House bill would require gun owners to have liability insurance

by Lydia Wheeler
May 30, 2015

House Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.) has introduced a bill that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance.

The Firearm Risk Protection Act, unveiled Friday, would require gun buyers to have liability insurance coverage before being allowed to purchase a weapon, and would impose a fine of $10,000 if an owner is found not to have it. Service members and law enforcement officers, however, would be exempt from the requirement.

“We require insurance to own a car, but no such requirement exists for guns,” Maloney said in a statement. “The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade, but gun fatalities continue to rise.”

Maloney said auto insurance carriers incentivize drivers to take precautions to reduce accidents, but no such incentives exist for firearm owners.

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” she said. “Adequate liability coverage would also ensure that the victims of gun violence are fairly compensated when crimes or accidents occur.”

58 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • dmacid says:

    Great way to keep track who owns guns. Now just how many crooks will have the ins. What a stupid idea. I’d bet the ins huge expensive lobbyists are doing their job. Does not surprise me they slipped their finger in this pie ti make more money. Greed has all kinds of ways to get into all aspects of Americans lives. Wonder how many crooks will respond and tell us they plan on getting gun owners ins. Don’t expect any.

  • cool breeze says:

    if every single american citizen, law-abiding or not, possessed a firearm would we be having these shit for brained politicians attempting to collect our guns? I think not. AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY

    1. Allan Richardson says:

      So you believe that NON LAW ABIDING citizens (and resident aliens, legal and otherwise?) ALSO have a right to own guns with which to commit crimes?

      1. cool breeze says:

        they possess ’em anyway. Equalize the fight

  • firereader says:

    we need all people who purchase liqueur and beer and wine to have liability insurance. We need everyone who is a politician to have liability insurance for all the damage they do to the citizens of the United States, say 10 million dollar policy for everyone who is elected to public office the proceeds to go to paying of the National debt. Every time someone breaks their Oath of Office they need to be penalized 10, 000 dollars per occurrence, to be put towards the National debt. Anytime a politician breaks a tenant of the US Constitution the politician pays a 20,000 dollar fine, the proceeds to be put towards the debt. Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.)is a Jackass if she thinks the American people will put up the this. Rep. Carolyn Boloney Moloney

  • tom2 says:

    I can think of nothing else that would unify a hundred million owners from both sides of the aisle. Forcing lawful citizens to purchase insurance for their constitutionally protected and lawfully owned firearms is another moronic scheme to disarm the public. And for those who don’t surrender to this particular leftist cretin, they’ll have their names, property and who knows what else registered for the government eye. This little trick might even trigger our second civil war. Nobody I know would buckle under such a small minded ruse.

  • Greg137 says:

    Gun registration in disguise.. The rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.. Congress needs to be told NO!

  • KentS says:

    “The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade,…”

    How does car insurance have anything to do with this statistic? Is Maloney stumping for the insurance industry?

    The Constituton has given us the right to “keep and bear arms”; there should be no caveats to this right, including insurance.

    Can anyone spell…R-I-D-I-C-U-L-O-U-S?

  • Junior Rutherford says:

    FU#@K him. New York is like California always screwed up!

  • Daniel Wright says:

    There is no right to drive a car anywhere in the constitution. This idiot is comparing raisins to watermelons. As the robot said” That does not compute”.

    1. Allan Richardson says:

      There is, however, an implied right to travel by any means available, and for those who have the money and credit rating, that includes a right NOT to have your car confiscated by a government agency as long as you are abiding by the law.

      1. Daniel Wright says:

        The right to keep and bear arms is not implied. It is in written words in black and white.It is ironic that those who tout themselves as the champion of the poor are the ones who constantly make it impossible for the poor to have the means to defend themselves from those who mean them harm.

  • Daniel Wright says:

    There should be penalties for knowingly writing or voting for bills that violate any of the rights in the constitution. If a law is found unconstitutional there should automatically be an investigation into why it was passed in the first place. Law makers should be held accountable for actions against the people.

