Several lawmakers have introduced a renewed push for a national firearm insurance act, called the Firearm Risk Protection Act. According to a press release, Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-New York) and eight other cosponsors have thrown their weight behind the proposal late last month.

“For too long, gun victims and society at large have borne the brunt of the costs of gun violence,” Maloney said in a statement. “My bill would change that by shifting some of that cost back onto those who own the weapons.”

Maloney stands firm behind the bill and is continuing to work with other politicians to advance the act. She says that the bill will, “require that gun owners carry liability insurance, just like car owners, to give innocent victims of gun violence some recourse if they are injured. 100,000 Americans are injured by guns every year. Carrying insurance is the responsible thing to do.”

The act, H.R 1369, requires the purchase of liability insurance coverage before buying a firearm. Gun owners who do not purchase liability insurance could face up to a $10,000 fine. Members of the armed services and law enforcement are exempt from this act.

Several states have introduced their own firearm liability legislation, including Maloney’s home state of New York. These proposals have not gone far past their introduction and some have been withdrawn due to overwhelming disapproval.

A similar insurance bill in Illinois–which required a $1 million liability coverage–was shot down earlier this year. Fox News reports that the lead supporter of the Illinois bill, Representative Kenneth Dunkin (D-Chicago), stated the price of insurance to be from $500 to $2,000. Opponents of the bill successfully argued that the coverage was too expensive for many gun owners and the bill was shelved after a 34-74 vote in the House.

Political experts believe that Maloney’s bill will face a similarly difficult fight.

Image from Stephen Z on the flickr Creative Commons

What's Your Reaction?

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

14 thoughts on “Legislators Introduce National Gun Insurance Act

  1. Mixing apples and oranges with the insurance, and does anybody really think the gang bangers and criminals are going to buy this crap… get real. You know, these Progressive Democrats are always touting how they are for the poor, elderly, minorities, etc., and freak out for simple things like a voter ID card; even when free. But when it comes to things like this, particularly firearms, it’s the hell with all of them, and they’re the ones most hurt by it all. All they’re trying to do is “price” an inherent right to bear arms out of the market for the average guy. The elite 1% like them though, being so special, get to keep theirs. Hypocrites all!

  2. Criminal misuse of firearms is higher per capita than among CCW holders yet the public is held to task for criminal acts committed by criminals, not the law abiding. If this is passed it is time for civil disobedience nation wide, every gun owner must refuse to comply.

  3. If I had to insure all my guns at that price I would need some Senators stealing tax money for me, not from me!
    Maloney’s is just full of Balony!

  4. Most guns sit in safes on private property for most of the year and do not hurt anyone. Not like motor vehicles that are out in the public on a daily basis for the most part. These politicians are really clueless people.

  5. Lawful gun owners have nothing to do with the mass executions, the crime in Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. What don”t the legislatures understand about the term “lawful gun owners”? It is obvious that the facts and statistics mean nothing to them unless they can spin them to their advantage. I read an article yesterday stating that 83% of the citizens were in favor of certain gun controls. I doubt the truth of the statement and the validity of the poll. I have an old saying that goes: Tell me what you want and I’ll prove it in a report!

  6. This is, of course, total BS!! Look at the causes of injury and let’s work on the top 25 before you even get to guns statistically. Every improper action by an individual carries liability. So why don’t all individuals carry personal liability insurance for any act that harms someone..why pick on just guns?

  7. It is sad that in today’s America we have such ignorant folks serving the people. This is another piece of dead legislation warranted by a idiot from New York. I now deeply believe that New York has poisoned their water thus resulting in total insanity of the people. Shove this down Chicago and see what happens…nah, it was dropped in the gun crazy bill in Illinois. Bring on the lawyers for another round of lawsuits against illegal laws made while hiking the fear factor fever.

  8. I do not know about the rest of you, but I am sick and tired of Insurance being used to RAPE the American public all in the name of necessity and safety. The only ones who are going to benefit from this one are the Insurance companies. In addition, this is simply another “back-door” attempt to leverage second amendments rights into nothingness. Simply put, the legislators are trying to make a lawful act into an unlawful one just like an assortment of other countries.

  9. Automobiles are out in public on a regular basis.Most guns are out only a few times a year for hunting and target shooting. Here in Canada, we get five million dollars in liability insurance through out gun club membership. I pay 75 dollars PER YEAR for my membership and that includes the insurance. Gun club/gun range membership is voluntary.

  10. Taking away the right of poor folks to defend their lives. I guess criminals will line up to get their policies. I don’t understand how some of these politicians keep from wandering into traffic on a regular basis.

  11. My guns hardly ever leave the house. Only a few times a year. My car on the other hand is out almost daily. Why should non violent law abiding gun owners require insurance when the risks are almost nil from them?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *