04-04-2013, 12:00 AM
cbelt3 wrote:
FWIW.. it's important to recognize that auto insurance came about due to tort issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_ins..._insurance
However if a firearm is used to injure or kill people, there are existing criminal laws to handle the problem. Many states allow 'personal bonds' to be posted in the place of insurance.
Requiring insurance as a financial guarantee against the commission of a heinous crime is a bit odd. Since I assume we're not selling 'license to kill', I'm back to my original thesis.
It's a back-channel way to ban gun ownership.
Exactly like mandatory auto insurance is a back-channel way to ban car ownership.
And mandatory health insurance is a back-channel way to ban health.