Articles, Blog

$1,000,000 Firearm Insurance? – The Legal Brief

Welcome back to The Legal Brief, the show
where we CRUSH the various legal myths and misinformation surrounding various areas of
the gun world. I’m your host Adam Kraut and today we’re heading
back to New York to hear the latest in proposed lunacy. It seems that Senator Parker, who proposed
giving up your search history for your gun rights wasn’t satisfied with stopping there. In his latest quest to burden gun owners,
Senator Parker has proposed a new bill which would require that gun owners carry one million
dollars in liability insurance. The bill would amend the insurance law, to
require firearms owners, before owning a gun, to obtain and continuously maintain a policy
of liability insurance to cover any damages resulting from the use of their firearm. The policy would be required to cover any
negligent or willful acts involving the use of a firearm while it is owned by that person. Failure to maintain the proposed amount of
insurance would result in the “immediate revocation” of the gun owner’s registration, license and
“any other privilege to own such firearm.” Funny…here I was thinking that it was a
right to own a firearm. While New York’s State Constitution does not
recognize a right to keep and bear arms, Article 2, Section 4 of the New York Civil Rights
Law provides: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed.” The bill would recognize that a person was
the owner of a firearm if it were lost or stolen, until the owner reports that it was
lost or stolen. Now of course, there are always exceptions,
especially for law enforcement and this bill continues that trend. The bill’s justification is that the insurance
policy will serve as an incentive for firearm owners to implement safety measures in order
to conduct the activity as safely as possible and only when necessary. It also states that “[b]y having this insurance
policy in place, innocent victims of gun-related accidents and violence will be compensated
for the medical care for their injuries.” Unfortunately, Senator Parker ignores a number
of issues that this bill presents. Putting aside the right to bear arms for a
moment, where is someone going to find liability insurance for a million dollars? How much is that going to cost them per year? And wouldn’t this create a barrier to lower
income individuals from owning firearms? Fortunately, this bill has been introduced
the past three sessions and never made it anywhere. If history is any past indicator, you can
expect this to be reintroduced this year. What do you guys think about gun owners having
to carry an insurance policy? Is it a reasonable solution or is it complete
nonsense? Post your thoughts in the comments below. That’s it for this episode, if you have learned
anything from this show, help us out and hit that like button, and share it with your friends. Don’t forget to get subscribed and if you
enjoyed the video, consider supporting us via the links down in the video description. Be sure to check out the The Gun Collective
Podcast on iTunes, and as always, thanks for watching!

100 thoughts on “$1,000,000 Firearm Insurance? – The Legal Brief

  1. Maybe we need insurance for the first amendment too so if snowflakes say something that offend me I can sue them. 2 million dollars I want to be rich too. What a dick head that senator is obviously a Demoncrat.

  2. Chances are I will never have to shoot anyone for defensive purposes. With that said I do have insurance and just feel that having insurance is a logical thing to have. However I do agree these bozo’s are overstepping the boundary. Just like wanting to enact a ridiculous tax hike on every purchase of ammunition. These politicians takes oath prior to taking office. Among other things in the oath it does continue to uphold and defend the constitution. The first thing these corrupt greedy politicians do is to go against the constitution. With these unconstitutional laws I have to wonder if they also apply to the rich and famous, politicians, and those with connections with the first two. It should also be enforced to where one can not have armed security guards.

  3. If I'm not mistaken a federal judge declared Obamacare unconstitutional due to government imposing a tax if the people failed to purchase a private good. How would this not be the same except more severe as the penalty for not buying a private good is the denial of a constitutional right?

  4. They're really showing their colors, more and more clearly. It's all about the money. The market is being driven by these fear tactics. Firearm sales are up, compliance parts cost money. Fees, taxes, and now insurance, make them more money. Nobody is afraid of your AR/AK.

  5. So many Republicans in here that now magically care about race, class, and income inequality. Where was all this a few years ago?

