Why does Gun Club Liability have to be so expensive?


PDA






Gaffer
January 6, 2006, 02:56 PM
When the NRA continuely touts the use of a gun is so much safer than just about any other sports tool, why does the cost of gun club liability insurance cost so much? Is it the public perception that has so drastically caused the cost of such insurance to rise astronomically since 9-11? Most insurance companies now advocate at least a $1 million policy for liability and the cost to most clubs is now several thousand dollars per year.

Now I know that the NRA has an endorsed insurance program as well but it is not any less expensive than commercial insurance. Why since this shooting sport is so safe could not the NRA or some other shooting organization create a specific insurance program just for gun clubs and ranges that would reduce this horrific cost.

Many clubs have been forced to shutdown and others are struggling with the high cost of such insurance. If our sport is so safe why are we paying such high premiums? Anyone got an answer?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why does Gun Club Liability have to be so expensive?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
TarpleyG
January 6, 2006, 03:48 PM
It's just like anything else that's taboo...it always costs more.

Greg

Pilgrim
January 6, 2006, 04:05 PM
I belong to two gun clubs, one in Idaho and one in California. The California club is a member's only range. The Idaho club opens its range to non-members.

The Idaho club just had a huge jump in annual membership fees and daily range fees. The increase in daily range fees for members was modest, but the non-member daily fees increased big time. The reason given by the club board was increased insurance cost.

The CA club has managed to keep fees under control, I'm sure because of the members only rule.

When I shoot at the CA club, I am pretty much sure all the shooters know the rules and keep an eye out for each other. At the Idaho club range, it's a toss up whether the guy in the next shooting position knows what is going on. It gets really fun during pre-hunting season time, when it seems everyone and his uncle comes down to sight in their rifle for deer and elk season. It is common to have rifle muzzles sweep the line and shooters walk down range while the range is still hot to have a look at their targets.

The Idaho club used to have a couple days a week as members only, but that was suspended during hunting season to earn more money from the non-members who are sighting in their rifles.

For entertainment, nothing beats watching the non-members sighting in their hunting rifles. They come without spotting scopes, staple guns, target pasters, etc., and expect the regulars to loan/give them supplies and let them use their spotting scopes. I recall one ill equipped hunter shoot three rounds, then want a cease fire so he could go look at his target. Equally entertaining is the hunter who has a new scope on his rifle and goes right to the 100 yard range to zero his scope.

Pilgrim

Standing Wolf
January 6, 2006, 04:10 PM
I have a hunch the insurance companies are just charging what the market will bear.

VorpalSpork
January 6, 2006, 04:25 PM
When the NRA continuely touts the use of a gun is so much safer than just about any other sports tool I think you are exaggerating what the NRA claims.

The fact that the NRA insurance program isn't any less expensive than the others is a good sign that the insurance companies are not gouging anyone on these policies.

I think the real reason may be that there is not any correlation between how much damage is actually done and how much a lawyer can get in compensation for those damages.

Car Knocker
January 6, 2006, 04:36 PM
Part of the reason is our legal system. With lawyers working for contingency fees, the bigger the award, the bigger the fee. Sympathetic juries may award plaintiffs amounts bearing no relationship to the injury suffered. If someone was fatally injured at a gun club, it would greatly surprise me if the club wasn't sued for well in excess of $1 million.

xd9fan
January 6, 2006, 09:33 PM
same reason guns are too expensive..........lawyers:rolleyes:

1 old 0311
January 6, 2006, 09:53 PM
I had some rental property and was advised to look at a $1,000,000 blanket policy to cover me. It was less than $200.00 per year.

Kevin

Art Eatman
January 6, 2006, 09:57 PM
It's part of the cost of doing business in a litigious society. The U.S. has more lawyers per capita than any other country in the world. That would not be the case if they couldn't get work--so it devolves on We The People and our willingness to sue.

The malpractice premium for an Ob/Gyn MD can run $250 K per year. Per office day open, that's $1,000 that he owes when he opens the door each morning. Does you firing range net $1,000 per day?

Art

Marty Hayes
January 6, 2006, 10:03 PM
For every trial lawyer, there are a hundred people wanting to sue each other. Elsewise, the lawyers couldn't stay in biz.

DJJ
January 6, 2006, 11:04 PM
Yup. Same reason a new airplane engine - basically an oversized Volkwagen Bug engine, with technology from the same era - costs $30,000.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why does Gun Club Liability have to be so expensive?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!