advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

Nobody's listening.

IF YOU CAN'T BEAT 'EM, MAKE THEM PAY

By
Neal Boortz
@ February 17, 2009 8:57 AM Permalink | Comments (51) | TrackBacks (0)

Illinois is trying its best to strip guns out of the hands of citizens. While lawmakers know that they can't overtly do this .. because of this pesky little thing called the Second Amendment .. they know that enough government regulation will eventually destroy an industry.

So Illinois is considering a law to require gun owners to maintain a policy of liability insurance of at least $1,000,000 ... this is HB0687, the Firearm Owners ID-Insurance bill:

"Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Provides that any person who owns a firearm in this State shall maintain a policy of liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person. Provides that a person shall be deemed the owner of a firearm after the firearm is lost or stolen until such loss or theft is reported to the police department or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the owner resides. Provides that the Department of State Police shall revoke and seize a Firearm Owner's Identification Card previously issued under this Act if the Department finds that the person to whom such card was issued possesses or acquires a firearm and does not submit evidence to the Department of State Police that he or she has been issued in his or her name a liability insurance policy in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person. Effective January 1, 2010."

When your goal is absolute control over the population controlling the population's access to weapons is crucial. These politicians know that guns legally owned by law-abiding citizens are not the problem. Remember that government has one power that the rest of us do not have .. government, and only government, can use force to accomplish its goals. We should always be very wary of any politician who exhibits fear at the thought of private citizens having the ability to defend themselves.

Categories:

Tags:

Main Index | Archives | RSS feed

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: IF YOU CAN'T BEAT 'EM, MAKE THEM PAY.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/21679

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Take Back Our Government!

Herman Cain is putting together a movement to take back our government. Do something now! Join the Hermanator's Intelligent Thinkers Movement, HITM! , and take part in the political revolution of 2009! "When they feel the heat, they will see the light!"

Belinda Skelton, Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!

Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • Copyleft
    Its surprising with your compassionate, liberal sensibilities that you would be in agreement with the proposition that only rich evil people who can afford insurance policies should have guns. The people (who because of their socio-economic victimhood) are forced to live in the live in the worst neighborhoods are the ones most likely in need of the protection from a personal firearm. This bill is just one more tool in the arsenal of the Chicago police to disproportionately arrest the less fortunate.

    Shame on you and your rich, racist, bourgeoisie friends. Firearms for protection shouldn't be just a right for you and your evil-rich buddies.
    By John @ 02/18/09 08:16:55 AMreport abuse
  • Response to HB0687
    If the majority of Citizens of Illinois value their 2nd Amendment rights, enjoy the personal choice to keep and bear arms, for any reason the person deems necessary. They must contact their representatives, and often, to let them know that if they support this bill, they will loose their power they so desperately want, come the next time they face the public for re-election.

    People, the only way these rabid politicians can be muzzled is by keeping YOUR representatives email addresses close at hand, and phone numbers on speed dial. If you don't voice your opposition, they assume that you agree with them.
    By Chris @ 02/18/09 07:47:29 AMreport abuse
  • Read the rest of the Bill!
    The $1M policy doesn't bother me as much as the second part of the bill:

    "Provides that a person shall be deemed the owner of a firearm after the firearm is lost or stolen until such loss or theft is reported to the police department or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the owner resides."

    This could mean that you are liable for whatever crime is committed with that gun, until you report it stolen. Obama tried to pass this kind of legislation in IL when he was a senator there.
    By J @ 02/18/09 12:21:59 AMreport abuse
  • Liability insurance on guns
    Illinois wants to make legal gun owners purchase $1,000,000 in liability insurance, to cover who, burglars that may be shot during a home invasion? So are they also going to require burglars to be insured for replacement cost of goods they steel? Or are they going to continue to require home owners to cover that cost as well? This is such a STUPID idea it has to be form a democrat, right?
    By Greg Girtman @ 02/17/09 11:44:48 PMreport abuse
  • Guns and more guns
    "The road to tyranny is covered with the blood of the unarmed citizen". I would just love to have you Obamans come and try to take away the only means I have to protect my family from people exactly like you. I feel more threatened by the pinkos who just moved into the white house than I am of a thug breaking into my house. I can dispose of a thug with just one bullet. Remember folks, to these people gun control has absolutely nothing to do with guns and everything to do with control. Don't like guns? Then don't buy one and SHUT UP!!!!!!
    By Gary @ 02/17/09 09:22:46 PMreport abuse
  • 2nd amendment
    If you can't repeal the 2nd amendment they might as well try this. Gun nuts still don't respond to the fact that Washington DC had the highest violent crime rate in the nation, while having a near total gun ban. While Switzerland, where reservists keep their assault weapons in their home (and are even offered to keep them after they separate from the military).
    By HopnChop @ 02/17/09 06:36:15 PMreport abuse
  • I see it coming...
    I suppose this will lead to a large influx of guns reported stolen and a booming black market for weapons. I for one will not give up my weapons because the government tells me too, or forces me too. I have a concealed weapons permit and I fired expert marksman in my time in the military. I know the proper use of said firearms and the proper time to deploy them. Any damages that others receive at the other end of my firearm is due to their criminal intent.
    By Joshua @ 02/17/09 06:08:10 PMreport abuse
  • "CopyLeft"
    I guess your handle fits you. All you do is copy the left's talking points.
    No logical thought process at all...pitiful!
    By larenzo @ 02/17/09 05:26:00 PMreport abuse
  • Good Job Illinois
    Gun control has nothing to do with "absolute control over the population" unless you are some kind of nutbar survivalist terrorist.

