Mandatory Gun Liability Insurance; Could Michigan Be Next?
The attack from the Democrats against the 2nd amendment continues with a new approach. This time they are attempting to mandate liability insurance for your guns.
This is coming from the very liberal city of San Jose California, one of the richest cities in the country. Reason magazine is reporting that last Tuesday in a unanimous vote the San Jose City Council approved two first-of-its-kind gun control attempts.
- Require every gun owner to purchase liability insurance coverage for all of the firearms they own. They did make one exception, the insurance could not legally cover intentional harm caused by the gun owner.
- Require that gun owners pay an annual fee to the city to reimburse taxpayers for the police and medical services incurred by the city for responding to gun-related injuries and death.
Sounds like a poll tax to me. How can a government charge a fee before you can exercise a written in plain English, constitutional right?
The city asked a nonprofit research group called Pacific Institute for Research Evaluation (PIRE), to prepare a report on the costs of gun violence to San Jose taxpayers. In a preliminary report, PIRE believes the costs to federal, state, and local governments from gun violence in San Josie approximately $39.7 million.
Interesting since they are not making anyone pay for “protestors” blocking a major highway in the city.
In a press release San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo stated:
"While the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, it does not require taxpayers to subsidize gun ownership…We won't magically end gun violence, but we will stop paying for it."
A law professor at the University of Wyoming, George Mocsary, believes the city council has raised some constitutional questions. One of those questions is what happens if no insurance companies would actually create any insurance products to cover this type of liability. If no insurance company creates such products then the city would effectively be prohibiting their residents from owning guns and that would be against the 2nd Amendment.
Mr. Mocsary stated:
"You can't intentionally ban something indirectly if you can't ban it directly”
Can this tactic to get around the 2nd Amendment come to Michigan? You bet it could. If it is deemed constitutional you can bet your bottom dollar that any city council or commission that does not respect the U.S. Constitution will pass an ordinance such as this as soon as possible.
Remember what Benjamin Franklin said:
“Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”