Why Aren’t CCW Holders Required To Have Insurance?

Licensed carry holders are the most responsible gun owners EVAH and other cherished wingnut myths, debunked here in a cursory search of the Bing machine:

• In Washington State:

Woman cited after gun accidentally fires, shooting 3 people

[…]

The woman, who is licensed to carry the gun, told police she was taking things out of her purse and grabbed the gun near the barrel. When she put it back inside, it went off.

The bullet grazed her palm and struck two friends. One woman was hit in the stomach; the other had her back grazed.

• In Michigan:

Seven-year-old shot while swimming in backyard pool

TEKONSHA, Mich. (NEWSCHANNEL 3) – A 7-year-old girl from Tekonsha is speaking out after being accidentally shot while swimming with her siblings in a backyard pool. The shooting happened around 5 p.m. Tuesday in the 6500 block of 14 and a half mile road.

Michigan State Police say the shooter was a neighbor who was using his 9 millimeter handgun for target practice.

Police tell us the man in his 30s also has a concealed weapons permit and should have known what he was doing.

The mother, Jodi Scherer tells Newschannel 3 that bullet barely missed hitting her daughter in the chest and whizzed right by her 2-year-old sister’s head who was standing next to her.

Also:

GRAND BLANC TOWNSHIP — Gun law debates are heating up as readers comment on the story of a man arrested for carrying a fake CIA ID while carrying a gun and wearing body armor.

Cassidy J. Delavergne, who has since been released on bond, was attending “Red 2” at the NCG Trillium theater on Tuesday, July 30 when he was taken out of the theater. He was armed with a 9mm handgun and bullet proof vest. Police confiscated an ID card with the CIA emblem and a golden rectangle which appeared similar to a security chip found on real federal badges, according to court records.

Police also found more than 100 rounds of ammunition in his vehicle.

While Delavergne had a concealed pistol’s license, he was charged with having the fake CIA badge. His CPL has since been suspended by Genesee County.

In Massachusetts:

Armed Man Arrested Outside Westender; “Chilling” Texts Sent to Ex

[…]

Police arrested Nathan David Wiesner, 23, of 50 W. Main Street Apt. 16 A in Westborough at the Westender in response to a call that a man who was stalking an employee was outside the building with a gun, according to court documents.

“Dispatch received a frantic 911 call,” wrote Gough who was among the officers that responded to the scene. “Dispatch stated that Nathan is licensed to carry in Massachusetts, owns a .44 Magnum which he always carries on his person.”

When police approached Wiesner — parked in a black Chevrolet Cavalier in front of the liquor store in the Westender plaza — he provided them with his license to carry and they retrieved the revolver from the car, according to court documents.

“I could smell a pretty strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emanating from his mouth as he talked,” wrote Gough in his police report where Wiesner reportedly responded that he had drank one beer.

In Wisconsin:

Psychiatrist to examine man charged in rolling shoot out

The Milwaukee concealed weapon permit holder charged in a rolling shootout with another permit holder last month may not be competent to proceed in the prosecution.

Eric Adamany, 27 was scheduled for examination Thursday by a forensic psychiatrist, according to court records.

His attorney, Chris Bailey, indicated his concerns about Adamany’s mental competence at a hearing last week. Court Commissioner Rosa Barillas suspended the case and ordered the examination.

The doctor’s report of his exam is scheduled to be returned Aug. 16.

These cases are all from within the last month.

I think it’s time we started demanding that you people carry liability insurance. So the rest of us don’t have to be collateral damage in your “here I come to save the day” Mighty Mouse fetish.

21 Comments

Filed under gun control, gun violence

21 responses to “Why Aren’t CCW Holders Required To Have Insurance?

  1. You mean they’re not required to have additional insurance when they get their gun licence?
    Wow! How frightening – I’ve just found out that UK firearms licence holders aren’t required to, either.
    Foolishly, I assumed it was mandatory, like car insurance!

  2. If you make them buy insurance you might as well just give Obamandingo’s Nancybooted Jackthugs the keys to their state-of-the-art gunz safes! They.’ll have all of the info that they need to swoop down on the ONLY PEOPLE who will defend the Sacred 2nd!!

    That feller from MA (wonder if he was a friend of Mr. “I carry a loaded gun into Patriots’ Stadium” WiredBeardy) might not be totin’ that hogleg of his no more.

    But, then, MA is a state where people are made defenseless by not being allowed to carry their gunz everwhere they go, lessen they have a compelling reason.

    See, Massachusetts fucking liebrals ALLOWED 185 people to be MURDERED in 2011 (somethem prolly JEWS whose gunz HITLER took away*) While the state of Tennessee kept ALL but 673 of their citizens safe during the same period!**!! Do the math!!

