Maryland House Democrats introduced a controversial gun safety bill requiring gun owners to forfeit their ability to wear or carry without firearm liability insurance.
Introduced by Del. Terri Hill, D-Howard County, the legislation would prohibit the āwear or carryā of a gun anywhere in the state unless the individual has obtained a liability insurance policy of at least $300,000.
"A person may not wear or carry a firearm unless the person has obtained and it covered by liability insurance issued by an insurer authorized to do business in the State under the Insurance Article to cover claims for property damage, bodily injury, or death arising from an accident resulting from the personās use or storage of a firearm or up to $300,000 for damages arising from the same incident, in addition to interest and costs,ā the proposed Maryland legislation reads.
Obviously, if no guns exist, no guns can be used. That isnāt even worth you bringing up. But since they do exist and are present, this is just a silly money grab and/or a way to restrict and even further incarcerate the poor half of the country. Making someone pay money to be allowed to carry around anything is just asinine. What next? Shall we charge you a fee for your propane bottle because you can make it explode? Your pencil because you can stab someone with it? Charge extra if you live above the 2nd story because you could push someone to their death?
There are literally millions of people who conceal carry every day. The ones who would pay insurance or simply stop carrying arenāt the ones hurting people. The āinsuranceā would just be for them. It wouldnāt be for the people you want to worry about.
Iām not saying if there were no guns, but fewer, and more tightly regulated. I think this particular law is not a solution by any means to be clear, but at least itās something. You make the same points here that I see against gun control and regulation more broadly, so Iām speaking to that as well.
I mean the difference between a gun and that stuff that a gun is designed to kill things ā humans. Itās not exactly comparable to a pencil or even propane which is comparatively very safe. The US has an extremely high per capita rate of firearm violence, even ignoring suicides which are a huge problem. We donāt have a propane problem
I am hopeful laws that have a bigger, more positive effect can be passed
Iām saying that creating a law or regulation that doesnāt in any way reduce the amount of guns in a violent or potentially violent personās hands doesnāt do anything at all.
How many people who arenāt already felons and not allowed to have so much as a knife on them anyhow and are going to pay an insurance fee to carry, and be someone to worry about needlessly shooting someone while away from their home while theyāre carrying do you think there are? Almost all the shootings that arenāt self defense and are outside of homes is done by people who already werenāt even allowed to carry to begin with. All the big mass shootings never seem like theyāre done on a whim, so those people obviously wouldnāt be deterred by an insurance requirement at all.