Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Require Felons to carry insurance also!
04/03/13

Posted on 04/03/2013 10:47:17 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway

Ok! Lets get real here. If the gun control whackos are going to require gun owners to carry insurance then convicted felons need to carry insurance also! If they are going to make you pay to own a gun then make conficted felons pay to be a criminal. Then when these idiots destroy property or worse injure or kill someone, their premiums go through the roof and they must be forced to compinsate those whose lives they have screwed up!


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: chitchat; vanity

1 posted on 04/03/2013 10:47:17 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

Oh man, why didn’t I think of that?

In order to be paroled or early-released, you have to put up a bond sufficient to pay for your re-capture.


2 posted on 04/03/2013 10:50:41 AM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

hell yes!


3 posted on 04/03/2013 10:53:01 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

I am sure they would comply.


4 posted on 04/03/2013 10:56:27 AM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

So simple, its absolutely brilliant. No insurance? Go back to jail.


5 posted on 04/03/2013 10:56:54 AM PDT by fhayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

I wish. Unfortunately, it violates their 5th Amendment rights, and to liberals, is considered an 8th Amendment violation.


6 posted on 04/03/2013 10:57:55 AM PDT by DCBryan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fhayek

The damn democrats want to make it expensive to own a gun. Why in hell not make it to expensive to be a criminal?


7 posted on 04/03/2013 10:58:49 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

If we are going down that road we should require all democrat politicians to carry a few hundred million dollars of insurance against making stupid laws that destroys wealth and kills people.

It’s a good thing.


8 posted on 04/03/2013 11:02:13 AM PDT by Iron Munro (Welcome to Obama-Land - EVERYTHING NOT FORBIDDEN IS COMPULSORY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Fifth Amendment
n
1. an amendment to the US Constitution stating that no person may be compelled to testify against himself and that no person may be tried for a second time on a charge for which he has already been acquitted
(Law)

How so?


9 posted on 04/03/2013 11:03:29 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

I’ll carry gun insurance right after that cow makes illegal aliens...er...illegal democrats carry carry car insurance.

Like that’ll ever happen.


10 posted on 04/03/2013 11:07:09 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

Kudos to you! An excellent answer to those wanting gun owners to pay for additional insurance.


11 posted on 04/03/2013 11:10:03 AM PDT by BipolarBob (Happy Hunger Games! May the odds be ever in your favor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway
How So?

Several USSC rulings....these are just off the top of my head:

Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board

Leary v. United States

Haynes v. United States

I could find more...but I'm at work.

12 posted on 04/03/2013 11:14:53 AM PDT by DCBryan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

I think LEOs and all officers of the government need to carry malfeasance insurance as a condition of employment.

Several other conditions need to be applied, but basically, make it too costly to be a petty little tyrant.


13 posted on 04/03/2013 11:18:38 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

“must be forced to compinsate those whose lives they have screwed up!”

They already do. It is called the “impact panel fee” and it is assessed even when there is no specified victim. Did you know that many felony charges do not involve damage to another person or to property?


14 posted on 04/03/2013 11:25:34 AM PDT by CSM (Keeper of the Dave Ramsey Ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Is it based on the idea you can’t label someone a criminal? but they are calling gun owners potential criminals at the same time for the harm their guns may do in the future.


15 posted on 04/03/2013 11:29:45 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CSM

Does every criminal pay this fee and if so is it law in most states? Yes I am aware that many felony charges do not involve damage to property or persons.


16 posted on 04/03/2013 11:33:27 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

Its all a whack left plan to seperate you from your guns. The criminals will still have them and get them. You will just have to ask the perp 3:00 am in the morning after he breaks into your house whether you get to live or die...


17 posted on 04/03/2013 11:36:40 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

No, criminals would NOT be required to carry insurance because it would be self incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. SCOTUS has spoken on this: having a criminal admit to having or registering a gun IS self incrimination.


18 posted on 04/03/2013 11:38:25 AM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

Or, how about politicians having to carry inusrance. Look at the amount of time and cost is involved when one of these people get caught in their various bad behaviors. Their constituancy should be reimbursed for the cost of having to replace them or the replace the funds that have been diverted

All policitians should have to carry at least $1M for the owest level of elected postiions and it should go up from their.

Consider the percentage of legal gun owners that are involed in gun related crimes and then compare to the percentage of politicians that are involved in crimes of using theri postion for illegal activity or breach of pledge.


19 posted on 04/03/2013 11:42:01 AM PDT by dirtymac (Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

I would narrow your idea down to people who are felons due to committing crimes while armed and make them pay even more liability insurance if they committed this crime with an illegal weapon (gun)


20 posted on 04/03/2013 11:45:19 AM PDT by dennisw (too much of a good thing is a bad thing Joe Pine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

“having a criminal admit to having or registering a gun IS self incrimination.”

And having John Q Public register a gun is what?


21 posted on 04/03/2013 11:45:31 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

It could be done. Landmark Legal Foundation (Mark Levin) could make the case for sure.


22 posted on 04/03/2013 11:47:01 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

How about gays having to carry liability insurances against them spreading AIDS and other abominations and STDS. Register these idiots. How come we have no registry of AIDS carriers? IE disease carriers?


23 posted on 04/03/2013 11:48:03 AM PDT by dennisw (too much of a good thing is a bad thing Joe Pine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

Require legislators to carry liability insurance for the damage thy do!!!!


24 posted on 04/03/2013 11:48:51 AM PDT by RAY (God Bless the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

You of course realize that if enough serial killers live in a particular democrip district and voted that they would be protected from registry, right?


25 posted on 04/03/2013 11:49:40 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

All good examples! The list of “potential” threats to society goes on and on. Why should we pick on guns only?


26 posted on 04/03/2013 11:52:33 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

Now this is a great point!!!! I’m in!


27 posted on 04/03/2013 12:19:20 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Bill of Rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

“Does every criminal pay this fee and if so is it law in most states?”

I don’t know of any that don’t. It is a standard line item on the list of “punitive actions” and if there is no actual victim, then the fee is actually handed over to MADD. I have to admit, I mis-named it in my other post, it is actually called the “Victim Impact Panel Fine” or something very close to that...

“Yes I am aware that many felony charges do not involve damage to property or persons.”

Then what is the point of increasing government reach to force these folks to buy an insurance product to protect no one from damage to their person or property?


28 posted on 04/03/2013 12:28:05 PM PDT by CSM (Keeper of the Dave Ramsey Ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CSM

If they are going to reach out after gun owners than they sure as hell can “reach out” after criminals...


29 posted on 04/03/2013 1:08:20 PM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

So, your response to government over reach is to advocate more government over reach? And we wonder why the GOP is confused and on its last breath.

The fact is that we won this argument in 1791. It is settled. No response to their idiocy is even required. However, if you feel a need to debate the lunatics, then use an approach that at least is on the side of NOT increasing the scope of the government.


30 posted on 04/03/2013 1:20:38 PM PDT by CSM (Keeper of the Dave Ramsey Ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson