Residents of MA - Prepare for a fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Trip20

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
505
Location
WI
I found the following on this thread from TFL. Thought some Mass residents on THR would want to know about it.

Source: http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/ht02/ht02125.htm

No license to carry shall be issued pursuant to this section unless and until the applicant for the license or for the renewal of an existing license presents to the licensing authority a complete list of every handgun owned by the applicant along with a certificate of insurance verifying that the applicant has a valid insurance policy insuring against any harm or damage that might arise out of the use of each weapon on said list. The applicant shall swear under the penalties of perjury that said list is a complete list of all handguns owned by the applicant. The insurance policy shall be in an amount of at least $250,000 and shall list the specific weapons covered by the policy.
Click to expand...

Good luck fighting this one ladies and gents. I never thought I'd see the day when a compulsory insurance requirement would accompany your CCW Permit. :barf:
 
Sooooo..
The state that gave us Ted Kennedy is giving law-abiding gun owners a hard time.

Will wonders never cease....:rolleyes:

BTW, how much insurance does one have to have in MA if they are driving a "friend" home across a bridge and the car goes into the water and the friend dies?
 
FYI, in order to legally drive a car in Mass., the driver must carry bodily injury limits of up to a basic limit of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per accident. Yet a licensed gun owner will be forced to carry a policy of $250,000.

Statistically speaking which person has a higher probability of actually injuring someone . . . :banghead:
 
petrel800 said:
FYI, in order to legally drive a car in Mass., the driver must carry bodily injury limits of up to a basic limit of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per accident. Yet a licensed gun owner will be forced to carry a policy of $250,000.

Statistically speaking which person has a higher probability of actually injuring someone . . . :banghead:
Click to expand...

Good point. Since the statistics show that concealed-carry folk are far less likely than the general population to commit a violent crime, you might wonder if insurance companies would realize this and charge very little for $250,000 worth of coverage. Sadly I doubt it.

And hold on a second...is the insurance supposed to cover instances of "neglect" and other "accidents"? Because if not, then it's de-facto "criminal" insurance, wherein the state assumes that carrying a gun makes you a suspected future criminal. This is wrong on so many levels...
 
Nice. Real nice.

I'm glad I'm already leaving this state.

“;and that no more than one firearm shall be sold to any person in the Commonwealth who has purchased a firearm within the past 30 days.”
Click to expand...
Super.

All weapons as defined in section 121 including, but not limited to, firearms, large capacity weapons, rifles and shotguns sold within the commonwealth without a safety device designed to prevent the discharge of such weapon by unauthorized users and approved by the colonel of the state police including, but no limited to, mechanical locks or devices designed to recognize and authorize, or otherwise allow the firearm to be discharged by its owner or authorized user, by solenoid use-limitation devices, key activated or combination trigger or handle locks, radio frequency tags, automated fingerprint identification systems or voice recognition, provided, that such device is commercially available, shall be defective and the sale of such weapons shall constitute a breach of warranty under section 2-314 of chapter 106 and an unfair and deceptive trade act or practice under section 2 of chapter 93A.
Click to expand...

Wonderful!
 
The person who wrote this has no clue about insurance.

First off property can only be insured for loss or theft, and a gun is property.
Property cannot have a liability policy issued to it. People however can obtain liability insurance. Most homeowners policies have a liability component, and its fairly easy to get an umbrella liability policy.

If the insured person commits a crime or a violation of law or an intentional act, it may not be covered.

Are they asking for a special CCW liability coverage???? If so it may not exist in the state, due to no insurance company having a state approved rate or policy form for CCW liability.

The list of guns is just a registry and has no bearing on a personnal liability policy, since an inanimate object cannot be liable for an act committed by a person.

Edited after re reading the proposed law, I can tell you that there is no such insurance availible nor will there ever be. So this is a defacto revocation of every CCW at renewal.
 
Ha, the fun is only just beginning if that law gets passed... now that every lawyer in MA knows that law-abiding gun owners are carrying a $250,000 paycheck, you can expect to see a lot more litigation directed at collecting that paycheck. This in turn will make the insurance more expensive and you can see where it ultimately ends up...
 
one gun a month if this passes and the insurance thing im getting the hell out of this state when i turn 18 hopefully for vermont.
 
Sometimes I regret not staying in MA and fighting the good fight for firearms rights. Then I remember how painful ulcers purportedly are.
 
Just spoke to GOAL. They are well aware of this bill, and at the moment it appears to be going nowhere.

All MA residents should calls their .gov types and encourage them to work toward improving our current laws and not pandering to anti legislation which amounts to posturing for people seeking higher office.
 
Trip20 said:
I found the following on this thread from TFL. Thought some Mass residents on THR would want to know about it.

Source: http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/ht02/ht02125.htm



Good luck fighting this one ladies and gents. I never thought I'd see the day when a compulsory insurance requirement would accompany your CCW Permit. :barf:
Click to expand...

And what's the typical penalty, again, for a criminal who does NOT get a license, does NOT get their gun legally, and carries it in an ILLEGAL manner and gets caught?

Oh, right...revolving door and a slap on the wrist. Because, you know, criminals are victims. :barf:
 
BostonGeorge said:
Thank God I've moved to America.
Click to expand...

Welcome north of the border! Far more sane, isn't it? Here, CCW is a background check and $10, and a couple days at most.

Funny, not much of a problem with violent crime, either!
 
Manedwolf said:
Welcome north of the border! Far more sane, isn't it? Here, CCW is a background check and $10, and a couple days at most.

Funny, not much of a problem with violent crime, either!
Click to expand...

