What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[Bob in Mich]

I didn't see discussion of gun liability insurance or gun owner liability insurance.  The idea is that there would be a pool of money to compensate those wronged by the gun or gun owner, or their beneficiaries anyway.  This guy raises an interesting point, imo

 

----------------------

Justin Wolfers, professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, wrote:

The real problem with gun ownership is that they involve "externalities," which is economist-speak for the fact that your gun may be used to hurt others. For instance, when Nancy Lanza purchased her Bushmaster AR-15, she probably weighed the benefits of owning the gun — the joy of ownership — with the price (about $800). But it's unlikely she considered the loss, pain and grief that might follow if it were used by her son to kill 26 innocents. When people fail to consider the broader social costs of choices like buying a gun, they're more likely to do them, and society suffers.

----------------------. 

 

If you think of how a 'gun owner liability insurance company' would determine insurance rates for a person, it becomes clear that there are a multitude of important factors including age, sex, police interactions, mental health reports, military record, employment experience, location/state, number of other guns, recent purchases of guns/ammo, and probably several more factors.  The more of this information that can be available at point of sale, the better.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Bob in Mich

[row_33]

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

cue up the SJWs for the 1,000,000th time telling us "the demonstration had PEACEFUL INTENTIONS"

 

yeah, right...

 

[Commsvet11]

2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

I didn't see discussion of gun liability insurance or gun owner liability insurance.  The idea is that there would be a pool of money to compensate those wronged by the gun or gun owner.  This guy raises an interesting point, imo

 

----------------------

Justin Wolfers, professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, wrote:

The real problem with gun ownership is that they involve "externalities," which is economist-speak for the fact that your gun may be used to hurt others. For instance, when Nancy Lanza purchased her Bushmaster AR-15, she probably weighed the benefits of owning the gun — the joy of ownership — with the price (about $800). But it's unlikely she considered the loss, pain and grief that might follow if it were used by her son to kill 26 innocents. When people fail to consider the broader social costs of choices like buying a gun, they're more likely to do them, and society suffers.

----------------------. 

 

If you think of how a 'gun owner liability insurance company' would determine insurance rates for a person, it becomes clear that there are a multitude of important factors including age, sex, police interactions, mental health reports, military record, employment experience, location/state, number of other guns, recent purchases of guns/ammo, and probably several more factors.  The more of this information that can be available at point of sale, the better.

What exactly is insured? I’m seeing a charity, not insurance.

[row_33]

libs want to ban all private ownership of any gun, except for themselves and their friends who can be armed

 

if they don't admit this they are lying the whole discussion

 

 

[Bob in Mich]

27 minutes ago, Commsvet11 said:

What exactly is insured? I’m seeing a charity, not insurance.

 

Here is the article that I saw U of Mich professor quoted

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/01/02/168231113/should-gun-owners-have-to-buy-liability-insurance

 

Edited February 27, 2018 by Bob in Mich

[LeviF]

1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Here is the article that I saw U of Mich professor quoted

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/01/02/168231113/should-gun-owners-have-to-buy-liability-insurance

 

 

I actually have DGU insurance.  Just another one of those things you hope you never have to cash in.

 

Changing topics, an assault weapons ban is on the table in IL, again.  And the same people who support an AWB also support banning body armor.  I wonder what the commonality is there...hmm...

[IDBillzFan]

3 hours ago, B-Man said:

Matt Walsh..............GOOD QUESTION:

 

Frankly, I think the Orlando night club shooting was a larger example  of a shooting they cared less about. You have 48 people murdered, some of them reportedly as point-blank range.

 

Now factor in the fact that it was a gay nightclub.  You can't even use the word 'gay' to mean happy without the entire media world jumping in your schitt for being intolerant.

 

 

Why did that story die so quickly while this one keeps everyone in twisted panties?

 

[boyst]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

God damn that B word at the end needs to chill.

1 hour ago, LeviF91 said:

 

I actually have DGU insurance.  Just another one of those things you hope you never have to cash in.

 

Changing topics, an assault weapons ban is on the table in IL, again.  And the same people who support an AWB also support banning body armor.  I wonder what the commonality is there...hmm...

I'm not seeing your point in the latter.

[LeviF]

5 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

 

I'm not seeing your point in the latter.

 

It's a DR-style tinfoil hat type thing, but not really tinfoil hatty because it's true.  Body armor isn't gonna "kill people." So why are the "guns are only good for killing people!!!!" crowd also for banning body armor?  Because the commonality between guns and body armor is this: people who possess them are harder to control.

[boyst]

Just now, LeviF91 said:

 

It's a DR-style tinfoil hat type thing, but not really tinfoil hatty because it's true.  Body armor isn't gonna "kill people." So why are the "guns are only good for killing people!!!!" crowd also for banning body armor?  Because the commonality between guns and body armor is this: people who possess them are harder to control.

Thanks sweetie

[LeviF]

1 minute ago, Boyst62 said:

Thanks sweetie

 

You're welcome babe

[B-Man]

[3rdnlng]

19 minutes ago, B-Man said:

You have no heart..........................................................................said PP to the fetus. Once you give them their heart whatever will they come for next?

[DC Tom]

6 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

We need rock control!

[TH3]

On 2/26/2018 at 6:33 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Of course that's not what he said. At. All. 

 

But that's the spin... so I guess it's the same thing in today's world. 

 

Well - he never actually does say anything really does he?....Gives dipshitts like you cover to lick his balls at every opportunity

[Koko78]

40 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

We need rock control!

 

An assault rock ban, or at least heavy restrictions and background checks, are in order.

[Justice]

You laugh but I know a place where you can get 10 to 20 years for throwing one at a soldier. 20 years. 

[/dev/null]

46 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

We need rock control!

 

Deplorables clinging to their rocks

[DC Tom]

7 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

An assault rock ban, or at least heavy restrictions and background checks, are in order.

 

But then how will I ever get a rock with a silencer and bayonet lug?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

3 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

Deplorables clinging to their rocks

 

#bitterclingers