    1. Terry Rushing says:

      I like your idea. If enacted perhaps some of these cracked-brain “laws” would not be proposed.

      1. Daniel Wright says:

        Unfortunately It is only wishful thinking on my part. My idea would require lawmakers to work against their own best interests. Heaven forbid that they would actually consider doing the right thing. What was I thinking?

    2. Allan Richardson says:

      Like the PATRIOT Act, for example?

      1. Daniel Wright says:

        The patriot act was poorly written in the haste to respond to the terrorist threat. A better written one not authorizing every person in America to to be spied upon is much more preferable.

  • Dean956 says:

    I think the NRA should step in on this one

  • carpkiller says:

    Another future victim of gun violence.

  • Buford says:

    More likely, car fatalities have decreased in the past decade because government regulation has made it too expensive to own and operate a vehicle. Fewer drivers, fewer accidents. Besides which, fewer Americans need to drive to work because their jobs fled to China, and congressmen like this one packed their bags.

  • John VanderKelen says:

    Pat progressive unconstitutional experimenting Democrats on the head. This proposal is demonically clever.

  • bobnstuff says:

    I’m not a person that is dumb enough to believe in gun registration but I do believe that we need to control the flow of arms, man killer guns, if we we want peace in our cities. These guns are coming from someone, the just don’t magically appear do they. How are we going to stop the flow? We gave up rights to protect the country after 4/11 with only a few thousand people dead,
    are we willing to give a little to keep 32,000 per year alive? I don’t know the answer.

    1. Terry Rushing says:

      “Man killer” guns??? Would you please describe such a weapon and then compare it to “non man killer” guins?

      1. bobnstuff says:

        Semiautomatics that can take steal jacketed rounds and that can be converted to fully automatics. This type of gun is only good for one thing.

  • Terry Rushing says:

    This is a sneaky, democrat, gun registration scheme wrapped in sheep’s clothes. Insurance companies require information that uniquely describes the insured article(s). The government long ago empowered itself to procure any and all lists that it deems “of interest”, both public and private. Only honest, law abiding citizens would comply with this useless law and at anytime thereafter some government, such as New Orleans, could demand the lists from insurance companies and then initiate a confiscation program. This democratic dimwit idea should not receive the slightest glimmer of hope and the the idiot that proposed the idea should have a sign posted on her desk that identifies her as “idiot”.

    1. Allan Richardson says:

      Car registration and insurance contain information which could, in theory, be used to drive (pun intended) a mass automobile seizure by an evil government agency. This would deprive millions of law abiding (mostly; check figures on speed limit compliance) Americans of a way to go to work, to CHURCH, to a gun show, etc.

  • Terry Rushing says:

    This is a sneaky, democrat, gun registration scheme wrapped in sheep’s clothes. Insurance companies require information that uniquely describes the insured article(s). The government long ago empowered itself to procure any and all lists that it deems “of interest”, both public and private. Only honest, law abiding citizens would comply with this useless law and at anytime thereafter some government, such as New Orleans, could demand the lists from insurance companies and then initiate a confiscation program. This democratic dimwit idea should not receive the slightest glimmer of hope and the the idiot that proposed the idea should have a sign posted on her desk that identifies her as “dimwit”.

  • mezeus says:

    Can’t this idiot woman realize it is not the legal an licensed gun owners that murder people it is criminals that murder people.
    Don’t you just know that every criminal and gang member in this country is going to rush out and buy liability insurance!! DUH

    I have to ask, does this woman have some kind of finical ties to the insurance industry? Talk about stupid………

  • bobnstuff says:

    Gun owner don’t have to take financial responsibility for what happens with their guns now. If we made them have to report stolen guns and be responsible for actions done with them you might see people insuring them but it will never happen. You would have to know where the guns are to enforce the law and the 2nd amendment would stop that from happening. Most guns never get shot,
    they just sit around collecting dust. I don’t have to insure the car
    that isn’t being driven so why would I insure a gun that isn’t being
    used? Guns are one of the few things that kill people that have very
    little regulation. What other product can’t you sue the manufacture
    when bad things happen with their product. Nothing will happen with
    gun control as long as the NRA owns Washington.

