Post by: MADMAX on January 27, 2024, 08:09:42 AM
On Monday, January 29th, the Senate Law and Justice Committee will hold a public hearing for Senate Bill 5963, a bill that would require gun owners to have a home insurance policy if they own a firearm, even renters. This bill will not reduce crime but will only price law abiding gun owners out of home insurance policies, if they can even obtain the coverage. Please contact the members of the committee and urge them to OPPOSE SB 5963
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on January 27, 2024, 08:56:42 AM
Post by: MADMAX on January 27, 2024, 08:58:43 AM
Sent this
Below is a copy of your message that will be sent to the following people: Senator Jamie Pedersen, Senator Javier Valdez, Senator Jesse Salomon, Senator Jim McCune, Senator Keith Wagoner, Senator Lynda Wilson, Senator Manka Dhingra, Senator Mike Padden, Senator Nikki Torres, Senator Patty Kuderer, Senator Yasmin Trudeau on Law & Justice Committee.
Subject: Please Oppose SB 5963
On Monday, you will be holding a hearing on Senate Bill 5963, relating to required insurance coverage for firearm owners. As a fellow resident of Washington I urge to please oppose this bill.
SB 5963, requires every legal firearm owner to obtain a “residential dwelling policy" that is to be kept wherever the firearm(s) may be stored. The policy is required to cover loss or damage resulting from the accidental or unintentional discharge of a firearm. Mandating insurance policies will in no way reduce crime and the illicit use of firearms, as criminals and other prohibited persons could never secure coverage. Instead, this legislation would serve as a barrier to those seeking to exercise their rights, including unknown annual costs. SB 5963 could be utilized as a backdoor registration scheme, which would include sensitive personal information on firearm owners, including name, address, phone number and other identifiers. Additionally, given the uncertainty if this type of coverage would even exist, it could put insurance companies in a position of increased pricing on policies based on the types and number of firearms covered. This legislation is not rooted in public safety, but instead provides an additional avenue for the Washington State Legislature to harass and burden law-abiding citizens.
Again, I ask that you please oppose SB 5963, as it will only place undue financial burdens on law abiding gun owners, and will have no impact on crime within our state.
Thank you for your consideration.
Post by: boneaddict on January 27, 2024, 09:06:31 AM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on January 27, 2024, 09:11:55 AM
That’s exactly what it is, and the left knows it. Plus to make criminals out of citizens who don’t get the coverage, and later defends themselves at home with a firearm making them a criminal.
Curious what the penalty for not getting said coverage will be?
Post by: ASHQUACK on January 27, 2024, 09:27:20 AM
Post by: boneaddict on January 27, 2024, 09:47:12 AM
Post by: Smokeploe on January 27, 2024, 09:57:04 AM
Smokeploe
Post by: hughjorgan on January 27, 2024, 10:00:41 AM
SB 5963 could be utilized as a backdoor registration scheme.
That’s exactly what it is, and the left knows it. Plus to make criminals out of citizens who don’t get the coverage, and later defends themselves at home with a firearm making them a criminal.
Curious what the penalty for not getting said coverage will be?
I’ve read the bill a couple times now and there is no penalty for not complying with this garbage. Just more crap from the democrats to ignore if they push it through the legislature.
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 27, 2024, 10:01:37 AM
Post by: ghosthunter on January 27, 2024, 10:03:34 AM
I couldn't believe how much it cost to try to get my guns on my homeowners just for loss reasons outside of just normal personal property , and the hassle it was in regards to having every one appraised etc.
Our house was broke into several years ago. The thief took a small safe which had a handgun in it.
My home owners covered it and paid me very well for the gun based on how long I had owned it. I have never had to list any firearms just provided police report.
Post by: KNOPHISH on January 27, 2024, 10:15:06 AM
Post by: Ridgeratt on January 27, 2024, 10:17:05 AM
This is a total infringement of the Second Amendment both state and national. Sideshow bob should know this and stop it!
Smokeploe
If you honestly think Fergason would lift a finger to stop this you should be able to buy gas at .99 cents a gallon.
Post by: MADMAX on January 27, 2024, 10:20:17 AM
Make your voices heard
Post by: buckfvr on January 27, 2024, 10:30:59 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 27, 2024, 10:31:22 AM
SB 5963 could be utilized as a backdoor registration scheme.Considering nearly everything insurance related passes through the AG's office at some point, I'm guessing a registry might be the intention.
