Is it time for gun owners to pay for their damage?
Gun shot wounds cost about $2.5 billion a year. Taxpayers pick up about $1.1 billion of this tab. Gun shot wounds are a major burden on the US health care system. Is it time for gun owners to pay for their damage?
No more nor less so than smokers, over eaters, drivers, boaters, golfers, etc.....
California just proposed a bill that would require gun owners to get liability insurance. Interesting idea but it still wouldn't really punish someone who illegally had a weapon and used it in a crime.
I kind of like the idea of fining manufacturers. If an unregistered gun is used in a crime, the manufacturer pays for the damage. If an unregistered gun is used in a homicide, fine the manufacturer a million dollars or so.
And this is what passes for "common sense" amoung the anti-firearm crowd. No wonder they have lost in the public opinion, the courts and the legislatures.
Yeah...and we should fine all the automakers and the UAW every time someone with a suspended license finds his way behind the wheel of a car. Or for that matter every time someone speeds and causes an accident since the car can go faster than 70 mph
Actually I think manufacturers would be pretty good at registering and keeping track of guns. I didn't say I'd actually do it, but it is at least a proposed solution. The pro-gun side has offered nothing so really is in no position to complain.
hard to argue with the fact that the NRA and Rabid pro-gun lobby realy has offered up nothing,... and i'm pro-gun,.. and i'm the 1st to admit that all the pro-gun side has offered is the word "NO"
The "pro gun": side has offered up the radical solution of punishing those who offend and hurt the innocent. I know that some of you consider this a "non starter" since it actually requires people to be responsible for their own actions
Guns do end up in the hands of people who should not have them. People or organizations along that transfer chain should be held "responsible for their actions." That is what registration would allow for. That's the point.
Calif. has full registration. Calif has some of the highest crime rates in the country. Same with Chicago. Junk would have the maker of seat belt material for a car be responsible for the drunk driver who kills an innocent. And this is "reasonable."
Jack, I said nothing about registration impacting crime rates. I said nothing about automobiles. I said nothing about reasonable, but yes many people do find registration to be perfectly reasonable. Deal with it.
Of course, they can't actually justify with logic or reason why registration is "reasonable" but it makes them ffeeelll ggoodd to call for it. Some people search for Bigfoot, others for the Loch Ness serpent, and some for gun registration rationals.
My justification was posted a few comments up. No one is searching for a rational. You are just ignoring it and posting some creepy comments about the Lochness monster making you feel good. No one is interested in what you do with your gun in private
Here's his "justification." Ed shoots a man with a gun he stole from Bob, who bought the gun from Sam 3 years ago, who bought the gun from Sue's Gun Shop 9 years ago. Junk wants registration so Bob, Sam and Sue can be charged money for Fred's crime.
If Bob properly secured his weapon and immediately reported it stolen than he did nothing wrong. Fred, who stole it and committed the crime would be fully responsible. You are once again inventing arguments I haven't made.
We do have scroll back, junk, and that is not what you posted earlier. Besides, I don't know very many people who leave their guns laying about on lawns, sidewalks and street corners for anyone to steal. Do you really think this is a problem?
I talked about holding people accountable for their actions. If no wrong action occurred (e.g. improperly securing or transferring weapon) than there is no action to hold accountable. You brought up theft, not me, but yes, proper storage is an issue.
I guess it was some other Junk who wanted to fine those who had nothing to do with the gun's misuse in a crime a "million dollars." My bad...
Then again, upon further reflection (and scroll back) I find out it really was ~you.~ What a surprise.
The point of the threat of a fine would be to induce manufactures to implement an effective registration system. They would rarely, if ever, actually be fined. It isn't surprising that you don't understand a relatively simple policy strategy.
Passing a law threatening a law abiding company on an issue that they have absolutely no control over once the gun leaves their building and never enforcing the law regardless is "common sense" gun control? We can't make this type of nonsense up,
It's a simple idea to develop a registration system. Your dramatics, name-calling, and inventing stuff I supposedly said don't change that. Do you have something rational at all to say about the idea or not? Your spastics really aren't of interest.
Junk can't actually lay out a simple, workable idea for a registration system run by the manufacturers that will actually do what he says. But he can post about it all day long, eh. And then blame others when we point out his obvious failings.
