state would be similar to car insurance, making gun owners civilly liable for property damage, injury, or death resulting from the use of their firearms. Gun owners would be required to have plans that cover losses or damages resulting from negligent or accidental use of their firearm, and they'll have to keep proof of their insurance with their firearm, and produce it when asked by a peace officer during the course of a lawful detainment.

MORE: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/new-state-bill-would-require-gun-owners-to-have-insurance/

According to the link, SB 8 will be modeled after the City of San Jose's gun insurance law ... which was the first of its kind in the country.

-----------

Should be a no-brainer, right?

[Chainfire]

1. Lets see if it passes the Supremist Court muster.

It sounds like a good idea.

[TeamProg]

2. This would lead would-be owners to buy unregistered guns - or seek unregistered guns.

But yah, I agree, seems like a no-brainer.

[Abnredleg]

3. The NRA is the largest seller of firearms insurance

So I expect they will welcome it, although I doubt it will pass legal muster.

Anyway. homeowners and renters insurance already covers firearms accidents so I doubt it will have much of an impact.

[gibraltar72]

4. Have always said insurance is the way to end gun culture.

[The Mouth]

5. Why do you think it would?

The NRA is the biggest insurer. More money in their pockets.

NO reasonable gun owner has any problems with such insurance. I have a PLUP, plus a good safe and active burglar alarm monitoring, yes, I am liable both economically and *morally* if any of my firearms were to be stolen and subsequently used in a crime.

On the other hand, people who have illegal, unregistered guns don't give a fuck, and usually don't have any assets worth suing them over anyway.

It's not a bad idea, but I don't think it's going to end 'gun culture'.

[gibraltar72]

6. Made my living in insurance

Make any firearm illegal to carry without insurance. Make high coverage limits mandatory. If I'm not mistaken NRA insurance only covers if it is a righteous incident. Insurers will not bite on covering people for all risks. See what is happening with home insurance if Fl. and LA. Couple or more big payouts on guns and insurers will walk. I was an NRA member shot competitively for a while. Now only gun I own is a percussion 40 cal. It is worth trying nothing else is working.

[The Mouth]

7. hmmm

As one who believes in the right to home defense, but thinks that only people who have undergone background checks, psych evals, and training should carry, makes a bit of sense.

It's been years since I used anything I learned in getting my CPCU 20+ ago!