Democrat Proposes Law Requiring Firearm Owners Have $1,000,000 Insurance Policies

Fred Garvin's picture

Democrat Proposes Law Requiring Firearm Owners Have $1,000,000 Insurance Policies

Illinois — the land of Obama and the Blagojevich mafia — is serious about making the Second Amendment so expensive only the rich will be able to exercise it. Kenneth Dunkin, a former social worker and Democrat member of the Illinois House of Representatives, has introduced HB0687, entitled the “Firearm Owners ID-Insurance” bill. It is currently in the Rules Committee.

Here's the bill
HB0687

I wonder which part of "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
that this nimrod liberal Dunkin doesn't understand. Oh yeah, that's right - liberals don't have to pay attention to the constitution. They don't have to pay their taxes to be appointed as Treasury Secretary.

Fred Garvin's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 10:25pm.

To insure a car in Illinois the minimums are $20,000 for injuries to one in an incident and $40,000 for injuries all persons in one incident. Property damage is $15,000.

I have a better solution. Since more are killed in automobile accidents lets raise those rates to $1,000,000. Of course, many can't afford that.

This Morehouse graduate is trying to make a name for himself. I doubt that it will pass their legislature.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by skyspy on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 9:55pm.

You mean only the rich AND the criminals will have guns. The criminals will ALWAYS have guns. So will those of us who have lost and or sold, and or had our guns stolen.

Having said that, having an umbrella policy is always a good idea.

yardman5508's picture
Submitted by yardman5508 on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 7:33pm.

don't you believe that states have the right to tailor their laws to the local situation, rather than succumb to the dictatorial power of the Federal Government? It seems to me that Illinois is merely trying to protect its citizens from those "frivolous lawsuits" folks are always complaining about. I got the perfect solution for you, Fred...DON"T MOVE TO ILLINOIS. Keep the faith

Democracy is not a spectator sport


DarthDubious's picture
Submitted by DarthDubious on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 2:53pm.

so what makes you the ANY politicians are going to follow it. The only strict Constitutional Rep currently is Ron Paul(R)Tex.

They wanna price ammo out of this world too. Better buy up some powder and lead to make your own!

In Liberty,

DarthDubious


Submitted by USArmybrat on Wed, 02/18/2009 - 9:58am.

The state and federal governments have no "right" to infringe on our constitutional right to bear arms but they will not stop trying to do so. Your other post concerning the anti-gun legislation was quite frightening, Darth. We had all better be more vigilant and aware of how this situation is developing. And, be prepared.

Submitted by eldergent on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 2:39pm.

To make inexpensive guns impossible to get is to say that you're putting a money test on getting a gun. It's racism in its worst form.
-- Roy Innis, president of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), 1988

Submitted by TyroneTerror on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 12:58pm.

But I'm thinking of purchasing one. I never felt I needed one, until now. It seems the threat of losing my right to free ownership makes me want to do it now!

PinchedNerve's picture
Submitted by PinchedNerve on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 1:11pm.

What are some gun related stock symbols. I would like to see how gun and ammo makers are doing since Obama won the election.


bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Thu, 02/26/2009 - 2:23pm.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Thu, 02/26/2009 - 4:34pm.

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

Somebody help me understand this please.

Mexicans are killing each other in droves so the U.S. wants its law abiding citizens to not be as well armed as the drug traffickers? Did I get that right? This ought to play real well in Texas.

Why not just put up WEB controlled .50’s w/inferred/telephoto/laser range finders up on 100 meter pools every mile or so along the border?

This way people can pay a fee for a given time period and pole location or by the shot. Half the money collected goes for the weapons/maintenance and the other half goes to the winner if he/she gets one. PayPal, VISA, Master Card and American Express accepted. (baiting may or may not be allowed)

Anyway it’s looking like a good time to visit Autry’s once again.

P.S. Stock up on ammunition too. A ban/registration on that will be next.


Submitted by mysteryman on Thu, 02/26/2009 - 8:57pm.

Better stock up while you can, what better way to stimulate the economy, than to go out and buy a TEC-9 or an UZI. Just imagine what a better world it would be if the thugs had to think twice about taking a score, because the folks inside might be more strapped than them...BLESS

PinchedNerve's picture
Submitted by PinchedNerve on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 11:39am.

If anyone asks I just sold all of my guns and no I don't remember that guys name.


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Tue, 02/17/2009 - 11:55am.

the others.. what they don't know CAN hurt them...


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.