I recently saw a left leaning friend post a meme from the Facebook page “Occupy Democrats” which said, “If we simply required gun owners to carry liability insurance the insurance industry would destroy the gun industry,” and the post had cheers and jeers and so I thought we might take a minute to explore this idea and determine if it was intelligent or ridiculously naive and stupid. I invite the readers to go ahead and guess which it will be before reading further…

So first let’s explore one industry destroying another unrelated industry? Where is the intelligence in this idea? I get that a segment of the US population is anti-gun and will always be anti-gun. But do you want to be the one responsible for putting all those people out of work? How will you provide for their families once you destroy their workplace? Are you willing to give up a portion of your own salary to subsidize and maintain their current lifestyle? I know I’m not. Now I am all for business making it own their own even in times of adversity, but I am not for one industry destroying another, perhaps you are, and if so you might want to take a hard look in the mirror and decide if you like the person looking back at you.

Now that we have established one industry really shouldn’t try to eliminate another unrelated industry let’s explore insurance, specifically liability insurance for gun owners. I suppose the insurance would be required if you owned a firearm. So would criminals purchase the required insurance? We all know the answer, it is no. So who would purchase the insurance, law-abiding citizens of course. Now when would we need the insurance? When an accident occurred with one of our firearms. So I accidentally shoot someone or something with my firearm. It could conceivably happen, but in the past 48 years of being around firearms I have not had one single accident, none, nada. So assuming I am average the only time the insurance would be collected would be when a firearm caused harm or destruction of property. I saw an article which said 32% of the US population owns a firearm. Assuming 1/3 of the population is children who cannot own one that would actually mean 50% of adults. So half the adult population would be required to own this insurance. At an estimate of 100 million people creating that group, let’s see what impact this might have. According to Wikipedia stats there were 85K nonfatal injuries and 33K fatalities with 21K of the fatalities being suicide. Assuming suicide would never collect that is less than 100K injuries and fatalities (including those caused by police and criminals). So that means the incident rate for ALL is 0.1%. The insurance industry would pay out so little of the time it wouldn’t even be a blip on their radar. Look at it this way, as an instructor I pay $300 per year to cover my courses and changes are will never need it. With such a low incident rate, the average gun owner would probably pay $50 and it would not change the gun industry one iota, it would simply line the pockets of the insurance industry.

I could go on, but suffice it to say if you believe this will work you are a special kind of stupid. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize insurance would not stop suicide, it would not stop criminals, and it would only create more profit for the insurance companies. Bottom line – Dumber Than A Box Of Rocks!