Two Simple Laws Could Solve America's Epidemic of Violence

jj23

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Nov 26, 2016
Messages
22,421
Reputation
5,571
Daps
107,351
it would have to be a policy category that they created.
its not really a stretch, my gubs in my house are covered as property under my homeowners insurance any way
it would be a liability coverage just like with cars
discounts available based on make model just like cars
characteristics of the owner etc.
it can be done.

I suppose the question would be - What would the premiums have to be like to cover the spread on an accidental or deliberate shooting using the insured gun?

No way I can see this being underwritten by Llloyds or any other insurance company underwriters unless the premiums are ridiculous.
 

Fenian

Superstar
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
9,364
Reputation
3,180
Daps
32,860
Reppin
Govan
Gun regulations won't do anything to stem people's inherent attitude about violence in-general.

Restricting access to guns means they will use some other means to kill/beat one another to death.....like crossbows/bows, poison, baseball bats, knives, bare hands, homemade explosives/bio-weapons, etc. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.

You have to treat the disease. Gun regulations only treat the symptoms of the disease.

Sure, other nations have very strict laws, but they don't have this country's unique history and are completely lacking our unique demographic make-up so, comparing them to us is disingenuous.

Personally, I don't need a weapon and prefer to solve disagreements without violence.

That's just me, though.​

Nah taking guns away makes a huge difference. I live in Scotland and we have a fukking disgusting problem with violence that does need to be addressed, but because guns are so hard to get our murder rate is fairly low.

People get stabbed, shot with crossbows and hit with bricks all the time but the vast majority of people live because it's hard as fukk to kill someone with these things.

I've never heard of 50+ people being killed in a mass stabbing, shyt like that is only possible with guns.
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
43,073
Reputation
7,987
Daps
118,505
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Fenian said:
I've never heard of 50+ people being killed in a mass stabbing, shyt like that is only possible with guns.

Actually, the 'mass killing is only possible with guns' argument fails due to the prevalence of easily obtained items to manufacture bombs and other chemical/biological weapons of mass destruction.........



Just add some nails/screws/etc. and .......



No, my friend, regulating guns is equivalent to treating cancer with aspirin. Sure, it'll alleviate some pain, but won't get rid of the actual problem.....unless you plan on regulating toilet cleaner, sugar, flour, aluminum foil, fertilizer, etc.​
 

General Mills

More often than not I tend to take that L.
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
28,632
Reputation
18,938
Daps
216,797
Reppin
Piffsburgh, PA
Nah taking guns away makes a huge difference. I live in Scotland and we have a fukking disgusting problem with violence that does need to be addressed, but because guns are so hard to get our murder rate is fairly low.

People get stabbed, shot with crossbows and hit with bricks all the time but the vast majority of people live because it's hard as fukk to kill someone with these things.

I've never heard of 50+ people being killed in a mass stabbing, shyt like that is only possible with guns.
Yall doing drivebys with crossbows??:ohhh:
 
Top