    1. undrprsr says:

      Guns don’t kill people, they can’t shoot all buy themselves, someone has to pull the trigger. Once again this would only affect the law abiding citizen, NOT the criminals! There is already to much regulation in some states to carry a weapon! Thank GOD for the NRA protecting our GOD given Right to ” Keep and Bear ARMS “

      1. bobnstuff says:

        The NRA has sold out to the gun manufactures. No one truly represents the gun owners anymore. Bad people get guns from good people, or else the people making guns are bad people. I’m responsible for what happens with my guns. If some one gets hurt with one of my guns it’s because I made a mistake. Everyone who wants to own a gun needs to take responsibility for what happens with it. Every time someone in government says they want to regulate guns fools, go buy more guns they don’t need. The Government is the best salesman the gun industry has. If someone gets hurt with
        your gun they should be able to sue you, because it’s your fault.

        1. Terry Rushing says:

          Sadly, the NRA (of which I am a Lifetime Member), has become much like the Red Cross with money raising schemes being it’s driving force. Submit an idea with a dollar bill and the NRA will likely nod “amen”.

        2. undrprsr says:

          You are no Gun owner if you let your guns gather dust, and don’t secure them from theft, I carry mine where ever it’s legal, NRA is one of only a few Org’s that keep the government from taking our rights away, look back in history when government took those rights away, required gun owners to register their guns, then required them to surrender those gun, it wasn’t that long ago NAZI GERMANY!

          1. bobnstuff says:

            I lost my shooting range, Some fool built a house in it. I have to drive 30 miles to shout for free. What world do you live in? Most people I now have half a dozen guns or more but only shout one or two on a regular basis. I know where right now I could go pick up a gun, not locked up that hasn’t been shot in years. It’s the fools in the world that make it had for everyone else. The NRA tries to sell you on the fear of gun registration when it isn’t ever going to happen.

          2. undrprsr says:

            Are you going to fund the lobby against these new regulations by the DOJ? If not the NRA , then you should step up with your $ millions!

          3. bobnstuff says:

            So you think letting the NRA buy our politicians is the answer. Interesting. You also believe that people
            who beat there family have every right to own a gun even though they have an increased rate of gun deaths. Just how do you plan on stopping the 32,000 people from dying from gun shots this year? If the DOJ doesn’t try to do something then who will? People are dying. But I guess that those lives doesn’t matter as long as people can buy AK47’s that they have no use for. I don’t know the answer but I know that the NRA doesn’t care about the body count.

          4. undrprsr says:

            Sorry, Statistics don’t matter!

          5. bobnstuff says:

            These numbers represent real living humans who are no longer living because of guns. 7 more children will
            die today. Some mothers child will not get a good night kiss. There are people dying not numbers. How can a group say they are pro life and not fight for some kind of gun control.


          6. undrprsr says:

            My life and my loved ones lives seem not to matter to you moron progressives, I would rather kill an attacker and survive then worry about his life!

          7. bobnstuff says:

            Your family is four times more likely to be shot because of guns in your house then someone with no guns. Plus a AK47 isn’t going to help you if some one breaks in to steal it. If you want a gun to defend yourself get a sawed of 12 gauge. You are safer with a big dog then with a gun.

          8. undrprsr says:

            An Omaha Police Woman was shot a killed last week by a felon WITH A GUN, so much for gun laws!

          9. undrprsr says:

            Of the 38 homicides in Baltimore this month . HOW MANY WAS FROM COPS?

