Mandate to buy gun liability insurance?

[rjmacs]

Bill in NC wrote:
Whether one agrees with it or not, Heller is the law of the land.

How do you mandate insurance given the above?

Wouldn't SCOTUS just treat any mandatory insurance scheme as the equivalent of a poll tax?

It depends on the burden created by the requirement. It's certainly not the equivalent of a poll tax. Rights, whether collective or individual, are not absolute. They can be infringed by the government, constitutionally, as long as the government has a compelling interest in infringing the right. Hence - the government can abridge the second-amendment rights of inmates, because it would be impossible to contain prisoners safely if they carried guns. The courts, including the SCotUS, determine the point of balance between the citizen's rights and the government's interests.

The constitutional case against requiring liability insurance is that the burden placed on citizens by the regulatory requirement is not justified by the government's interest in regulating gun ownership to provide for the public good. Arguments to the contrary certainly can be made, especially if such insurance would not be prohibitively expensive (and therefore, a de facto deprivation of any right to bear arms).