Illinois Carry Liability Insurance

[eapking]

Here's another great "backdoor" tactic going on in the state of Illinois. Sure glad I don't live there.

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/midwest/2009/02/18/97987.htm

[Oh Shoot]

Here's another great "backdoor" tactic going on in the state of Illinois....

Has absolutely nothing to do with carry, though.

It's just to OWN a gun.

- OS

[Guest sling]

You cant fix stupid. That states always been messed up.

[Ridgerunner665]

I just hope it don't "catch on" everywhere else...that would be bad (unaffordable by most I would imagine)

[Guest nraforlife]

I'll just stop paying my mortgage to get this insurance

[Guest jackdog]

I'll just stop paying my mortgage to get this insurance

Then the government can bail you out.

[Fallguy]

That has to be about the most stupid thing I've ever heard of......

[TripleDigitRide]

Yet, ANOTHER reason why I have no desire to ever live in that state again.

[Farman]

They've done it with certain breeds of dogs. I bet the insurance cos. are all for it.

I wonder if Ken Dunkin has more to do with ins. then donuts?

[2000silverz28]

They've done it with certain breeds of dogs. I bet the insurance cos. are all for it.

I wonder if Ken Dunkin has more to do with ins. then donuts?

In hardeman county they passed a law that you had to carry $100,000 liability insurance to own a pit bull. I think that is bull****. I don't own one or plan on it but its still a stupid law and could lead to other laws that are similar.

[Guest HexHead]

The problem here is going to be finding insurance companies that want to take on the risk of insuring the liability of such a policy. Currently, you insure your guns against theft, but you have very little or no protection against liability from your homeowners insurance.

What they are trying to do is require insurance that's basically not available. And if it should become available, you can be sure the people that need a gun in the house the most won't be able to afford it. It's just the back door to a gun ban.

[musicman]

"Rep. Kenneth Dunkin's bill seeks to amend the state's Firearm Owners Identification Card Act to provides that any person who owns a firearm in the state maintain a $1 million or higher policy of liability insurance "specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person."

Wow, that's nuts. The "willful" acts part is crazy. Insurance doesn't usually cover "willful acts." HexHead has it right, no insurance company is going to accept "willful acts" for a covered risk! If it can be proven that you willfully drove your car into somebody to hurt/kill them, it's not covered. (First off, that's illegal, so you would be in the act of committing a crime, which negates any insurance coverage anyway.)

There's no freaking way any of the major companies would decide to cover someone willfully shooting another person. However, there's always some company out there willing to give it a shot, and as said earlier, they'll probably charge out the whazoo for it.

[Guest KWW67]

I don't see this happening. I think it is just a tactic to appease the anti-gun crowd. I think there would be many challanges to it and would be ruled an infringment in the end. Just my two cents.

[Guest HexHead]

I don't see this happening. I think it is just a tactic to appease the anti-gun crowd. I think there would be many challanges to it and would be ruled an infringment in the end. Just my two cents.

Yes, but "in the end" could take years with that as law.