ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Should fines be imposed if gun owners do not buy insurance?

Updated on April 29, 2013

The concept of establishing a level of fines for gun owners if they choose not to purchase insurance associated with gun ownership is a step in the wrong direction. It is clear that there is a cost to law enforcement agencies when crimes such as the one in Newtown, Connecticut but it is the responsibility of organizations to investigate such crimes. Asking gun owners, any gun owner to purchase insurance to pay for the investigation of such acts violates the 2nd amendment and possibly our privacy which we hold dear in this country.

One thing is always certain with these kinds of proposals is that it hurts the private citizen. We as individuals have the right to own firearms or not as identified in the 2nd Amendment but it ignores the fact that criminals do not care about gun laws, never have and never will. A proposal which takes or impedes the rights of individuals under any Amendment to the Constitution is wrong and should be fought to the fullest.

I agree there needs to be some changes to our gun laws but before any changes are made current laws need to be examined. The examination should include both state and federal laws and involve the content and whether they are now enforced or simply on the books. Many laws exist today that are on the books across the country but are never enforced. This could be the result of the capability of law enforcement agencies to enforce them.

Laws are often vague and sometimes require interpretation either by lawyers or law enforcement agencies. The prospect of imposing a fine on a gun owner for not buying insurance raises many questions not the least of which how will government know if an individual owns a gun and whether they have purchased insurance. The collection of data identifying who owns a gun and who does not must be part of this process but is also raises another critical point. If such a list exists or is created regarding this proposal it leaves open the fact that criminals may discover who owns a gun and who does not and target those who do not.

The right to own a gun is embodied in Amendment 2 to the Constitution. It is the decision of each individual whether they choose to own a firearm or not and nobody else, not even the government. Being a citizen of our country it is important to remember we have certain privacy rules and regulations and placing a requirement for purchasing insurance by gun owners violates our right to privacy. Businesses must identify their privacy rules regarding what data is collected and how it is used. We value our privacy in this country and the decisions we make are our decisions not the government. Imposing a fine for not taking a specific action regarding gun ownership impedes the right to own a firearm. The fine may create an environment where an individual may not purchase a firearm if they would be subject to government involvement of their purchase.

The current path of government at the some states and at the federal level is one which should bring concern to every citizen. Governments have certain responsibilities and in accomplishing those responsibilities the rights of individuals under the Constitution should not be violated. Granted there have been various interpretations of different portions of the Constitution by our judicial system which is a problem. We have certain privacy and individual rights and if they are challenged, we should challenge the decisions made by our judicial system up to and including the Supreme Court. The proposal to invoke fines on gun owners who fail to purchase insurance is one of the examples which should be fought if it becomes law. Our judicial system is one of the best if not the best in the world but sometimes it is necessary to have legislation reviewed by our judicial system to ensure the principles in the Constitution are not violated.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Dennis AuBuchon profile image

      Dennis AuBuchon 4 years ago


      Thanks for stopping by and providing your input. I too live in Ohio.

    • AJReissig profile image

      Alex J. Reissig 4 years ago from New Richmond, Ohio

      I agree the insureance idea is a bad idea, as are fines. What is next, an insurance policy for free speech?

      By the way, here in Ohio, if you drive without insurance, you loose you license.

    • Dennis AuBuchon profile image

      Dennis AuBuchon 4 years ago

      Thanks for stopping by and for following. I do not know for sure if there is a fine for driving without insurance but the decision would be up to each state.

    • WalterPoon profile image

      Poon Poi Ming 4 years ago from Malaysia

      QUOTE: "The concept of establishing a level of fines for gun owners if they choose not to purchase insurance associated with gun ownership is a step in the wrong direction."

      I totally agree with you. It's like driving a car without an insurance cover. By the way, I am not American and don't know what the penalty is in America, if one drives a car without insurance. Does the government also impose a fine?