2024 - HB430 - Firearms - Liability Insurance - Public Wearing and Carrying

[Reds147]

Pro-tip: Check w/your homeowners insurance agency. Adding increased liability coverage on my homeowners policy was significantly less expensive than adding the liability coverage on my CCW Safe plan-- and it covers me in all US States and territories and world-wide.

How much insurance did they have to carry back in 1776 ?

 

[River02]

How much insurance did they have to carry back in 1776 ?

None-- not the point.

If you carry a gun for self defense and defense of your family and fail to protect your family from financial disaster and ruin, then perhaps your priorities are askew. MD doesn't need to write a new law telling me I have to be insured if I carry a gun--fug 'em and their law. I carry a gun, I have assets, because "people"--I carry insurance.

 

[rbird7282]

None-- not the point.

If you carry a gun for self defense and defense of your family and fail to protect your family from financial disaster and ruin, then perhaps your priorities are askew. MD doesn't need to write a new law telling me I have to be insured if I carry a gun--fug 'em and their law. I carry a gun, I have assets, because "people"--I carry insurance.

That's exactly the point. If someone wants to get carry insurance that's fine, it SHOULDN'T be mandatory. No different than training.

 

[River02]

That's exactly the point. If someone wants to get carry insurance that's fine, it SHOULDN'T be mandatory. No different than training.

I agree with you-- can you divine from my post where I agree with the MDGA?

 

[Muleskinner]

Well if this passes I will buy the insurance...

And the cost will become a business expense I will require ALL of my employees to carry at all times for work where allowed..(I am the only employee)

 

[GOG-MD]

I just saw an article on Fox45 News' website about this bill. No way it's constitutional, but that hasn't stopped the MGA before. I really hope this crock of bull gets defeated.

 

[Twist]

It's a little unclear to me what this mandatory insurance is intended to do for me. How is this any different than if I have a personal umbrella policy? What would be an example of using this insurance? If I have USCCA or US Law Shield, etc they would handle the criminal legal obligation. The only thing that comes to mind is the inevitable civil suit that would follow the proper self defense use of a firearm. Some wear and carry policies already include civil litigation support so the legal bills are paid but if there's an ultimate judgement against me in a civil action, this newly required insurance would pay that?

So here's a thought, if every person in Maryland that's involved in a self defense action has this $300K minimum insurance then isn't that a new incentive which would guarantee that every ambulance chaser will file the civil suit for the "victim." And, if this turns out to create a whole new business model for the aforementioned ambulance chasers, what insurance company in their right mind would write this insurance in Maryland?

 

[Twist]

Hypocrisy at its finest - democrats will argue that requiring a voter ID card is an undue burden to place on a citizen to exercise their RIGHT to vote. Then how is not an undue burden to require carry permit holders to have some costly insurance to exercise their RIGHT to bear arms?

The Maryland legislature has demonstrated that they don't concern themselves with the constitutionality of the laws they enact so this will probably happen.

 

[Atlasarmory]

Would my policy pay me 300k if I shoot myself in the ass with a BB gun ?

 

[RFBfromDE]

Would my policy pay me 300k if I shoot myself in the ass with a BB gun ?

No.

Sue Daisy!

 

[Atlasarmory]

You'll shoot your brown eye out kid !

 

[River02]

It's a little unclear to me what this mandatory insurance is intended to do for me. How is this any different than if I have a personal umbrella policy? What would be an example of using this insurance? If I have USCCA or US Law Shield, etc they would handle the criminal legal obligation. The only thing that comes to mind is the inevitable civil suit that would follow the proper self defense use of a firearm. Some wear and carry policies already include civil litigation support so the legal bills are paid but if there's an ultimate judgement against me in a civil action, this newly required insurance would pay that?

So here's a thought, if every person in Maryland that's involved in a self defense action has this $300K minimum insurance then isn't that a new incentive which would guarantee that every ambulance chaser will file the civil suit for the "victim." And, if this turns out to create a whole new business model for the aforementioned ambulance chasers, what insurance company in their right mind would write this insurance in Maryland?