    And, and, PATRIOJESUSTISM!! Shut up, that’s why!

    * Statement is not intended to have any connection with factual information
    ** http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-4

    • Snort. As if they lock their gun safes in the first place.

      Christ, as if they even HAVE gun safes. Demo, you should know better.

    • GregH

      Sorry, but “liebrals” is too clever. Go back to “libtards”. You must maintain versimilitude and cannot appear rational or intelligent when satirizing rabid, mouth-breathing knuckledrags.

  3. I guess the only silver lining in this cloud might be that if somebody rich enough shoots you and you can beat them in court you, or your survivors, might get a new house’n’shit.

  4. It’s especially needed in Florida, where if you miss the attacker and hit a bystander, you can’t be sued by the bystander’s family.

    • Look, if they weren’t guilty of SOMETHING, they wouldn’t be in the same neighborhood as the (Fill in the blank with whatever racist, misogynistic, sexual/sexual orientation, ethnic or religious slur you general use for the hated “other” group of your choice)-O-Perp. Lie down with cantaloupe-calved drug mules from old Mehiko and you get up with 9mm fleas, gnoI’msane?

  5. deep

    Interesting, but what would be hte mandatory pay-out? With car insurance, most states require something like 20-25k coverage, but your average fender-bender doesn’t usually result in maiming or death. A gun OTOH is far more dangerous so I would think the minimum would have to be at least 100k.

    But then what about the mass murders? If dozens of plaintiffs file wrongful death lawsuits then 100k wouldn’t be enough.

    • What’s funny (in a really fucking sick way) is that when you tell gunzloonz that they should be subject to some, y’know, RULES, they say that they don’t need no STEENKEEN ROOLZ! The justification that they proffer for their irrationale is that there are so FEW stupidents resulting in people gettin’ shot up or dead. When, however, you suggest that special liability insurance should be required for people who like to wave their 9mm penises in public (or 7.62 X whatev’) they get all, like, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! That would cost me teh moneez and I wouldn’t be able to buy as much ammo and likker. And I’m like, sotto voce (for you gunzloonz; that’s like talking out loud, but with a suppressor–legal in all jurisdictions, much advised in many):

      “How come the insurance would cost so much. All insurance (except for peoples’ health) coverage is priced on actuarial data and suchlike. If only a few (or a few hundred thousand) people are killed and wounded every year by gunz goin’ off in totally uforeseen circumstance that could not possibly have been prevented wouldn’t the incidence of such occurrences bear on the price for such insurance.”

      I think that if I really ask the question that their reply would be:

      ‘Fuggen’commie! FREEDOM, JESUS, 2ND! SHUTUP, THAT’S WHY”.

      Why do gunzloonz hate the “invisible hand” and MurKKKa?

      • I realize in re-reading my comment that the downside of unhinged rants is that rules of grammar and punctuation tend to go out the window, making it a little more difficult to parse the comment.

        This:

        “When, however, you suggest that special liability insurance should be required for people who like to wave their 9mm penises in public (or 7.62 X whatev’) they get all, like, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! That would cost me teh moneez and I wouldn’t be able to buy as much ammo and likker. And I’m like, sotto voce (for you gunzloonz; that’s like talking out loud, but with a suppressor–legal in all jurisdictions, much advised in many):”

        Should have been this:

        “When, however, you suggest that special liability insurance should be required for people who like to wave their 9mm penises in public (or 7.62 X whatev’) they get all, like,:

        “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! That would cost me teh moneez and I wouldn’t be able to buy as much ammo and likker.”

        And I’m like, sotto voce (for you gunzloonz; that’s like talking out loud, but with a suppressor–legal in all jurisdictions, much advised in many):

        We regret the air!

      • deep

        lol, you crazy demo!

  6. Pingback: Concealed Weapon Law | Law on Firearms .com | Who is gunning for what?

  7. Why aren’t bloggers required to carry insurance?
    If exercising one’s Constitutional right is open to “subject to” clauses, then I should have to carry insurance for writing a blog as well as for carrying my pistol.

  8. “Why aren’t bloggers required to carry insurance?”

    For the same reason that people who talk to each other in public are not required to carry insurance. When peoples’ words start killing and wounding other people, on purpose or by stupident, let us know.

    • Media corporations DO have libel and slander insurance. And my blog exists not because of the First Amendment but because the corporate entities at WordPress and my ISP allow it to. I guarantee my blog would be yanked as soon as I posted something deemed pornographic or libelous. In creating my blog I have automatically agreed to WordPress’ “terms of service.” One of them is that I am accepting responsibility for all content and any harm that may come from it. As is everyone who comments here, I might add.

      So yes, insurance for bloggers does exist. It’s not required because my blog host is already denying any responsibility for the content, including comments. Whether I choose to get insurance is my own affair.