The point isn't to actually develop the system. The point would be to incentivize the development of a system by manufacturers. I think that is pretty clear. So again, do you have an actual thought about the idea or just more insults?
as noted.... junk really can't come up with his supposed "simple" system that is actually workable. But it sure is a common sense solution, eh. And he has to blame me for pointing out his inability. :-)
The idea is to provide the incentive for someone ELSE to develop the system. I can't be any clearer than that. You are still evidently talking to an imaginary person in your head.
junk is all hat and no cattle. He understands that his idea is totally unreasonable so he passes the responsibility for somehow making it "reasonable" to another party. And this is "common sense" gun control at its finest.
I obviously don't find my own idea unreasonable and never said anything about passing responsibility, so I still have no idea who you are talking to.
80,000,000 gun owners. About 10,000 murders with a gun each year. Maddot thinks that the 79,990,000 gun owners who did absolutely nothing wrong with their firearms should pay for the crimes of the .00001 percent who did. And this is considered "common sense" gun regulations, eh.
while we're at it,.. lets get the condom manufactures of the world to pay for marriage counseling and divorce lawyers,.... cause if your going to punish those who use a product properly,... by charging them for the expenses for those who use the product for ill intent,.... then you might as well charge the Trojan man with adultery.
No. I have caused no damage with my gun, rifle etc. Should everyone who owns a car pay for all of the car accidents that irresponsible drivers have? Hardly.
I think the person who shot the gun should pay for the wound, not all gun owners everywhere. Otherwise, my taxes are going up...
Nice ad hoc fallacy. So because I own a gun I'm responsible for all the people who shoot innocents with them? Ridiculous. Come to think of it you probably own a kitchen knife, there are lots of people in hospitals for stab wounds.
Only those who cause the damage should be held accountable for their actions no matter what the situation is, gun related or not.
If I lose my firearms (not stolen) and they were use in a crime, I can be held liable in a civil case.
If I give my firearms to my buddy who then uses it in a crime and injures/kills someone, I can be held liable even if I didn't know or didn't conspire with him.
If I carelessly leave my firearms about and someone shoots themselves, I will be put in jail and fined.
When I buy firearms I pay extra taxes (to pay for background checks and paper work for the state) in addition to sales tax. That I am fine with. What I am not fine with is punishing someone who didn't commit a crime. I didn't shoot anyone, and my firearms are all accounted for. When I transport firearms and ammo, I open/conceal carry to ensure my firearms don't get stolen. So no.
Health care costs are high because of the following:
1. Inefficient/unnecessary health services.
2. Administrative wastes in health care.
3. Medicare fraud.
4. Lack in preventive health (no incentive to be healthy).
by LiamBean 5 years ago
First, this is not my idea. It was presented by an author on a web-site that concentrates on economics.The proposal is this. Do not attempt to curtail gun ownership rights. Rather levy a federal tax on all fire-arms and ammunition. The tax, much like the gasoline tax, would only affect those with...
by RealityTalk 4 years ago
Should gun owners be able to bring guns to churchNow some gun owners are upset because Starbucks won't let them bring guns into their stores. I guess it's difficult to drink coffee without a concealed weapon. If the coffee is served too hot, the customer can only yell and not shoot the store...
by H C Palting 5 years ago
Is tracking down illegal gun owners more important to you than knowing where legal gun owners are?How would you feel if your name and address were published online because you own a gun? While many gun owners' info ends up on lists that can be viewed by the public, do you disagree with making this...
by Stclairjack 5 years ago
1) i have no problem banning the civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons (already illegal, has been for years, so its like me saying have no qualms with the sun coming up in the morning)2) i have NO problem banning the import, manufacture, or sale of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds,...
by crankalicious 5 years ago
Is there such a thing as reasonable or common sense gun control?So, there's a continuum of gun control, right? On the far right, you have unfettered access to guns where anyone can get one anytime without restriction. On the far left, you have a total ban on all guns. Is there somewhere we should...
by DebtFreedom 7 weeks ago
Just wondering how much you would be willing to pay for your child's art classes - and say the cost included supplies. What reasons might you be willing to pay more? Also, for the amount you say you are willing to pay, how long do you expect each class to be and how many classes? Please be...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|