That’s exactly what it is, and the left knows it. Plus to make criminals out of citizens who don’t get the coverage, and later defends themselves at home with a firearm making them a criminal.
Curious what the penalty for not getting said coverage will be?
Post by: baldopepper on January 27, 2024, 10:37:26 AM
Post by: storyteller on January 27, 2024, 12:13:51 PM
Post by: baldopepper on January 27, 2024, 12:36:17 PM
(I'm not agent or in any way pushing insurance, just passing on what I learned thru experience)
Post by: boneaddict on January 27, 2024, 12:40:47 PM
Yes, apples and oranges, but the point being is it costs quite a bit of money and even if its our own choice for our own benefit, they have you by the nads and force you to have on file every firearm you own.
Post by: storyteller on January 27, 2024, 12:49:30 PM
"accidental or unintentional
discharge of the firearm including, but not limited to, death or
injury to persons who are not an insured person under the policy and"
Most riders on insurance are "
Homeowners insurance policies typically cover gun theft and accidental or unintentional damage caused by firearms. On a homeowners insurance policy, $5,000 is the average coverage limit for theft of firearms. You can also schedule your guns under itemized personal property coverage for additional protection.
Post by: baldopepper on January 27, 2024, 01:08:21 PM
Post by: buckfvr on January 27, 2024, 01:34:35 PM
Post by: boneaddict on January 27, 2024, 01:38:28 PM
Post by: MADMAX on January 27, 2024, 03:19:21 PM
“ Thank you for your email. I am adamantly opposed to this – and all other legislation – which infringes/impairs on or violates our 2nd Amendment rights! Please participate in the public hearing on this bill in whatever format you’re able! It’s on Monday, January 29th at 10:30 AM.
I remain concerned about how emboldened my Democratic colleagues have become – to empower criminals and take away the ability for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves – all while simultaneously supporting policies which cripple our law enforcement officers’ ability to do their jobs. Firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens are not the problem – Washington already has some of the strictest gun-control laws in the nation! As you and I know, criminals don’t care about breaking the law. Crimes of all types are skyrocketing across the state while Democratic lawmakers, Governor Jay Inslee, and Attorney General Bob Ferguson continue to push soft-on-crime policies and look the other way. Make no mistake – Washington state has a public safety crisis!”
Post by: cem3434 on January 27, 2024, 03:27:50 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 27, 2024, 06:25:50 PM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 27, 2024, 06:56:26 PM
Post by: fowl smacker on January 28, 2024, 06:58:05 AM
I didn't see this mentioned yet, but if they do pass this and then decide to start enforcing it somehow, who do you think they are going to come down on first? How about anyone who has bought a hunting license.What if you've only ever bought archery tags?
Post by: buckfvr on January 28, 2024, 09:42:03 AM
I didn't see this mentioned yet, but if they do pass this and then decide to start enforcing it somehow, who do you think they are going to come down on first? How about anyone who has bought a hunting license.
That would be blatant discrimination, more likely have to go by registered gun owners. Even if it passes, its unlikely to be enforced.
Post by: hughjorgan on January 28, 2024, 10:02:48 AM
I didn't see this mentioned yet, but if they do pass this and then decide to start enforcing it somehow, who do you think they are going to come down on first? How about anyone who has bought a hunting license.
That would be blatant discrimination, more likely have to go by registered gun owners. Even if it passes, its unlikely to be enforced.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
Post by: bornhunter on January 28, 2024, 10:17:45 AM
I didn't see this mentioned yet, but if they do pass this and then decide to start enforcing it somehow, who do you think they are going to come down on first? How about anyone who has bought a hunting license.What if you've only ever bought archery tags?
That would depend on if your bow looks scary.
Post by: chukardogs on January 28, 2024, 01:04:44 PM
Contacting your representative and letting them know how you feel is most likely a waste. By all means, the representatives need to know what you think and understand that you are paying attention to how they vote but believing that will make a difference to any of them (imo) is a fairy tale. The sides are so polarized now, representatives do not care what their constituents believe. It seems as though, there are very few left that aren't far right or far left. Someone in the middle may be willing to listen to an argument that may sway their vote but those reps are few and far between. Throw in the fact that the businesses that may benefit from this bill passing or failing, will have lobbyist pushing the representatives that may or may not vote for or against. The whole system leaves the individual constituent with little to no influence in the system. Our only real influence comes from the money we spend and where we spend it.
