Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
San Jose becomes 1st in US to require gun liability insurance, city officials say
https://abc7news.com/san-jose-gun-law-control-laws-sam-liccardo/11508623/
SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Gun owners will soon be required to carry liability insurance and pay a fee in the city of San Jose that officials say would be the first of its kind in the United States, following a trend of other Democratic-led cities that have sought to rein in violence through stricter rules.
...
Having liability insurance would encourage people in the 5,500 households in San Jose who legally own at least one registered gun to have gun safes, install trigger locks and take gun safety classes, Liccardo said.
...
The liability insurance will cover losses or damages resulting from any negligent or accidental use of the firearm, including death, injury, or property damage, according to the ordinance. If a gun is stolen or lost, the owner of the firearm would be considered liable until the theft or loss is reported to authorities.
The requirement won't apply to current and retired law enforcement officers or those with a license to carry concealed weapons.
SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Gun owners will soon be required to carry liability insurance and pay a fee in the city of San Jose that officials say would be the first of its kind in the United States, following a trend of other Democratic-led cities that have sought to rein in violence through stricter rules.
...
Having liability insurance would encourage people in the 5,500 households in San Jose who legally own at least one registered gun to have gun safes, install trigger locks and take gun safety classes, Liccardo said.
...
The liability insurance will cover losses or damages resulting from any negligent or accidental use of the firearm, including death, injury, or property damage, according to the ordinance. If a gun is stolen or lost, the owner of the firearm would be considered liable until the theft or loss is reported to authorities.
The requirement won't apply to current and retired law enforcement officers or those with a license to carry concealed weapons.
I guess we'll see if this has an effect.
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
To be clear, this insurance will pay on the gray shaded "Preventable/Accidental" section.
The "Undetermined" area may see some coverage as well; best guess would be a crap shoot.
Link- National Safety Council:
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics/guns/
This graph is 2020. The latest numbers from the CDC are for 2019.
(CDC) Unintentional (Includes undetermined) Firearm Injuries: 20,814 (Estimate)
https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/nonfatal.html
(CDC) Unintentional Firearm Deaths: 486
https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html
I guess the 2020 numbers are close.
Something from the insurance industry: https://www.iii.org/article/background-on-gun-liability
Overview
The idea that insurance can help prevent deaths from firearms often rises to the forefront of the nation’s consciousness following mass shootings.
Advocates of the idea believe that if gun owners were required to purchase insurance, the cost of the insurance would provide them an incentive to own fewer firearms and/or more carefully store the firearms they own. However, no U.S. insurance company offers separate, stand-alone gun liability coverage. In considering whether insurance is an appropriate mechanism to prevent mass shootings, it is important to note that no insurer – primary or excess – provides liability coverage for illegal acts. Looking ahead, there is very little likelihood that insurers would develop such coverage.
Excess personal liability coverage for firearms owners is available, though typically only through membership in a firearms association.
Acts that are intended or expected to cause harm are also generally excluded, though some policies will provide coverage in cases for which bodily injury or property damage results from the use of “reasonable force” by an insured to protect persons or property. “Self-defense” coverage for firearms owners is available, though rarely found.
The idea that insurance can help prevent deaths from firearms often rises to the forefront of the nation’s consciousness following mass shootings.
Advocates of the idea believe that if gun owners were required to purchase insurance, the cost of the insurance would provide them an incentive to own fewer firearms and/or more carefully store the firearms they own. However, no U.S. insurance company offers separate, stand-alone gun liability coverage. In considering whether insurance is an appropriate mechanism to prevent mass shootings, it is important to note that no insurer – primary or excess – provides liability coverage for illegal acts. Looking ahead, there is very little likelihood that insurers would develop such coverage.
Excess personal liability coverage for firearms owners is available, though typically only through membership in a firearms association.
Acts that are intended or expected to cause harm are also generally excluded, though some policies will provide coverage in cases for which bodily injury or property damage results from the use of “reasonable force” by an insured to protect persons or property. “Self-defense” coverage for firearms owners is available, though rarely found.
...did the most business in firearm insurance?