  6. How about every felon gang member caught with a gun gets an automatic million dollar bond to be paid 100% in full pending trial before release?

  7. If you live in Commiefornia and have a CCW like I do, you better have CCW insurance, people are happy to go after you in a civil case even if you are justified in your self defense actions, (that also goes for using force inside your home). As for insurance just to own a firearm, well I guess they didn’t see the part of the Second Amendment that says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. 🇺🇸🗽

  8. Weren't people flipping their collective shit a little while ago because people had just this, like
    by way of the uscca. Saying oh its incentive for them to just shoot people because they have the insurance.

    I believe the uscca policy covers the policy holders court fees and such in a lawful use of firearms.

  9. Well guess what ?! I suppose if Banks, Credit Card Companies and Social Media's can help the Government "Impose" and "Infringe" upon Your Rights, then Insurance Companies can to ?!!!!!! Insurance from who, the Government or regular Insurance Companies ?!!
    As far as I can see this is another slippery slope the Government does not know or understand how or what the outcome will be ?! Imposing required insurance may invoke problems with your own insurance companies decisions on whether or not you are safe to insure or not ?! Just for being a Gun Owner ?!
    Life Insurances, Home Insurances, Vehicle Insurances, Businesses Insurances ? And, maybe even Profession Insurances like Doctors, Sports Athlete's ect….. ? Just for wanting "Your Naturally Born Given Rights" ?!!!!!!

  10. Now I did buy the NRA insurance when it came out. Had it a about 18 months. Then I got a letter with money back info me under Cuomo Safe Act I'm not eligible for the insurance. Seems in New York you cannot buy insurance if you're a criminal. And since I have a gun, well I'm a criminal waiting to happen. So NRA insurance was banned in New York. Cuomo is an idiot and that's how it was explained to me.

  11. Older folks on fixed incomes would be in trouble with this type of law. I guess when you get social security you are expected to give up your rights and safety.

  12. It sounds Like an undue burden upon the poor and the needy— those in need of protection NOW should have it without awful red tape like that. On the other hand, once I work out which policy we’d like with my wife, there’s going to be a legal and/or insurance investment made, BUT ADAM! That’s our choice… or at least mine.

  13. We have a couple of companies that promise to defend you after the fact but the non-hired testimonials seem like it's not so worthwhile…

  14. The nonsense is that law abiding firearms owners continue to live in states that restrict there right and give the restrictive state more electoral votes by living there. In my opinion if all the gun owners moved to gun friendly states the shift would change for the government and the second amendment would gain more traction and more freedom the way it should be

  15. That's great poor people can't own a gun and won't stop a single crime. See I would offer tax credits to buy a safe that actually solves a problem

  16. Imagine if you had to carry 1st Amendment insurance in case you said something to hurt a snowflake's feelings. Yeah. It's that stupid.

  17. Sen Kevin Parker is just another long line of corrupt politicians that think only they, the privilege few, should be the only ones to be allowed to have guns.

  18. There was a hew and cry for gun owners to carry insurance 6 or so years ago. USCCA was the first to offer insurance (i think) then the NRA stepped up and offered their "Carry Guard" insurance last year (or was it 2017?) Anyway, they Uninvited USCCA from that years NRAAM so they wouldn't have any distractions from them announcing their insurance.

    Fast forward to the end of 2018 and the usual New York Anti's were crying that the Insurance offered up by such groups was "MURDER INSURANCE" even though they themselves were Advocating for gun owners to HAVE insurance. They even filed a lawsuit against the NRA to make them stop. I, however, didn't read the lawsuit so I am unfamiliar with the "Meat & Potatoes" of it all

    Now they are introducing a bill to Mandate insurance? What's wrong with them? Will they just call it Murder insurance again if it passes?

  19. I propose that all senators and lawmakers must carry a $100million insurance or bond to reimburse legitimate legal challenges to unreasonable laws they may or may not introduce that violates the civil rights of their constituents.

