I guess my first question is "what is covered now?". And I'm not going to try and find my policy. I would assume/hope that most policies have liability coverages that would cover this kind of thing? And who will incur damages? Little brother who got accidently shot?
Likewise, I see requiring insurance for gun owners to be extremely unlikely to have any impact on gun injuries and deaths.I guess my first question is "what is covered now?". And I'm not going to try and find my policy. I would assume/hope that most policies have liability coverages that would cover this kind of thing? And who will incur damages? Little brother who got accidently shot?
Insurance rates.......
Also, I see that the .05 DUI/BAC bill is in Committee. Sorry all you teetotalers, but if passed this will decimate the bar and restaurant industry that is still recovering from COVID.
I caught some news report lamenting all the drunk driving deaths and how this will save countless lives. And some reporter said an average (175 lb?) guy could have 4 drinks in 2 hours and be below .05. Bullshit.
Here's my thing. How many drivers at .05 get into wrecks and hurt or kill innocent people? We probably have no way of knowing because at .05 you a) aren't getting in a wreck, and/or b) since .05 is currently legal, what arrest stats would there be? A: None.
What I would like to see is stats on accidents and sadly injury/fatal crashes, and what the driver's BAC was. And overall stats on the same criteria where alcohol was not a factor.
I would bet $20 that very few crashes, injury/fatal or not, involve a .08 or say .09 driver. Further I would double down and bet that the non-alcohol crashes, etc. are damn near as many as the .08 ones. Shit I bet texting-caused accidents are twice as many.
The guys (or gals) that you hear or see in the news careening the wrong way down the freeway, or running red lights, or speeding through town at a high rate of speed or running into a tree are F-ed up. Way, way over .05 or .08. Fine to throw away the key on those that do that. But the careful guy who share a pitcher or 2 with his buds then cautiously makes his way home obeying all laws? C'mon. Do not tell me that going from .08 to .05 will save one life. Complete BS.
I actually tried to read through all this. The first article - wow a word salad of graphs and stats, meandering all over the place. In the second article, I picked out one piece. In 2020, traffic deaths were: zero alcohol, 63.5%. .01 to .07, 5.3%. .08 and above, 31.2%.
Don't yell at me, I'm not in favor of the bill. My point was that poor people can't afford to buy guns. Or ammo. They don't just hand them out.
When you say “the criminals,” are you referring to the thugs on the street or the ones in Olympia?
Chicago is flooded with guns coming in from neighboring states it has nothing to do with their strict gun laws but that is a popular wingnut claim
Good one, and no disagreement here - although I would not use the term "criminals". The left wing in control of our legislature does do some criminal things though. Just not literally.
Like pass a bill, put it on the election ballot asking constituents "Keep this insane spending bill that taxes you into oblivion" or "Repeal" said bill......... Its a Repeal vote for me every time. I actually went along with the Light Rail Transit bill back in what 2016(?). Definitely have buyers remorse because that collection of taxes is out of control.
So, what happens when insurance drops you? Like what is happening now for auto and homeowners.
Why doesn't Indiana, with way looser gun laws and is where lots of these guns come from, have anywhere near the gun violence issue? "Wingnut claim" lol
Australia had had it at .05 since before most of us were born. A bit different than what you see in the movies and TV shows. And many want it to be even lower. .02 (one beer) or even zero. Some countries are already there.
And how do you enforce it? That's one of my big beefs with the liberal crowd. Even if the idea isn't terrible, the devil is always in the details.
Make no doubt - this is 100% a(nother) cash grab by the state of WA.
Problem is that those are almost always advisory votes, and nobody's under any obligation to follow them. Even if 95% of people vote "repeal" there's nothing that says they have to.
I can't point to (or look for, right now) any data to support this, but I'm absolutely certain that you'll find a very strong correlation between gun violence and number of low-income residents. Not percentage or per capita of low income - sheer number. When you get a lot of them in one place, it turns into a zoo. And, where do we concentrate our low income residents? Cities - and the larger the city, the more of them we have.
Bingo, America's (and my) love affair with the car. That is what throws me about Australia (and frankly about their gun laws as well). Never been there, but I do know that a whole lot of it is BFE (Bum F Egypt). You telling me those folk out in the Outback aren't swilling big time then getting in their Utes and driving home?
They've got less than 10% of our population and population density, and most of them live on the coasts. If you get just a little into the interior, you can drive around all alone.
There are still some "high risk" companies that will take you in. It can cost a zillion though.
My favorite is the “uninsured motorist” coverage. Insurance is mandatory, but you need to buy coverage that covers if someone else doesn’t.
You really don't have anything intelligent to add to any thread, regardless of the topic, do you?
It's really more about "under insured".
I don’t know who ran it, but it’s been a shithole longer than that. Stockyards, railroads, political jungle as early as the 1850s. And it was built in marshy lowlands so their first sewer line flowed back into town. It literally was a shithole.
I dunno. You tell me. Or tell Al Capone.
This reminds me…it’s funny if you look at democrats and republicans over time. They’ve both basically moved 180 degrees and swapped platforms.
Your mortgage loan requires insurance. The servicer will force place it (now known by the friendlier label of "lender placed insurance") if you don't have it, which is incredibly expensive. I made two claims on my homeowners within a five year period and Safeco dropped me.
Alway boggled my why this happens. You'd think that they would want to continue collecting to try to break even. Or maybe the math is they'll never break even and the whole insurance industry is a gamble that you'll never claim and once you do they've lost.
You are correct, but there are differences between covering the mortgage and covering the house.
