Skip to comments.Firearms Risk Protection Act Will Stick Gun Owners With $10,000 Fine
Posted on 04/02/2013 8:11:30 AM PDT by EXCH54FE
While the Socialists are finally coming out about the reality of the costs that Obamacare will bring and the utter monstrosity it is, others of the Socialist Democrat Party are pushing for gun owners to be forced to purchase liability insurance for gun owners. Those that dont could face fines of $10,000. We told you that when you open the floodgates of allowing the Federal government to mandate purchasing a product there would be more to come. Maloneycare is just another in a long line of legislation that will be coming down the pipe.
Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) introduced her bill, H.R. 1369, along with eight other Socialists in the Democrat Party saying it would be the first bill to require liability insurance of gun buyers nationwide.
The Firearms Risk Protection Act of 2013 requires gun owners to have a qualified liability insurance policy before they can even buy a gun, a clear violation of the Second Amendment, which Socialists swear to uphold then seek to undermine.
However, this isnt just about citizens who wish to purchase a firearm. Its about those of us who already own them. Maloney and her comrades want to impose a $10,000 fine if you dont purchase liability insurance.
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomoutpost.com ...
Maloney and her comrades want to impose a $10,000 fine if you dont purchase liability insurance
and a $10,000 fine if you do have liability insurance ,just to keep it fair
Chief Traitor John Roberts will not allow something so blatantly unconstitutional.
Who is selling these policies?
Not paying for insurance or fine. Legal or not.
Glad you asked...I think it’s called Maloney Insurance Co.
So... Since I have an umbrella policy, I guess I’m covered.
Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 3/21/2013
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-7] - 3/21/2013
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 3/21/2013
Rep Lynch, Stephen F. [MA-8] - 3/21/2013
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 3/21/2013
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 3/21/2013
Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] - 3/21/2013
Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-3] - 3/21/2013
SEC. 2. PROHIBITIONS ON SALE OF FIREARM TO, AND PURCHASE OF FIREARM BY, A PERSON NOT COVERED BY APPROPRIATE LIABILITY INSURANCE.
(a) Prohibitions- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(aa)(1)(A)(i) It shall be unlawful for a person to purchase a firearm unless, at the time of the purchase, the purchaser presents to the seller proof that the purchaser is covered by a qualified liability insurance policy.
`(ii) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell a firearm unless, at the time of the sale, the seller verifies that the purchaser is covered by a qualified liability insurance policy.
`(iii) It shall be unlawful for a person who owns a firearm purchased on or after the effective date of this subsection not to be covered by a qualified liability insurance policy.
`(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the purchase or sale of a firearm for the use of the United States or any department or agency of the United States, or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State.
`(2) In paragraph (1), the term `qualified liability insurance policy' means, with respect to the purchaser of a firearm, a policy that--
`(A) provides liability insurance covering the purchaser specifically for losses resulting from use of the firearm while it is owned by the purchaser; and
`(B) is issued by an insurer licensed or authorized to provide the coverage by the State insurance regulatory authority for the State in which the purchaser resides.'.
(b) Penalty- Section 924 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(q) Whoever violates section 922(aa) shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to conduct engaged in after the 180-day period that begins with the date of the enactment of this Act.
I’m fine w/ that, as long as the poofters are required to buy butt-sex insurance. /s
Next step - mandate insurance companies offer such insurance.
I'm sure there is no such thing now...
So, the libs are now promoting NRA membership? I just received an email last week from the NRA offering affordable insurance on my firearms.
Just guessing but wouldn’t this be akin to registration of firearms. I would suppose that the insurance company would need a list of ALL firearms in the house complete with serial numbers.
The same company that makes 7 round "clips" for New York.
Don'tcha just love mandates for things that don't exist.
Sounds like a back door method to gun registration. You dont necessarily know the guns that are owned but you know who owns guns.
Make it a tax and it’s a slam dunk. Just ask Roberts.
** GUN CONTROL is not about guns. It is about CONTROL **
i’m not. homosexuals engage in far more risky behavior than law abiding gun owners do.
The only way to defeat the Communists.. Democrats is to stamd up to them and fight them. Since 2012 demonestrated that they now control the election process, at least to the extent that they need to, voting them out of office is out of the question. We are at this point in time down to two options, surrender or fight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.