    The reason for this is to encourage law makers to only propose laws that work within their constitutional authority and to discourage lawmakers from waisting government time an resources with illegal legislation.

  20. A better plan would be to require those that choose NOT to carry a firearm to obtain liability insurance for being negligent for failure to maintain basic self defense and protection of life.

  21. Sounds like a good way to have people buying guns "under the radar" to avoid paying for a ridiculous tax that shouldn't exist. Not to mention people would be scared to report their guns as stolen.

  22. I'm in N.Y.S. and I think its crap! My self defense insurance can't cover me after my policy is up do to the state forcing them out. How can they kick out USCCA and then insist your covered ? None of this adds up unless they intend to make being a N.Y.S. gun owner a crime. I've also read the state will start doing insurance, wouldn't that be a conflict of interest when they will be the ones pressing charges on you most of the time. Why can't we shop around and pick one we like in that case. If we had a stand your ground law I wouldn't even need insurance in the first place. In N.Y. if someone wants to rape you and tells u they won't kill you your not aloud to shoot them. Fear of rape or loss of property isn't a legal reason to defend your self , only fear of life! This state sucks and I'm sure ill end up in jail defending myself or a victim one day.

  23. what about the criminals are they going to be required to have a million dollars insurance to have their illegal guns so their victims are compensated?

  24. Unrelated to the specific topic but related to the topic of gun control as a whole: if there are 250,000 registered transferrable machine guns and there are about 600,000 bumpstocks in circulation (that have been recently classified as "machine guns") are there now enough "machine guns" in circulation to have a legitimate arguement of "common use" or whatever was stated during the Heller case (or some other case)? Correct me if I'm wrong.

  25. Forgot to mention the fact that the law abiding gun owners that are actually subjecting themselves to the heinous infringments arent the ones doing the killing. This will solve nothing and further the monopolization of violence by the government and criminals.

  26. PLEASE HELP GET EVERYONE ON BOARD: HR 1072 : NY's (NIAGARA COUNTY) very own Chris Collins reintroduced 2ND AMENDMENT GUARANTEE ACT. Please spread the word this is a great bill and we need everyone on board call their and call CONGRESSMEN / WOMEN to vote yes. This bill makes it so no state can make any firearms laws greater than that of federal regulations.

  27. WAIT A MINUTE. Didn't New York specifically go after the NRA's insurance program for gun owners by sanctioning the financial institutions that sold it? This is actual Orwellian doublespeak. First they don't want you to have liability insurance so they try to eliminate it then they wanna legally mandate it?

  28. Just another Socialist doing what Socialist always do across history. Try to make it as hard as possible to exercise your Second Amendment, or for that matter that part of the NY State Constitution (which the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of New York ignore's all the time), until it is removed entirely. And that is the Socialist's ultimate objective after all.

  29. We just need a program that allows you to be a cop for a week so you can get a police license, retire after that week, and forever after be a retired police officer able to carry on accordance with the constitution. Because clearly cops are now the only ones the constitution applies to.

  30. This insurance requirement is intended to make gun ownership so expensive, as to be prohibited. It is intended to be an end run around 2A.

  31. Born and raised in New York, I love the state, the people (mostly), but after moving to a nearby location with slightly less Draconian gun laws, I could never go back. This bill definitely places an undue financial burden on both impoverished and minority communities, and is just another example of how them "Big City Folk" of Albany and NYC try to impose their will on their 'subjects' who just want to live their lives as they see fit.

  32. If this does pass, how are they going to prove if you have it or not. Only when a gun is purchased, or if you do shoot someone.

  33. Requiring insurance to exercise an enumerated constitutional right is no different than requiring a poll tax to vote. It's onerous legislation masquerading as "reasonable" and a back-door approach for denying one their rights by economic oppression.

