When car insurance was forced to car owners, the number of car accidents decreased slowly through the years. Many concerned citizens are also aski ng for imposed insurance for the ownership of arsenals that a bill was passed. Liability insurance seemed fit for the most common use of guns.
If the bill is signed, The Firearms Risk Protection Act would require gun buyers to have liability insurance coverage before being allowed to purchase weapon. The Act would impose a fine of $10,000 if an owner is found not to have it. This bill was introduced by House Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New Jersey.
Despite not being an official law, Axis Capital, insurance and Reinsurance Company located in Bermuda with branches in Singapore, Australia, Europe and more than 10 States in America has already received a lot of request for liability insurance.
A review on the statement of Maloney states, “We require insurance to own a car, but no such requirement exists for guns. The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade, but gun fatalities continue to rise.”
Maloney said auto insurance carriers incentivize drivers to take precautions to reduce accidents, but no such incentives exist for firearm owners.
America is known to have lenient laws against the use of firearms compared to Asia which has stricter laws on the use of it. Nevertheless, citizens from other nations have complaints when the news of the bill was spread. They also demand liability insurance be imposed on their own gun owners especially in Jakarta, Indonesia which reportedly has a lot of civilians who carries small firearms. The problem is, some, if not most, of these gun-carriers are not licensed but are able to get away because of the archipelagic structure of the country.
This isn't a substitute for other popular gun-control measures, such as limitations on magazine capacity, universal background checks (which even NRA members support) and so forth. But given the limitations on possible gun control measures in a country where the Supreme Court holds individual gun ownership for home self-defense to be a constitutionally protected right, and where there may be 300m firearms already in circulation, it seems like a good place to start. For that matter, there's no reason why we should wait for the federal government to impose these policies. States with strong pro-gun-control politics could start passing mandatory firearm-insurance laws right now.