Check w/your insurance carrier that provides the umbrella policy-- you may already be covered. Yes-- it's for the inevitable civil suit that will follow a successful criminal trial. But-- I believe in MD, if one is exonerated of criminal charges then they are safe from civil liability? But --- IANAL and I've seen opinions on this forum in other threads that basically opine just because MD may have a law that says one thing---doesn't mean an alleged "injured" party won't file suit anyway.

 

[Rockzilla]

Md. Politician
You want to wear and carry in this state,?
No problem....
Wear / Carry class and all the associated paperwork /fees

Gun Owner
No problem and its done.

Md Politician
Not quite, oh we forgot one more thing. You have to get $300k liability insurance or no permit...

Gun Owner
@&@&@&#&@#*%



I'm so glad I'm not in MD anymore... Best move we made. Unfortunately we still have a house up there, hopefully not much longer.. We're in a place where it's cheaper, lower taxes, gun friendly, and people actually wave, speak to you, yes sir, yes ma'am etc. And willing to help instead of looking at you like your crazy or bothering them..and the "You have a blessed day"

-Rock

 

[mpkills]

Not many insurance company's want to insure gun shops, good luck finding one in Maryland that would be willing to insure you for 300,000! and the cost......?

 

[BurkeM]

It's a little unclear to me what this mandatory insurance is intended to do for me.

Absolutely NOTHING.

It's for the future benefit of victims of your "NEGLIGENCE." (sarcasm font)

As written, it only kicks in for your negligent discharge (in the bathroom or wild west twirling display.)

 

[BurkeM]

(A) A PERSON MAY NOT WEAR OR CARRY A FIREARM UNLESS THE PERSON
HAS OBTAINED AND IS COVERED BY LIABILITY INSURANCE ISSUED BY AN INSURER
AUTHORIZED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE UNDER THE INSURANCE ARTICLE TO
COVER CLAIMS FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE, BODILY INJURY, OR DEATH...
ARISING FROM AN ACCIDENT RESULTING FROM THE PERSON’S USE OR STORAGE OF A FIREARM
OF UP TO $300,000 FOR DAMAGES ARISING FROM THE SAME INCIDENT, IN ADDITION TO
INTEREST AND COSTS.

 

[Rob00taws6]

Looking at the Epoch Times and found this

Maryland Bill Would Require Gun Owners to Have $300K Liability Insurance to Carry in Public

I’m not going to post it because there is a subscription pay wall, but searching the title of the article might be a better option for anyone interested.

But in a nutshell I got two takeaways.

1) in the eyes of the MGA there is no distinction between a W&C permit holder and the average Gang Banger. I’m just a thug who bought my rights?

2) people who bought their rights in the peoples republic of Maryland after the Bruen decision skyrocketed, approximately 800% and this is not acceptable. But hey, I already knew this.

“The legislation could serve to curb the number of people carrying firearms in public in the state less than two years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen.”

Quote from article..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Doco Overboard]

Lots of people were looking for insurance before they even had their permits.
Lots of them became rights instructors too and put a price on that sort of thing creating the establishment of a precedent.
At some point the people that come up with the conditions will just point to those that already paid and accepted the conditions and that will be the status quo which creates division.
The argument in participation of a personal decision will be role reversal after a declaration of thats what have to do to feel safe and to carry a gun for self defense and to exercise their rights.
Others will feel differently and will not accept a test to exercise rights and will suffer consequences based on others actions to legitimize through a second party whats germane to every citizen from birth and granted by the creator.

 

[chilipeppermaniac]

Control, Votes, and $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ are the reasons for most laws and agendas of Md Dems, DC Dems, Dem citizens and illegals. Don't think any different about this one.

 

[pleasant1911]

I bet the very firearm insurance companies that gun owners swear on are the very companies that lobbied these dumb a$$ politicians that created this bill.

Yes follow the money and it always lead to the ones that’s getting the pot. In this case the insurance companies