    For those of you who are eligible voting members of the NRA, Adam is on this years ballot again for the NRA Board of Directors. You should throw him your vote. His presentations on The Legal Brief tells all of us that he takes a no-compromise position when it comes to safeguarding our rights from the Enemy's attacks. I think we would be well served by his being on the NRA Board.

  34. I think having gun insurance can be a helpful tool but by no means should be required to owning a gun. If someone wants a kind of legal protection for their firearm try becoming a member at either the uscca , or the second amendment foundation both pro gun groups.

  35. Similar idea to the $200 nfa tax, it just makes it out of reach of lower income households. They just don't want armed poor people.

  36. Are they going to enforce this $1,000,000 insurance requirement on criminals?? Oh, yeah, I forgot, criminals tend to not follow the law.

  37. That proposal is totally ludicrous my car ins.amount is not that high and I could kill someone accidentally with it . What next ins.on my kitchen knives?

  38. Where can I get this insurance? Does it cover buying a new firearm if I use mine for self defense and its taken as part of the investigation?
    Or at least like a loaner while I wait on the proceedings?
    Or broken parts if I find a torture test one of my guns cant handle?

  39. Here in England a lot of us have such insurance. It usually comes as part of our membership of a shooting association like the BASC ( or as a member of a shooting club. It doesn't cost much. For the BASC it is a little over $ 100/year for $ 13 million of public liability cover plus legal expenses of $ 325,000 and $ 65,000 personal accident cover. Discounts for joint husband and wife, family membership, young people and senior citizens also apply.

  40. I've wondered about the options that are available for such insurance. Was pondering starting a pretty control business and figured it would be a good idea. At the time it was hard to find anything about what is available for insurance.

  41. But you don't understand. When the good citizen that needs your stuff more than you do to support his illegitimate offspring is shot by you while exercising his left wing rights to break and enter and burglarize, how will he support them! This insurance will merely be your "fair share". Don't you want to be fair? 🙂

  42. Simple answer : Complete [email protected]*!&^! nonsense, easy to imp.ose all these laws when all these politicians either have a CCW or 24 hr armed security, guess they feel their lives are important and not ours sad individuals.

  43. Where is the problem that this is looking to solve; 10’s of millions of gun owners out there and I’ve never heard of 1 time outside of criminal conduct wherein this would be needed and I’m sure the criminal, who are already willing to KILL, will comply with this.

  44. For what ? so some asshole that tries to rape you can get rich because you shot him? What kind of a fuckhead dickhead thinks of this bullshit.

  45. In addition to being a member of the USCCA, I also keep a 1 million dollar umbrella policy through USAA with whom I have my home owners policy. I know that not all of us have this option, but for those of us who do, it is not that much more expensive to ensure that my 6 is covered.

  46. Hasn't NYC and the State of CA, prevented NRA from selling carry insurance in those locations because there was a chance the policy could pay out, even if the policy holder was convicted of illegally using the firearm?

  47. the founders were outlaws according to the king's government. if they were still alive we would already be in another revolution with this government for violating the rights of we the people…

  48. the fact that they always exclude them selves from the very laws they force on we the people is proof their laws are illegal and unconstitutional. this crap needs to stop, it set the government and all their entities above we the people, which is direct violation of the principals and laws of the constitution. we the people can restrict government liberties but the government cannot restrict we the peoples liberties. they seem to have it backwards.

  49. Let me get this straight. People, that cannot come up with ten dollars to purchase a valid ID for voting, don't know where to obtain valid ID for voting and don't have access to, or the intelligence to operate a computer are gonna come up with money for insurance to protect their lives and family's? That guy is a jackass!

  50. Fine, require insurance. A 1,000,000.00 umbrella policy is cheaper than one might think. After I show my insurance then allow select fire and stop complaining about barrel length, mag capacity etc.

  51. the people that having it would best serve public safety will absolutely not carry it. by this logic burglers shoud be the ones with the insurance policy to cover the items they steal for the benefit of the rightful owners. hey why dont we make that a law as well. im sure the perps will be following all over themselves to comply!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *