Maryland bill would force gun owners to get $300K liability insurance to wear or carry | WBFF
foxbaltimore.com
As the bill is currently written, local and state law enforcement officers are not exempt from the insurance requirement.

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 “wear or carry” 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 person’s use or storage of a firearm or up to $300,000 for damages arising from the same incident, in addition to interest and costs,” the proposed Maryland legislation reads.

  • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
    01·
    9 months ago

    Yes, atf form 4473 which coincides with an FBI background check to verify the info

    Okay, so we’re in agreement that you think filling out a form is hard. Don’t worry though, the pro-gun community has got your back and that form isn’t needed for private sales.

    Well, turns out, that if you’re under 18 or have a history of felony animal abuse, you can’t pass that! “Threats of death and rape” seems to be more of a “I don’t feel like dealing with this” scenario from the cops, fix that, not being able to protect yourself.

    We’re really starting to find some common ground now with you acknowledging that the current laws and proceedures aren’t working.

    Unfortunately, you seem confused about whose problem it is again. These are the laws you’re defending, conspicuously failing and resulting in the deaths of children.

    If you want me to implement laws I support, I’m happy to do that, but you’re not going to like them. On the bright side, if they habitually fail and arm terrorists, abusers and criminals, then you can demand I fix the laws.

    And I will, because my laws don’t rely on people having an acceptable amount of innocent people murdered because of proceedural mistakes or poor coverage.

    “The democrats don’t support gun rights at all so to buy them you typically buy them from right wingers” then start some left wing gun companies and advertise, I’d love to buy a gun from an employee owned business, problem is one would have to “exist.” You should start one.

    Can’t you offer any solutions except “you should fix this my problems for me”. Why am I supposed to work to fix your laws? Why am I supposed to run the gun company you want? Aren’t gun owners meant to be all fiercely independent? All I’m seeing here is the learned helplessness of a spoiled child.

    Ah so by your logic since I can rent a uhaul and fill it up with fertilizer car bombs are legal, huh? Not even a NICs check!

    You will absolutely get a visit from their FBI if you start buying the materials needed to fill a truck with explosives. Thankfully, we don’t let dumb motherfuckers write and enforce those laws.

    Wrong again cheesedick, private sale to a prohibited purchaser is also illegal.

    Don’t know if you’re being stupid or dishonest but it’s only illegal if you know for a fact that they’re a prohibited person.

    Oh word we’re back to victim blaming?

    “Back” to the point you never made? They’d have to be the victim for it to be victim blaming.

    Remember, I’m not advocating “people should be charged with a crime when their responsibly stored firearms are stolen”, I’m advocating that people should be charged with a crime when their negligently stored firearms are accessed by a prohibited person.

    A policy that “responsible gun owners” oppose of course. For some reason it’s important to them that being responsible is optional and being irresponsible isn’t punished.

    It’s like having a group of people who constantly say “I would never drive if I was drunk and I don’t think anybody should” but then fiercely oppose DUI laws, despite reading daily headlines about how another of their members killed 2 people in a crash when they were drunk.

    I agree.

    Not going to bother engaging on that one. You already said something so self-absorbed and fucked in the head that there’s nothing I could say to make you look worse.

    In fact, I’m just going to wrap up the comment here and not bother replying again.

    I was looking forward to making fun of you for trying to insult my mother by saying you pay old ladies for sex but really, nobody with a mind worth changing is reading this far.