    Private ownership of guns does not offer any real protection from criminals or (for you nutbars out there) the government. Actual evidence (rather than emotional speculation) shows that trying to use a gun to protect yourself is a great way to get yourself, your family, or someone innocent killed, but little else.

    And then there's the reality that this concept of protecting yourself from "the evil criminals" is largely nonsense. For the most part, you have much more to worry about from the people you know and the businesses you deal with, as well as identity thieves across the globe and even overeating, than unknown assailants and robbers.

    Beyond that, gun control has been shown to cut down on gun violence and overall murders and suicides. No, people don't just kill each other or even themselves with other weapons at anywhere approaching the level they do with firearms. It might seem like they would, but they don't. There's a reason that Britain has a much lower murder rate than the US, despite higher violent crime.

    Personally, I think people should be able to own reasonable guns for hunting or sport, but that's not exactly the most important thing in the world and it makes perfect sense to keep it out of the cities and states that don't want it.

    I like this law. It might make people less likely to get guns without a real reason (which self protection isn't), and more likely to consider their responsibility and not offer them as a virtual handout to criminals or behave like fools. Still, no settlement can bring someone back to life. We do this for cars, which are dangerous but unlike guns are useful, so it only makes sense.
    By Lent Visor @ 02/17/09 05:11:36 PMreport abuse
  • Fear a Gov't that fears your gun!
    Washington D.C. has a per capita murder rate of 69 per 100,000 with the strictest gun control laws in the country. Indianapolis with much more gun freedom only has 9 murders every 100,000 residents. If disarming people makes citizens safer how can this be?
    By Todd @ 02/17/09 05:03:21 PMreport abuse
  • Copyleft is to be new Insurance Czar in Obama Admiministration
    "" A gun in the house is far more likely to injure or kill you, or a family member, than an intruder. That's just good business sense from an insurance perspective.""

    Copyleft is rumored have a future in the Obama administration. Like the job application states, only idiots need apply.
    By $mooth Operator @ 02/17/09 04:25:04 PMreport abuse
  • illegal
    Most all know the wording of the 2nd Amendment, but I have to wonder why those opposed to it have no idea of the meaning of the word, infringed. Any laws such as this infringes on the right to bear arms. Even the requirement of obtaining a CCW permit is infringement. Why is that not brought up in courts.?
    By Choctaw @ 02/17/09 04:19:30 PMreport abuse
  • Sorry, Shmoe
    But it's liberals who are patriotic by definition. You're the ones insecure enough about your patriotism to worry about flag lapel pins and yellow-ribbon bumper stickers. You need to shout and brag about it, because you know you don't really have a TRUE love of country inside, like we do.

    And if you're so eager to protect this country from tyranny, where were you the past eight years? Even _Boortz_ was condemning the Patriot Act! (And it takes quite a bit for him to deviate from his role as GOP Propagandist for even a minute.)
    By Copyleft @ 02/17/09 04:10:39 PMreport abuse
  • Do Your Homework
    Stan, you clearly didn't read the link I posted for you after yesterday's asinine comments, so here it is again.

    http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

    I suppose if you read it, though, and actually knew the facts you could no longer make general, unrelated comments. That's a dirty shame.
    By Concerned @ 02/17/09 03:17:11 PMreport abuse
  • Alrighty Thennnn.....
    Copyleft says:
    "Seems sensible to me
    After all, insurance companies have to deal with other stupid, high-risk behaviors (like higher rates for motorcyclists).

