2024 - HB430 - Firearms - Liability Insurance - Public Wearing and Carrying

[Biggfoot44]

Lots of people were looking for insurance before they even had their permits.

This isn't That type of insurance. This is just for accidental discharges .

 

[FPL53]

And, what about all of the criminals that are arrested for violent crimes with a firearm. Are they going to heavily fine them for not having liability insurance after dropping the firearm charges? Of course not! Once again, the piece of sh!t MGA and Rep Fair wants to penalize the law abiding citizens.

I really wish I could move out of this hell hole of a state.

 

[Doco Overboard]

This isn't That type of insurance. This is just for accidental discharges .

Thanks, I was focused on the words "carry" and "accident"
I dont need a permit to do any of that while I'm carrying a gun, unless in public.
There may have also been public used in there too, going by memory will get you in trouble it seems.

 

[RJRjr]

But I am a mere peasant your majesty. The bridge I and my 5 children live under is under construction and I need to find a new bridge. We are almost out of spam. How can I afford to protect my family . Think of the poor.

 

[Mr H]

If the report I heard last night was accurate, the type of insurance the bill calls for doesn't even exist.

 

[BurkeM]

If the report I heard last night was accurate, the type of insurance the bill calls for doesn't even exist.

Yup.

And the MGA can't compel the industry to prepare and sell Unicorn farts.

 

[OldBrokenGrunt]

This is the kind of horseshit that waste tax money. Every one of these “so called” representatives need to be sued in civil court. Is that a possibility? Individual lawsuits against each one of these clowns?

 

[imaoldcowhand]

I am so confused.

My guns are unloaded and locked away.

I don't have a wear and carry permit, and the only time I take a gun out is to go to the range.

Which has become less and less as the years pass. I really should sell them.

Will I have to get insurance to take my guns to the range?
Or just having them at home?

 

[Allen65]

This is the kind of horseshit that waste tax money. Every one of these “so called” representatives need to be sued in civil court. Is that a possibility? Individual lawsuits against each one of these clowns?

Unfortunately, there's no way to sue a legislature for legislating, no matter what their output smells like.

With the part-time MGA, it might be more effective to picket the businesses of some of the more noxious anti-2A members in the off-season.

 

[Growler215]

Since it's the only reasonable justification, waiting to see their statistics on how many people Maryland permit holders have killed or injured in cases that were not self defense.

 

[Rob00taws6]

And, what about all of the criminals that are arrested for violent crimes with a firearm. Are they going to heavily fine them for not having liability insurance after dropping the firearm charges? Of course not! Once again, the piece of sh!t MGA and Rep Fair wants to penalize the law abiding citizens.

I really wish I could move out of this hell hole of a state.

Have to arrest them first… the drum mag, clearly protruding out of a waistband, attached to stolen Glock 19 with illegal Glock switch hasn’t grabbed anyone’s attention yet. The lack of insurance surely will…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[scottyfz6]

This isn't That type of insurance. This is just for accidental discharges .

I am going to make a longer post.
But no its not only for accidental discharges. It says "accidents" and I would assume that means you miss your target ( bad guy ) and hit a car. I am sure the courts will consider that an accident.

It is also required to carry even if you dont discharge the gun at all. AKA a cop sees you carrying they can ask to see your insurance, if you dont have one they give you the ticket. There is no 4th or 5th amendment protection here. If you carry you must have the insurance, same as no 4th or 5th amendment protection for handing over your drivers licence and ins when driving a car.

 

[Threeband]

Since it's the only reasonable justification, waiting to see their statistics on how many people Maryland permit holders have killed or injured in cases that were not self defense.

They don't need to use "reason" to justify anything. The Left bases everything on emotion, confusion, lies, and emotionally confused lies.

The Left can not withstand any exposure to Reason at all.

 

[whiskey3]

I am going to make a longer post.
But no its not only for accidental discharges. It says "accidents" and I would assume that means you miss your target ( bad guy ) and hit a car. I am sure the courts will consider that an accident.

It is also required to carry even if you dont discharge the gun at all. AKA a cop sees you carrying they can ask to see your insurance, if you dont have one they give you the ticket. There is no 4th or 5th amendment protection here. If you carry you must have the insurance, same as no 4th or 5th amendment protection for handing over your drivers licence and ins when driving a car.

I think this is accurate.

and fear Mr H is right:

“If the report I heard last night was accurate, the type of insurance the bill calls for doesn't even exist.”

 

[Blacksmith101]

Langley Outdoors on YouTube just covered this:

While EVERYONE Looks At The Border... More Insurance REQUIREMENTS For Concealed Carry Is Spreading..​

 

[BurkeM]

s that a possibility? Individual lawsuits against each one of these clowns?

NO. Sovereign immunity.

 

[BurkeM]

Once again,

It sounds like the penalty for failure to comply is the "issuance of a citation."



Any comments, jokes, or poals ?

If cited, the ACCUSED has the right to trial in District Court with an attorney of their choice.

At that time, competent counsel should provide the Judge and prosecutor with the full Bruen order AND a framed copy of the Bill of Rights.

No judge could reasonably CONVICT someone under the proposed statute (if it passes)

 

[Allen65]

If cited, the ACCUSED has the right to trial in District Court with an attorney of their choice.

At that time, competent counsel should provide the Judge and prosecutor with the full Bruen order AND a framed copy of the Bill of Rights.

No judge could reasonably CONVICT someone under the proposed statute (if it passes)

"Reasonably", yes. But we live in 4CA at the Federal level, and at State level, every single judge was appointed with the full blessing of the Party. And the Antis in MGA well know it.

About the only time we can win in this state is when a law is like the MoCo carry statute that's a prima facie an in-your-face affront to established law that the court simply can't ignore. And even that was only a partial win at the PI level.

 

[BurkeM]

"Reasonably", yes. But we live in 4CA at the Federal level, and at State level, every single judge was appointed with the full blessing of the Party. And the Antis in MGA well know it.

About the only time we can win in this state is when a law is like the MoCo carry statute that's a prima facie an in-your-face affront to established law that the court simply can't ignore. And even that was only a partial win at the PI level.

These are the same judges that grant a thousand "nol prosequi" and "stet" decisions a week for people accused of violent crimes.

 

[Reds147]

This is the kind of horseshit that waste tax money. Every one of these “so called” representatives need to be sued in civil court. Is that a possibility? Individual lawsuits against each one of these clowns?

I AGREE !!