HR 127

[eddiememphis]

So the real question. Asked in a hypothetical manner, of course.

The fine for failing to register your firearms start @ $50K



AND the penalty for an unregistered, happy switched item is?

$10K and 10 years

No.

922(aa) says it's unlawful to possess a firearm or ammunition unless... you have a license and the gun is registered. Penalty for this is no less than $75,000 and no more than $150,000, not less than 15 years in prison and not more than 25 years, or both.

If you don't have the mandatory insurance policy, it's $50-$100k, 10-20 years, or both.

If it's is not your gun the owner needed to have informed the attorney general of the loan. It's not clear if that is the AG of the US or your state AG.

The big one is if you transfer a firearm to someone under 18 and it is used in a crime, unintentional shooting or suicide. $100-$150k, 25-40 years, or both.

[ChunkyMonkey]

Lobbyists have been busy collecting donation from local gun stores... It's going to get worse.

[brutal]

I forgot to add there is a requirement for the registered gun owner to obtain insurance.
No definition of the type or coverage limits- probably one of those things that needs to pass before we know the details.
However, it is another way to limit ownership since insurance companies can be coerced politically to either refuse to offer these policies or have the rate so expensive as to price out the average American.

"subsection a policy that insures the person against liability for losses and damages resulting from the use of any firearm by the person during the 1-year period that begins with the date the policy is issued."

It's a government run "insurance" policy.

This woman is absolutely insane.

[eddiememphis]

This woman is absolutely insane.

Nah. She is just a believer that government does things best.

“We need a massive takeover by the Federal Government to massively vaccinate the American people,” she said. “We need it to be done through the officers and the expertise of FEMA.”

[Rucker61]

I forgot to add there is a requirement for the registered gun owner to obtain insurance.
No definition of the type or coverage limits- probably one of those things that needs to pass before we know the details.
However, it is another way to limit ownership since insurance companies can be coerced politically to either refuse to offer these policies or have the rate so expensive as to price out the average American.

"subsection a policy that insures the person against liability for losses and damages resulting from the use of any firearm by the person during the 1-year period that begins with the date the policy is issued."

Liability insurance requirement

“Though well intentioned, such proposals misunderstand a fundamental principle of insurance—that it is designed to cover fortuitous, or accidental events; not intentional conduct. Property/casualty insurance does not and cannot cover intentional behavior such as criminal acts,” said Willem O. Rijksen, vice president of public affairs for the American Insurance Association.


According to Jimi Grande, senior vice president of federal and political affairs for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, gun liability insurance measures would neither deter violence nor help victims.


“Liability coverage is designed to protect against accidental damages, most of which involving guns would be covered under a homeowner’s insurance policy. While some policies may provide coverage for liability stemming from the intentional use of a firearm for defensive purposes, no liability insurance product covers intentional acts of malicious violence, whether committed with a gun, a car, or any other instrument that is used as a weapon to deliberately harm people,” said Grande. “It is inconceivable that any insurer would offer such coverage, either as part of a homeowners or renters policy or on a stand-alone basis.”


https://www.insurancejournal.com/new.../10/287849.htm
Many home insurance companies (like Esurance) don't increase premiums for gun ownership. In fact, they may not even require homeowners to disclose whether they own a firearm or plan on owning one in the future. The only way coverage would increase is if you select the aforementioned insurance rider for your collection.

https://www.esurance.com/info/homeow...ners-insurance

[JohnnyDrama]

It's a government run "insurance" policy.

This woman is absolutely insane.

Not really insane. Just an absolute tool.

[Great-Kazoo]

I forgot to add there is a requirement for the registered gun owner to obtain insurance.
No definition of the type or coverage limits- probably one of those things that needs to pass before we know the details.
However, it is another way to limit ownership since insurance companies can be coerced politically to either refuse to offer these policies or have the rate so expensive as to price out the average American.

"subsection a policy that insures the person against liability for losses and damages resulting from the use of any firearm by the person during the 1-year period that begins with the date the policy is issued."

You also forgot. Actually the democrats forgot. The same ins type companies that would insure you are.



The same one's NY , N.J and 1 or 2 other states kicked out and said they couldn't sell ins in their state. Or some other crazy democrat double speak.

[Great-Kazoo]

No.

922(aa) says it's unlawful to possess a firearm or ammunition unless... you have a license and the gun is registered. Penalty for this is no less than $75,000 and no more than $150,000, not less than 15 years in prison and not more than 25 years, or both.

If you don't have the mandatory insurance policy, it's $50-$100k, 10-20 years, or both.

If it's is not your gun the owner needed to have informed the attorney general of the loan. It's not clear if that is the AG of the US or your state AG.

The big one is if you transfer a firearm to someone under 18 and it is used in a crime, unintentional shooting or suicide. $100-$150k, 25-40 years, or both.

you completely missed why i posted that.

[DDT951]

LEO's could support this bill, as they get an exemption from all of it.

Rules for thee, and all.




I REALLY hate the idea of a public registry for firearm owners, that anyone can access.

Applying for a job? Well sorry, it seems you own guns, we can't hire you.


Don't register yourself and then have to use your gun in self defense? You might have been better off letting the criminal have their way with you. (Which I think is the intention of some politicians recently anyways.....)

Look at the bright side.

Applying for a job? Well sorry, it seems you don't own guns, we can't hire you.

Employers could use it to screen people who don't own guns?

[ray1970]

Look at the bright side.

Applying for a job? Well sorry, it seems you don't own guns, we can't hire you.

Employers could use it to screen people who don't own guns?

Let me educate you a bit. It would probably break down more like this....

Well, you seem very well qualified for the position but it appears you are a registered firearm owner.

Thanks for applying for the position but I?m afraid we aren?t willing to offer you the job.