    Why shouldn't the gun-fondlers have to pay a little more for their "accident-prone" lifestyle? A gun in the house is far more likely to injure or kill you, or a family member, than an intruder. That's just good business sense from an insurance perspective.

    By the way, gun nuts... hurry it up, willya? We need you erase yourselves from the gene pool as quickly as possible."

    It pains me to say that us "gun-fondlers" will be the ones protecting your sorry ass from tyranny when the shit hits the fan. We're the real patriots ready to defend our rights to the death and you're just a pu**y. Typical whimpering liberal.
    BTW I am also a motorcycle enthusiast. Yeah, the one that you almost ran over because you were talking on your cell phone instead of DRIVING.
    By JoeShmoe @ 02/17/09 02:57:08 PMreport abuse
  • Who Owns Guns - Gun Safety
    The intelligent Stan Gable asked: "Who owns guns?"

    Me. Several acquaintances.

    Who've we hurt? No one. Who will we hurt? No one who didn't try to hurt us first.

    Are we going to damage ourselves with our guns? No. You? Hopefully not. But don't try to hurt any of us.

    The group of gun owners I refer to includes four police officers, two corrections officers, three "weekend warriors" - that's National Guardsmen to you, and a civilian.
    By Jubilation T Cornpone @ 02/17/09 02:42:44 PMreport abuse
  • Let em try
    It will happen slowly, but it will happen. Socialist governments cannot progress without its populace being stripped of all self-defense. When they try to take those rights away, there is going to be a lot of violence.
    But who is actually going to take away the guns? Most soldiers and police are gun owners (outside of their duties), myself included. I will be on the side I believe is correct...
    By Gun-Owner, only Nuts are in Pants @ 02/17/09 02:28:25 PMreport abuse
  • Copyleft
    You really do need help. You talk about how everyone here is so pathetic and yet day after day, here you are! I think you must enjoy the attention when we call on your stupidity so from now on I'm just going to ignore you. You are not worth my time.

    Col Stack great idea!!!

    Jerry is probably right, this would be like a poll tax, it won't work.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 02/17/09 02:23:08 PMreport abuse
  • Hm?
    Isn't this like the unconstitutional "poll tax" that everyone was yelling about a few years back?
    By Ryan @ 02/17/09 01:52:28 PMreport abuse
  • Downstate IL
    Neal, thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. I live in rural, central Illinois and I had no idea about this. I own numerous guns that fill my freezer with meat every year. I will forward this link onto many family members and friends and encourage them to write to their congressmen asap.
    By Pete @ 02/17/09 01:35:00 PMreport abuse
  • Thomas Jefferson's take
    I consider Thomas Jefferson to be one of the greatest minds the world has ever known. Here are some of his famous quotes.

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. "

    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." --this is what scares the left the most, which is why it is a high priority on their ultimate agenda.
    By Ryan @ 02/17/09 12:52:22 PMreport abuse
  • new illinois gun law proposal
    I live in Southern Illinois...no doubt this law was dreamed up by some rocket scientist in the general assembly representing the Chicago area. I could go on and on about the stupidity of this proposed law, but once again it just goes to show you why we should NOT live in a 'democracy". Where one group of people (or geographic area of a state) are allowed to impose their will upon another portion by 'majority rule'. We are supposed to have the rule of law to protect individual rights.. what happens when the law crushes them instead of protecting them? I guess I'm just a red state insurgent trapped in blue state America. Kentucky and Missouri are looking better and better.
    By david @ 02/17/09 12:47:15 PMreport abuse
  • 1st Amendment Insurance
    Why not include a requirement that one needs a similar liability policy in case they say or write something that causes distress in another person? No froodom of speech unless you have the proper insurance policy.
    By Doug @ 02/17/09 12:31:17 PMreport abuse
  • Rights and responsibility are inseperable.
    Shouldn't the Illinois State Government be held liable up to $1M for the safety of citizens who can't afford their $1M insurance policy to excercise their second ammendment rights? If they are going to abridge the right, shouldn't they assume the responsibility? They don't care about your safety any more than they care about the quality, price and availability of your healthcare, which is not at all. They just want to monopolize control over them, and thus you.

    These kind of gun laws are much worse than poll taxes. Unlike the right to arms, there is no constitutional right to vote.

