What if I told you that firearms liability and theft insurance currently costs about $100 per person (not per gun, per policyholder)
I would say that insurers currently lack enough customers paying premiums to make it worthwhile for them at the moment so they charge exorbitantly to make up for the money they would have to pay in claims. Insurance premiums on property/casualty insurance tend to be high where there are few companies are writing policies involved and few policies are issued. A problem which would be remedied by an insurance mandate. They will be fighting each other over customers if that happens, which has the tendency to lower rates for all but the worst loss risks.
Would you also be OK with mandatory liability insurance on speech?
Does my speech pose an inherent peril of death or injury to the general public which would have to be borne by the public otherwise? Of course not. This is a silly analogy.
Actually no, we don’t.
You are saying automobiles, explosives or wild animals don’t require mandatory liability insurance for ownership in your state? That is dangerous and probably untrue.
What US gun owners put up with licensing and registration?
The ones who don’t feel like being arrested for unlicensed or illegally owned firearms.
Your state doesn’t have registration of handguns or permits for them? Nor do you have to pay for background check fees. That is highly unlikely
The great thing about insurance requirements is its customization. Risk and premium calculated by actuaries rather than government officials who are far from unbiased or well informed most of the times. There is no reason a Spanish Civil War Era bolt action Mauser should be charged as much in premiums as an AR-15. Especially since there is also a difference in cost by a factor of 5-10. More people who have to carry insurance means you would see group policies as well to reduce costs.
