|
|
Post by Forever Sunshine on Apr 6, 2013 17:44:02 GMT -5
So, regardless of what the insurance is for . . . those being responsible shouldn't have to pay for insurance? So, If I am healthy . . . don't smoke, eat all the right foods, don't drink alcohol, etc., etc., I shouldn't have to pay for health insurance then. OK make that happen please. ;D
Those who live in the flood plains are required to buy flood insurance. Those who don't live in the flood plain don't have to buy it. Why can't the same thing be for guns?
|
|
|
|
Post by pilgrim47 on Apr 6, 2013 17:50:13 GMT -5
I'm sure the vast majority of car owners are law abiding as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 7:53:31 GMT -5
So, show me a financial report on the monetary damages caused by law abiding gun owners that demonstrates a "need" for insurance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forever Sunshine on Apr 7, 2013 8:02:35 GMT -5
Show me a financial report on those who take care of themselves and are healthy that demonstrates a need for insurance.
Show me a financial report on those who are law abiding drivers and have never once had an accident that demonstrates a need for insurance.
Etc, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 8:25:44 GMT -5
Um law abiding drivers DO have accidents. They are called "accidents" even though you are following the laws. Healthy people also have accidents. They get run over by buses, break their legs skiing and all manner of things that are expensive. So, i will wait while you produce the financial damage of my owning a gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by janieshere on Apr 7, 2013 8:27:30 GMT -5
So, show me a financial report on the monetary damages caused by law abiding gun owners that demonstrates a "need" for insurance. So, who should be responsible for the health care bills, funerals, etc, associated from the loss (or carelessness thereof) such 'legal' gun owners? Below are just a few examples of how the guns were purchased 'legally' to commit such atrocities, NOT counting the most recent shooting in Connecticut where the gun was also purchased 'legally.' Someone other than the innocent need to responsible for the loss to others caused by guns, period. If the gunowners cannot keep the guns out of the reach of such madmen? Then you should be held responsible! Not the innocents in this world! Three guns used in the massacre at Columbine High School were bought last year by Dylan Klebold's girlfriend shortly after her 18th birthday, investigators said Monday. extras.denverpost.com/news/shot0427a.htmWeapons: Of the 143 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally. www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 8:29:39 GMT -5
Sue the pants of the people who purchased the guns legally.
|
|
|
|
Post by janieshere on Apr 7, 2013 8:31:54 GMT -5
Sue the pants of the people who purchased the guns legally. Sure, one could sue, but realistically if the person has nothing...then one will get nothing....You know this as well as I do, fuzz.. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 8:41:24 GMT -5
People text and drive. Let's make people buy Phone insurance. People eat and drive. Let's require "Drive Through" insurance. People do all manner of stupid across the board. Let's require insurance for every act. Let's require Sex Insurance on everyone because some men get women pregnant and leave and it falls on the taxpayers anyway. So, you should be paying big bucks monthly to that pool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forever Sunshine on Apr 7, 2013 8:44:45 GMT -5
Um law abiding drivers DO have accidents. They are called "accidents" even though you are following the laws. Healthy people also have accidents. They get run over by buses, break their legs skiing and all manner of things that are expensive. So, i will wait while you produce the financial damage of my owning a gun.
And gun owners have accidents with guns as well.
And my comment wasn't about accidents. As a matter of fact, I stated drivers who never have accidents.
And yes, healthy people have accidents from time to time too but that's not the issue. They're healthy and do everything right to make sure they don't get sick. So why should they have to buy insurance?
I hear all the time about people hunting shooting another human claiming to think it's a deer or bear or . . .
I hear people use the excuse of "self defense" all the time too when there was no threat.
And what if the gun is stolen? Insurance could protect the gun owner. |
|
|
|
Post by janieshere on Apr 7, 2013 8:58:13 GMT -5
Well, my position is this (and not very popular I might add) Guns..should NOT be sold ANYWHERE except in legitimate gun stores. Strict background searches should be initiated. However, most of the ones doing the killing DON'T have any previous issues with the law. So, what now? Maybe before anyone can own a gun..there should be all kinds of background searches of ANY known mental issues concerning ANYONE that resides in the home? Even then, this will not stop the lunatics.
All assault weapons should be outlawed and confiscated! This is my take on the gun issue. No one needs to be own these types of guns for hunting, or protection. They are designed for one thing and one thing only...to kill.
Make it tougher for people to own these weapons and maybe such shootings that has been going on, will at least be decreased (one can at least hope).
As far as your right to the second amendment? My right, my kids right, my grand-kids right, to live in a safer environment--- and this includes going to school of all places!!!!! Supersedes that right of yours to bear arms!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2013 9:34:17 GMT -5
Well Janie, most of these kids are shot in "Gun Free" zones. And, lots of crime is happening in "Gun free" states. So go ahead, outlaw all legal ownership of guns. If you think that is going to change crime, you are seriously deluding yourself. The ONLY thing you are doing is harming yourself and your family by making them sitting ducks. QUACK!
|
|
|
|
Post by janieshere on Apr 7, 2013 12:42:00 GMT -5
Well Janie, most of these kids are shot in "Gun Free" zones. And, lots of crime is happening in "Gun free" states. So go ahead, outlaw all legal ownership of guns. If you think that is going to change crime, you are seriously deluding yourself. The ONLY thing you are doing is harming yourself and your family by making them sitting ducks. QUACK! Fuzz, a lot of these killings are from kids that get their guns from members of their own family! Either they already have access to these guns OR they are kept where they can be easily stolen from the parents, grandparents, etc. With something as dangerous as a gun...there should be stricter regulations and harsher consequences for being an irresponsible gun owner! Also, please tell me what is the reason for owning an assault weapon? I sure can't think of any reason other than the power it possesses and the 'fun' of shooting it, according to the ones that own these things. That's not a good enough reason to be able to legally own this 'deadly' weapon, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by pilgrim47 on Apr 7, 2013 15:58:46 GMT -5
If you're out hunting quail with a friend and he shoots you in the face, wouldn't your health insurance take care of things?
Assuming you have health insurance that is...
|
|
© 2011 -- 
Crap, the Name Escapes Me 