Thank you. I don't have my CCW, but I'm still enjoying all the other luxuries of the free world. I had lived my whole life in Boston, but it seemed like I was paying a lot of money for nothing, excempting needless, mindless legislation.
 
thank God I moved to Texas!!

I still have my MA carry permit to show people here that you can actually get one, most people dont belive they exist in Ma.


Dont forget The AG is planning on running for gov when romney leaves!
 
Master Blaster said:
The person who wrote this has no clue about insurance.

First off property can only be insured for loss or theft, and a gun is property.
Property cannot have a liability policy issued to it. People however can obtain liability insurance. Most homeowners policies have a liability component, and its fairly easy to get an umbrella liability policy.

If the insured person commits a crime or a violation of law or an intentional act, it may not be covered.

Are they asking for a special CCW liability coverage???? If so it may not exist in the state, due to no insurance company having a state approved rate or policy form for CCW liability.

The list of guns is just a registry and has no bearing on a personnal liability policy, since an inanimate object cannot be liable for an act committed by a person.

Edited after re reading the proposed law, I can tell you that there is no such insurance availible nor will there ever be. So this is a defacto revocation of every CCW at renewal.
Click to expand...

Your right, I don't believe this particular coverage exists anywhere in the U.S.

However, property can in fact have insurance... and the coverage goes well beyond "theft or loss". Think auto insurance. Liability (the primary reason for auto policies) covers damage you do to others both bodily injury, and property damage, through the use of your auto (substitute auto for firearm).

If you think you're insured with your auto policy (instead of your actual auto), you better read your policy closely. The coverage for your auto policy follows what ever active VIN #'s you have scheduled on the policy at that particular time... unless you have a blanket form of coverage like "Hired Auto Liability" or "Non-ownership Liability" (check for a symbol "01" for Liability, or symbols "07, 08, 09" on the declarations page of your policy).

It would be very easy for a MA State Plan to form in order to provide insurance for this requirement (should the law pass, and it makes this insurance a compulsary requirement). There's a similar pool or "plan" for those who cannot obtain insurance for their auto (both personal and commercial) for whatever reason, be it a bad driving record, bad loss history... or for some other reason they are considered "high risk".

I really don't believe that this insurance and the many facets would be hard to whip up by some insurance hotshot. Aside from all of the fine print and "exclusions"... it will be very similar to auto liability IMO.
 
If you think you're insured with your auto policy (instead of your actual auto), you better read your policy closely. The coverage for your auto policy follows what ever active VIN #'s you have scheduled on the policy at that particular time... unless you have a blanket form of coverage like "Hired Auto Liability" or "Non-ownership Liability" (check for a symbol "01" for Liability, or symbols "07, 08, 09" on the declarations page of your policy).
Click to expand...

The top of the policy it says "named insured" Hint Your cars name is not on it.:)

Your auto insurance also covers you for liability when you operate another vehicle, like a rental for example. It also covers people who you loan your car to, or give permission to drive it.

Liability coverage applies to people or legal entities, not to property.
 
Master Blaster -

I do agree that "liability" cannot be placed on an inanimate object (property), as it cannot cause bodily injury or property damage until used by the Named insured.

My statement that property can in fact have insurance... is correct... but not necessarily "liability" insurance, I agree with you. You can insure a weapon, as you said, for loss & theft... One may wish to purchase insurance for an expensive painting against loss or theft... but yeah it'd be quite silly to ask for liability insurance for something like a painting, unless it's so bad it'll cause bodily injury to anyone that views the painting (nevermind... covered under home owners, right? :neener: )...etc.

Your auto insurance also covers you for liability when you operate another vehicle, like a rental for example.
Click to expand...
Not all the time. Exclusions are built in your policy that may not provide coverage for loaned, leased, or otherwise borrowed autos. As I said, it's not automatic - the proof is in the fine print - all I'm suggesting is people read their policy before assuming they have coverage, or enough coverage for certain circumstances.

It also covers people who you loan your car to, or give permission to drive it.
Click to expand...
Well, yes - I have coverage on that auto. The persons autos insurance - unless otherwise excluded in their policy - should cover the losses involved with the accident. If not, or their coverage falls short, my policy will kick in.
 
Liability Insurance for firearms Bills have come up before in the Mass Legislature, everytime they are either never voted on or voted down by a majority. This does not mean we can dismiss it as another futile attempt to legislate firearms bans. In this State anything is possible. The good news is that even in Massachusetts, we have made gains by having legislators defeat anti-gun bills that come up, year after year. We even have been able to lobby enough legislators to vote and approve written clarifications of the 1998 Gun Control act, to help clarifiy some of more ambigious sections in the act that where so badly written they caused many problems for gun owners. This is a major feat for gun owners since Mass is an leftist leaning state, and both houses are controlled by mostly liberal Democrats.
 
All weapons as defined in section 121 including, but not limited to, firearms, large capacity weapons, rifles and shotguns sold within the commonwealth without a safety device designed to prevent the discharge of such weapon by unauthorized users and approved by the colonel of the state police including, but no limited to,mechanical locks or devices designed to recognize and authorize, or otherwise allow the firearm to be discharged by its owner or authorized user, by solenoid use-limitation devices, key activated or combination trigger or handle locks, radio frequency tags, automated fingerprint identification systems or voice recognition, provided, that such device is commercially available, shall be defective and the sale of such weapons shall constitute a breach of warranty under section 2-314 of chapter 106 and an unfair and deceptive trade act or practice under section 2 of chapter 93A.
Click to expand...
Good heavens ! Who wrote this infernal thing..Inspector Gadget ?
 
Sounds like more fun and games where I live.My own Chief of Police would love this;he's quite found of making his own action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top