Think about who benefits from this law, Gun safe companies, insurance companies. These are the entities that need to hear from you. They need to know that if they support a law like this that as a gun owner, you'll never own one of their safes. If an insurance company is backing this law, find another insurance company. Not sure how, but someone should be able to find out who with the money is backing this bill or backing a candidate that will vote for this bill.
A law as flawed as this one will be challenged and I can't believe they'll get it past the 2nd amendment argument. Someone that is in peril by a legitimate threat, that goes to buy a gun and can't afford the safe that is required to go with or prove they have an insurance policy that covers them having said gun in the house, "can't" exercise or utilize the right given to them by the second amendment. Seems like such an absolutely obvious infringement on the second amendment but nowadays, you just never know.
After going back over and reading this, I guess I should say I'm sorry! I wasn't aware of the level of my cynicism in the world we're all living in. Good luck out there and stay safe.
FWIW, owning a firearm comes with an inherent responsibility to keep that firearm from falling into the hands of someone that hasn't been given the authority to have said firearm. If you're one that lives with a firearm within reach at all times, when you leave that gun and someone picks it up and does something stupid, heinous or irresponsible with it, it doesn't take much of a lawyer to show that as the gun owner, you're to some degree culpable. You're the gun owner and whether you like it or not, everyone that owns firearms should know that no matter what else that gun is used for, it was designed and built for two things, to protect yourself and to kill something. Yes, you may get a big kick out of shooting targets but that isn't what the gun is for. The gun is a tool just like any other tool. It has a purpose just like a hammer or an axe and these gun owners that let their three year old get their hands on it, give every other gun owner a bad name.
Hunters alike, whether we like it or not, whether an archer, a muzzleloader or modern firearm carrier, are all lumped in by some, with anyone that uses a gun to cause harm. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever but it's an inevitable fact. If we as hunters, (not shooters) that use guns to kill animals, don't come to the table and become part of a solution, in some minds, we're part of the problem. As long as we're part of the problem in those minds, our interests and needs as a group will never be taken into consideration by those minds! Again sorry! Just the ramblings of a hunter.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on January 28, 2024, 01:08:44 PM
If or when this bill passes, one of the larger gun manufacturers or firearm owner organizations of some kind will fund someone to file a constitutional challenge (lawsuit) claiming this law is discriminatory against law abiding citizens. (Which it is) That the law unfairly targets the less fortunate who can't afford a gun, a gun safe and an insurance policy. (Which it does) Once the suit has been filed, the law and the enforcement of, will go on hold until the suit and any appeals have been exhausted. If the law is ever deemed constitutional, there will be a lengthy time period for all to abide by the specifics of the law.
Contacting your representative and letting them know how you feel is most likely a waste. By all means, the representatives need to know what you think and understand that you are paying attention to how they vote but believing that will make a difference to any of them (imo) is a fairy tale. The sides are so polarized now, representatives do not care what their constituents believe. It seems as though, there are very few left that aren't far right or far left. Someone in the middle may be willing to listen to an argument that may sway their vote but those reps are few and far between. Throw in the fact that the businesses that may benefit from this bill passing or failing, will have lobbyist pushing the representatives that may or may not vote for or against. The whole system leaves the individual constituent with little to no influence in the system. Our only real influence comes from the money we spend and where we spend it.
Think about who benefits from this law, Gun safe companies, insurance companies. These are the entities that need to hear from you. They need to know that if they support a law like this that as a gun owner, you'll never own one of their safes. If an insurance company is backing this law, find another insurance company. Not sure how, but someone should be able to find out who with the money is backing this bill or backing a candidate that will vote for this bill.
A law as flawed as this one will be challenged and I can't believe they'll get it past the 2nd amendment argument. Someone that is in peril by a legitimate threat, that goes to buy a gun and can't afford the safe that is required to go with or prove they have an insurance policy that covers them having said gun in the house, "can't" exercise or utilize the right given to them by the second amendment. Seems like such an absolutely obvious infringement on the second amendment but nowadays, you just never know.
After going back over and reading this, I guess I should say I'm sorry! I wasn't aware of the level of my cynicism in the world we're all living in. Good luck out there and stay safe.
