NJ governor bans sale of insurance to gun owners

[RockIsland]

I thought these asshats want to require gun owners to have insurance?

I wish they'd make up their freakin minds already.

[57springer]

Its1low is Hillary in disguise!

Noah

............. You were quick on that one

[streaker69]

This probably is targeted directly at the LawShield type services. Those insurance companies that will defend gun owners, and probably against companies that will write a policy to insure large collections.

[lts1ow]

Its1low is Hillary in disguise!

Noah

i think he was just saying no one can get things like carryguard because no one in nj can carry therefor no one can improperly use a firearm therefor there is no gun crime in NJ because only criminals use firearms improperly and all of them obviously have insurance to protect themselves from their robbery and murders
(my ramble doesn't make sense to me either)

what insurance encourages you to improperly use anything anyway? (other than having big gov protections which have been known to vastly encourage improper use of anything)
where this really nips people is no insurance to CYA when you defensively shoot that violent repeat offender, out on probation for illegal weapon possession, that climbed in your window and pointed a gun at you.

Pretty much.

Its a virtue signaling BS move by our glorious fucktard in charge.

[knight0334]

Well on the bright side, they cannot force gun owners into having insurance in order to own firearms like they are trying to do elsewhere.

[fallenleader]

I thought these asshats want to require gun owners to have insurance?

I wish they'd make up their freakin minds already.

yeah thought they wanted to require every gun owner to carry a minimum $1m liability policy.
and require them to train and get approval cards from the .gov
also require us to lock them up at night, because alexa WILL know... and they will send the stormtroopers.

Well on the bright side, they cannot force gun owners into having insurance in order to own firearms like they are trying to do elsewhere.

why not? CA also requires technology that doesn't completely exist. NJ does so as well with the smart guns(or was that NY?)
requiring insurance while also prohibiting insurance from existing is the type of trap these people love. especially when the courts are stacked to give it a nod of approval.

[father-of-five]

I thought so as well, However, the "law" is kind of vague and seems it pertains to "gun owners"?? I'm not sure....

"6. The Commissioner of Banking and Insurance, within 30 days,
is instructed to take all appropriate action within her authority to
prohibit and/or limit the sale, procurement, marketing or
distribution of insurance products that may serve to encourage the
improper use of firearms. "


WTF does that even mean???? ^^^^^^^^^
https://nj.gov/infobank/eo/056murphy/pdf/EO-83.pdf

Hmmm....
Somehow New Jersey's suicide to homicide ratio appears vastly different from the rest of the country in the "whereas" section. Probably inaccurate sattstics that they don't expect people to notce.....unless New Jersey is the actual leader in gang violence, which I can believe.

I can't wait to move back to Pennsylvania.

[Bang]

Historically, it does mirror auto insurance. Murphy's law expresses concern that insurance tends to serve "to encourage the improper use of firearms. "

Meaning, people will be less cautious in use of firearms if they believe they are covered by insurance.

That kind of reasoning does have a degree of merit. Around 1960 the nation's first no-fault insurance state was Massachusetts. When it went into effect, Massachusetts (particularly Boston's) accident rate increased notably. People became more aggressive in asserting their intentions behind the wheel, and less yielding to others, in the mistaken belief that who is at fault is no longer a concern. Where they made their mistake was, no-fault wasn't about collision damage and who caused it. It had to do with the medical part of the coverage.

What PRNJ legislators and Murphy in signing are ignoring is the insurer makes it expressly clear that you are not covered if found guilty or civilly liable.

[Defender]

He said the "distribution of insurance products that may serve to encourage the improper use of firearms". Sorry Governor, but self-defense is not an improper use of a firearm.

[Steeltrap]

...that may serve to encourage the improper use of firearms.

What if it serves to encourage the proper use of firearms? Buy a liability policy.......get a NRA "Safe handling of firearm" brochure.