Regarding the Aug. 28 letter “ Liability for guns”: I’m trying to understand how a requirement for gun owner liability insurance would reduce crime.
Since criminals don’t follow the law, a requirement to carry insurance would likely be ignored. So either the writer is hoping for a defacto gun ban (that pesky old Bill of Rights) or he’s advocating that only affluent people should own guns. He would surely agree that a law effectively prohibiting anyone under a certain income level from protecting himself would be unjust.
What would come next – a sliding scale on insurance fees? A new government program that pays the insurance for the less fortunate? Also, I assume law enforcement organizations would have to comply. After all, they’re the ones transferring guns to the drug cartels, losing them on a regular basis and (according to the liberals) using them to murder “innocent” and “harmless” individuals.
Like most liberal proposals, this one is awash in naivete and hypocrisy; its only goal is to criminalize honest and law-abiding people and excuse/justify the behavior of criminals. If liberals really want things to change, they need to stop telling people that nothing they do, no matter how egregious, is ever their fault.
Digital Access for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.