Bob
6.5 Creedmoor
I had insurance on my own, but Cuomo took it away.
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966)
Fuck 'em.
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966)
Fuck 'em.
According to Kevin Parker, the approved targeted easy payout policies in his bill were said to run $2000.00 each. So it looks like 400 a year for a 5 year policy but higher if there is more than one handgun on your permit since liability in his proposal follows the gun including injuries following theft and unauthorized use.They will not pass it until the NRA “investigation “ is done. The requirement goes against Cuomo’s narrative.
A million dollar policy won’t cost as much as one thinks. The liability on gun ownership is so low that a million dollar policy was not expensive.
they should have called it GunCare .. you know ..
"If you like your guns...."Thank you! I was going to say this is like ObozoCare for guns...
Don’t get me wrong. It’s an unconstitutional requirement. But something I got anyway.Jeez, don't let Emperor Monkeyface hear that! Anyhow, the insurance is the equivalent of a poll tax.
You don't have that. This policy is prohibited from providing ANY coverage or benefits for the policy holder (no criminal lawyer, lawyers would represent the financial underwriter, no bail, no court costs, and judgements against the gun owner are not limited to the coverage). It is a pool of money guaranteed to payout to anyone injured and their families (including misunderstood yoots or predators shot / wounded by a gunowner protecting their family). This will be like winning the lottery for a "they were turning their life around" criminal's surviving family.Don’t get me wrong. It’s an unconstitutional requirement. But something I got anyway.
Personally, it wouldn't be a bad investment for someone who carries to have some kind of insurance because legal fees to defend yourself would surely be astronomical. But to force it upon people is completely unconstitutional.Don’t get me wrong. It’s an unconstitutional requirement. But something I got anyway.
Personally, it wouldn't be a bad investment for someone who carries to have some kind of insurance because legal fees to defend yourself would surely be astronomical. But to force it upon people is completely unconstitutional.
You don't have that. This policy is prohibited from providing ANY coverage or benefits for the policy holder (no criminal lawyer, lawyers would represent the financial underwriter, no bail, no court costs, and judgements against the gun owner are not limited to the coverage). It is a pool of money guaranteed to payout to anyone injured and their families (including misunderstood yoots or predators shot / wounded by a gunowner protecting their family). This will be like winning the lottery for a "they were turning their life around" criminal's surviving family.
No, I have a policy.You don't have that. This policy is prohibited from providing ANY coverage or benefits for the policy holder (no criminal lawyer, lawyers would represent the financial underwriter, no bail, no court costs, and judgements against the gun owner are not limited to the coverage). It is a pool of money guaranteed to payout to anyone injured and their families (including misunderstood yoots or predators shot / wounded by a gunowner protecting their family). This will be like winning the lottery for a "they were turning their life around" criminal's surviving family.
I feel the same way about seatbelt laws.Don’t get me wrong. It’s an unconstitutional requirement. But something I got anyway.
Never trust a skell wearing a bow tie.
Wonder how this would affect me. I am about to write my PPO to change my CCW permit from resident to non-resident.
So..., now that I live in NC, and all of my firearms are here, will I still be forced to get said BS insurance?