Skip to comments.Require Felons to carry insurance also!
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!
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.
I am sure they would comply.
So simple, its absolutely brilliant. No insurance? Go back to jail.
I wish. Unfortunately, it violates their 5th Amendment rights, and to liberals, is considered an 8th Amendment violation.
The damn democrats want to make it expensive to own a gun. Why in hell not make it to expensive to be a criminal?
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.
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
I’ll carry gun insurance right after that cow makes illegal aliens...er...illegal democrats carry carry car insurance.
Like that’ll ever happen.
Kudos to you! An excellent answer to those wanting gun owners to pay for additional insurance.
Several USSC rulings....these are just off the top of my head:
Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board
I could find more...but I'm at work.
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.
“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?
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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)
“having a criminal admit to having or registering a gun IS self incrimination.”
And having John Q Public register a gun is what?
It could be done. Landmark Legal Foundation (Mark Levin) could make the case for sure.
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?
Require legislators to carry liability insurance for the damage thy do!!!!
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?
All good examples! The list of “potential” threats to society goes on and on. Why should we pick on guns only?
Now this is a great point!!!! I’m in!
“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?
If they are going to reach out after gun owners than they sure as hell can “reach out” after criminals...
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.
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.