          10. undrprsr says:

            Any how many people killed in car “accidents” why can you buy cars that have top speeds of 180-200 MPH when top speed limit in US is 85 MPH in a few places (West Texas on I-10) your point is moot!

          11. bobnstuff says:

            More money is spent on car safety then gun safety and if a car manufacture builds an unsafe car he can be
            sued. Plus it’s not the 200 mph cars that are killing people on our highways, they are in fact those are some of the safest cares and drivers on the road. Plus to drive a car you MUST pass a test and have insurance, to by a gun you need a pulse and if we are lucky pass a back ground check. As I keep saying I don’t know the answer to this problem but I think we owe it to all the dead children to at least try to find an answer.

          12. undrprsr says:

            Yea! that’s why Government mandated air bags are being recalled by the millions BECAUSE THEY ARE UNSAFE!

          13. bobnstuff says:

            When was the last time you heard of a gun manufacture admit that a gun they built was unsafe. I have seen some pretty badly build Saturday Night Specials over the years. You don’t hear much about building a safer gun these days except for the
            NRA trying to block states from regulating smart guns.

          14. undrprsr says:

            Your a MORON, no help for you!

          15. bobnstuff says:

            I guess you have shopped for guns much.There is a lot of crap out there. Cheep hand guns are the worse.
            Revolvers that the cylinders don’t line up with the barrel. Half the guns imported I would own. At least car manufactures have to take responsibility for their mistakes.

          16. undrprsr says:

            And law abiding citizens with guns are not committing crime in urban area’s of major cities either!

          17. bobnstuff says:

            You are right but the criminals got those guns from someone. They aren’t making those guns themselves.
            However we will never know who sold them the gun, will we? To protect your right to bear arms nine children died yesterday and my niece has to worry every time her cop husband goes to work that someone with a steel jacked shell with shoot him or he’s going to be shot answering a domestic dispute. How may lives is it worth? What has the NRA done
            to stop gun violence in our country?

          18. undrprsr says:

            What has Oblamo or Al “no so smart” Sharpton done?

          19. bobnstuff says:

            Not a thing, but their name isn’t The National Rifle Association. Obama did make a weak effort back after Sandy Hook. I don’t want you to get me wrong, I don’t believe we could ban guns in our country even if the government wanted to. I own guns and would never willingly give them up. What we need is
            responsible gun owners who understand that they need to respect the safety of others when dealing with their guns. Over half of the gun deaths in this country are people killing themselves. Can’t we at
            least try to reduce that number? If we could keep hand guns out of the hands of people who are going through mental problems we could cut gun deaths greatly. This morning I have been reading a lot about gun valance and have found that some of what I believed was wrong. You can keep your AK47’s , I don’t know why you want one but they aren’t as big a problem as they are made out to be. It’s hand guns that are the real problem and the illegal sale of them. It’s the junkie on the street that buys one and 10 minutes later holds up a
            store with it that is the real problem. It’s not even the good hand guns, but the cheep one that need to be regulated. Most important though is keeping your hand gun locked up and out of the hands of
            your loved ones.

          20. Allan Richardson says:

            Perhaps not intentionally, but in a heated quarrel, if a knife is available, the death of the other person is not nearly as certain as if a gun is available.

            Remember, it only takes ONE decision for a law abiding gun owner to turn into a NON law abiding gun owner.

          21. undrprsr says:


          22. Allan Richardson says:

            That old canard is not true. In fact, the existence of thousands or millions of privately owned guns HELPED the Nazis come to power, by recruiting the owners of those guns to overthrow the existing government. Well, they didn’t actually “overthrow” by force, but the fear caused by NAZI private citizens with guns who were known to support him, and willing to use their guns to break the law and use violence, intimidated the German people into electing Hitler.

          23. Daniel Wright says:

            Not true. Hitler came to power in 1933 before confiscating private citizens guns.

          24. undrprsr says:

            Yea, and once in power the NAZI party disarmed the masses, especially the Jewish population!

Leave a Reply

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

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.