Tags: Gun Rights | Gun | owners | liability | Maloney

Insurance Bill Targets Gun Owners

By
Wednesday, 03 Apr 2013 10:24 AM Current | Bio | Archive

Here’s an idea that would save taxpayers millions of dollars and apply a free market solution to a nagging problem: Require any legislator introducing unconstitutional or publicity-motivated legislation to have a personal liability insurance policy large enough to cover the legal bills when the feds are sued to overturn the bill.

If the bill withstands judicial scrutiny, then the legislator is not liable. But if the bill is overturned, their insurance policy would reimburse the taxpayer.

My inspiration for the vital legislation is Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who recently introduced a bill in Congress that would require all gun owners to have a mandatory liability insurance policy or be subject to a $10,000 fine.
 
She justified her absurd bill by saying, “For too long, gun victims and society at large have borne the brunt of the costs of gun violence. My bill would change that by shifting some of that cost back onto those who own the weapons.”

Actually her bill would not do anything of the kind because it is unconstitutional on its face. My bill, however, would either prevent publicity hounds like Maloney from introducing ridiculous bills or would save the taxpayer from defending the bills in court.

Maloney is one of those odd leftists who purports to be devastated by the idea that a child might be wounded by a bullet, but is completely unconcerned about the 1.2 million babies that die under the abortionist’s knife each year.

The determining factor in whether or not Maloney is concerned about a particular child’s death is evidently whether or not the parents are upset enough about the child’s passing to contribute to her campaign or appear in a news conference.

Maloney justifies her bill by comparing liability insurance for autos to liability insurance for guns, yet try as I might, I am unable to find any reference to automobiles in the Constitution, while firearms have a dedicated amendment.

It might be useful to actually read the Second Amendment: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” That is pretty clear to anyone who is not a leftist.

But what specifically does “infringe” mean? It’s defined as either “act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: ‘infringe on his privacy’” or requiring gun owners to buy liability insurance.

Maloney’s bill isn’t worth the toner it takes to print it, yet she feels vindicated because it got her in the newspaper. If she is sincere about preventing deaths from dangerous products, Maloney would do better by requiring hammer owners to have a liability insurance policy.

This bill has its advantages: More people are killed by hammer-wielding attackers each year than die by being shot by an “assault rifle” — and hammers are not protected in the Constitution.
 
Michael Reagan is the son of President Ronald Reagan. He is the founder and chairman of The Reagan Group and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation. Read more reports from Michael Reagan — Click Here Now.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

© Mike Reagan

 
1Like our page
2Share
Reagan
Here’s an idea that would save taxpayers millions of dollars and apply a free market solution to a nagging problem: Require any legislator introducing unconstitutional or publicity-motivated legislation to have a personal liability insurance policy large enough to cover the legal bills.
Gun,owners,liability,Maloney
511
2013-24-03
Wednesday, 03 Apr 2013 10:24 AM
Newsmax Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved