Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Captain Stern

(2,249 posts)

9. The law seems like a good idea. It probably does no harm, and maybe some good.

Reply to Dial H For Hero (Original post)

Fri Jan 28, 2022, 11:46 AM

Jan 2022

However, the mandatory liability insurance they are proposing that gun owners have wouldn't have covered anything that the mass shooter at their rail yard did.

In my opinion the $25 annual fee for any gun owner is going to kill this law in court.

I think they shouldn't have tied those two things together.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

26 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gun Rights Group Sues to Block First U.S. Firearms Insurance Law [View all] Dial H For Hero Jan 2022 OP

Of course they did. spanone Jan 2022 #1

Hope your "gun-rights" group fails. Hoyt Jan 2022 #2

I agree rockfordfile Jan 2022 #6

We are against any law that allows the government to know what weapons we have. marie999 Jan 2022 #3

I suspect this law will be found unconstitutional. Time will tell. Dial H For Hero Jan 2022 #4

This has nothing to to do with that. Actually it's Neo-Nazis that would want to hide weapons rockfordfile Jan 2022 #7

The fee would allow the government to know who has weapons. marie999 Jan 2022 #8

California already has state wide firearms registration. Dial H For Hero Jan 2022 #10

And I'm sure that all the White supremists have all their weapons registered. marie999 Jan 2022 #12

We already have national registries on gun ownership. Xolodno Jan 2022 #23

Murder and Mass Mayhem Organization Sues for Rights to Bloodshed...corrected headline. Alexander Of Assyria Jan 2022 #5

The law seems like a good idea. It probably does no harm, and maybe some good. Captain Stern Jan 2022 #9

the challenge may be based on onethatcares Jan 2022 #11

The NAGR should lose, and lose badly gratuitous Jan 2022 #13

Nothing but symbolic fluff ripcord Jan 2022 #14

de facto 2A restriction... won't survive it's first trip to Court. WarGamer Jan 2022 #15

So, is mandated auto insurance also unconstitutional? nt crickets Jan 2022 #16

Auto ownership isn't a constitutional right. Angleae Jan 2022 #19

So what? Liability is liability, whether from cars or guns. nt crickets Jan 2022 #20

Not everything in life is covered by specific liability insurance. former9thward Jan 2022 #21

The courts long ago said you can't place a tax specificially on a constitutional right. Angleae Jan 2022 #22

The insurance for cars is to exercise the privilege of driving on public roads. NutmegYankee Jan 2022 #24

Sounds like they don't want to be responsible gun owners! Emile Jan 2022 #17

Easy solution.... Happy Hoosier Jan 2022 #18

I'm not surprised by this sakabatou Jan 2022 #25

This is going to depend on how it is worded. Xolodno Jan 2022 #26