FWIW, owning a firearm comes with an inherent responsibility to keep that firearm from falling into the hands of someone that hasn't been given the authority to have said firearm. If you're one that lives with a firearm within reach at all times, when you leave that gun and someone picks it up and does something stupid, heinous or irresponsible with it, it doesn't take much of a lawyer to show that as the gun owner, you're to some degree culpable. You're the gun owner and whether you like it or not, everyone that owns firearms should know that no matter what else that gun is used for, it was designed and built for two things, to protect yourself and to kill something. Yes, you may get a big kick out of shooting targets but that isn't what the gun is for. The gun is a tool just like any other tool. It has a purpose just like a hammer or an axe and these gun owners that let their three year old get their hands on it, give every other gun owner a bad name.
Hunters alike, whether we like it or not, whether an archer, a muzzleloader or modern firearm carrier, are all lumped in by some, with anyone that uses a gun to cause harm. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever but it's an inevitable fact. If we as hunters, (not shooters) that use guns to kill animals, don't come to the table and become part of a solution, in some minds, we're part of the problem. As long as we're part of the problem in those minds, our interests and needs as a group will never be taken into consideration by those minds! Again sorry! Just the ramblings of a hunter.
Yep.
Post by: ghosthunter on January 28, 2024, 01:17:48 PM
If or when this bill passes, one of the larger gun manufacturers or firearm owner organizations of some kind will fund someone to file a constitutional challenge (lawsuit) claiming this law is discriminatory against law abiding citizens. (Which it is) That the law unfairly targets the less fortunate who can't afford a gun, a gun safe and an insurance policy. (Which it does) Once the suit has been filed, the law and the enforcement of, will go on hold until the suit and any appeals have been exhausted. If the law is ever deemed constitutional, there will be a lengthy time period for all to abide by the specifics of the law.
Contacting your representative and letting them know how you feel is most likely a waste. By all means, the representatives need to know what you think and understand that you are paying attention to how they vote but believing that will make a difference to any of them (imo) is a fairy tale. The sides are so polarized now, representatives do not care what their constituents believe. It seems as though, there are very few left that aren't far right or far left. Someone in the middle may be willing to listen to an argument that may sway their vote but those reps are few and far between. Throw in the fact that the businesses that may benefit from this bill passing or failing, will have lobbyist pushing the representatives that may or may not vote for or against. The whole system leaves the individual constituent with little to no influence in the system. Our only real influence comes from the money we spend and where we spend it.
Think about who benefits from this law, Gun safe companies, insurance companies. These are the entities that need to hear from you. They need to know that if they support a law like this that as a gun owner, you'll never own one of their safes. If an insurance company is backing this law, find another insurance company. Not sure how, but someone should be able to find out who with the money is backing this bill or backing a candidate that will vote for this bill.
A law as flawed as this one will be challenged and I can't believe they'll get it past the 2nd amendment argument. Someone that is in peril by a legitimate threat, that goes to buy a gun and can't afford the safe that is required to go with or prove they have an insurance policy that covers them having said gun in the house, "can't" exercise or utilize the right given to them by the second amendment. Seems like such an absolutely obvious infringement on the second amendment but nowadays, you just never know.
After going back over and reading this, I guess I should say I'm sorry! I wasn't aware of the level of my cynicism in the world we're all living in. Good luck out there and stay safe.
FWIW, owning a firearm comes with an inherent responsibility to keep that firearm from falling into the hands of someone that hasn't been given the authority to have said firearm. If you're one that lives with a firearm within reach at all times, when you leave that gun and someone picks it up and does something stupid, heinous or irresponsible with it, it doesn't take much of a lawyer to show that as the gun owner, you're to some degree culpable. You're the gun owner and whether you like it or not, everyone that owns firearms should know that no matter what else that gun is used for, it was designed and built for two things, to protect yourself and to kill something. Yes, you may get a big kick out of shooting targets but that isn't what the gun is for. The gun is a tool just like any other tool. It has a purpose just like a hammer or an axe and these gun owners that let their three year old get their hands on it, give every other gun owner a bad name.
Hunters alike, whether we like it or not, whether an archer, a muzzleloader or modern firearm carrier, are all lumped in by some, with anyone that uses a gun to cause harm. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever but it's an inevitable fact. If we as hunters, (not shooters) that use guns to kill animals, don't come to the table and become part of a solution, in some minds, we're part of the problem. As long as we're part of the problem in those minds, our interests and needs as a group will never be taken into consideration by those minds! Again sorry! Just the ramblings of a hunter.
Yep.
Well said