    Don't hold your breath waiting on the hussein's DOJ or judicial picks to challenge any infringements on 2nd Ammendment rights.
    By CowboyUp @ 02/17/09 12:27:51 PMreport abuse
  • Insurance
    So I read and reread this bill. I now have a soulution for everyone who needs money. Go to Illinois, break into someones house, get shot, then sue the gun owners insurance for damages. Rich criminals is what this bill will create. Is that a "government handout?
    By RN @ 02/17/09 12:20:45 PMreport abuse
  • Make them pay??
    I have to assume that if such a law is passed it will eventually be overturned in the courts. Assuming the 2nd Amendment does in fact protect the right to possess a firearm then an expense associated with a required insurance policy would be viewed similar to a poll tax and therefore a form of discrimination against those having lower income. Ironic, since there is no right to vote in a Presidential election.
    By Jerry @ 02/17/09 12:12:33 PMreport abuse
  • Gun liability insurance
    Simple: report all your guns stolen. Then: What a coincidence. The dead guy in your house just happens to be the same guy who stole your gun.
    By Col. Stack @ 02/17/09 12:10:38 PMreport abuse
  • Seems sensible to me
    After all, insurance companies have to deal with other stupid, high-risk behaviors (like higher rates for motorcyclists).

    Why shouldn't the gun-fondlers have to pay a little more for their "accident-prone" lifestyle? A gun in the house is far more likely to injure or kill you, or a family member, than an intruder. That's just good business sense from an insurance perspective.

    By the way, gun nuts... hurry it up, willya? We need you erase yourselves from the gene pool as quickly as possible.
    By Copyleft @ 02/17/09 12:04:46 PMreport abuse
  • "Illegal" Firearms
    It seems like it is becoming an increasingly smart idea to have at least 1 "illegal" firearm to defend yourself with. Odd that to exercise your 2nd amendment right as intended would classify you as a criminal in Illinois.

    Any bets on how long it will take the Obama administration to outlaw firearms entirely?
    By Collin Williams @ 02/17/09 11:54:35 AMreport abuse
  • Illinois gun grab
    And people wonder why gun sales went through the roof with the change in regime in the the US. Remember, the Illinois machine that gave us Blago gave us Obama.
    By Bill H @ 02/17/09 11:28:43 AMreport abuse
  • Illinois Firearm Owners Insurance Bill
    this will only lead to confiscation, for what insurance company would underwrite risk associated with "damages resulting from negligent or willful acts"
    By RCG @ 02/17/09 11:27:31 AMreport abuse
  • Ignore the law.
    There comes a time when the law is a tool of oppression and the citizen's duty is to subvert it. Do not obey laws that would strip you of your essential, God-given rights. It's that simple.
    By Joe Don Baker @ 02/17/09 11:26:00 AMreport abuse
  • The feds are also at work!
    Check out H.R. 45 (Blair Holt Licensing and Record Act of 2009) The Feds are using the Interstate Commerce clause in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution to claim firearms are subject to regulation by congress. If you want to own a firearm, you will have many hoops to jump through, including background checks, written exams, mental and physical health histories surrendered(Electronic conversion of health records everyone?) fingerprinting, proof of,and mandatory notification of change of address of residence, and much more. It is currently under everyones' radar. It must be stopped.
    By doktorbill @ 02/17/09 11:23:24 AMreport abuse
  • Liability Insurance
    "...specifically covering any damages resulting from...willful acts..."

    "Willful" acts or intentional/criminal acts are never covered by insurance. Therefore, no insurance policy will ever be issued to meet this proposed requirement. Having no such coverage, no one will be able to legally possess a firearm.
    By David @ 02/17/09 11:16:36 AMreport abuse
  • Constitutional Rights
    In 1965, Congress enacted the Voting Rigths Act to prohibit practices that disenfranchised Blacks such as literacy tests, etc. As we all know, there is no constitutional guarantee to vote, yet we enacted a law (and rightly so) that outlawed unfair practices that prevented citizens from voting. Today, there is now legislation that will ultimately disenfranchise poorer Americans and prevent them from exercising an actual Constitutional right. This should be an outrage to all Americans.
    By CS @ 02/17/09 10:34:27 AMreport abuse
  • T. Jefferson said....
    The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny from government.

    It's starting to look like we may have to resort to that. Some seem to already be stocking up.
    Try to find a Mossberg 590SP these days. I understand that gun dealers are having a hard time getting certain guns that would not normally be a problem as well as ammunition. Go ahead, lawmakers, outlaw all guns. Then, only criminals will own guns. And I'll be one of them.
    By JoeShmoe @ 02/17/09 10:23:26 AMreport abuse
  • Phew!
    This kind of news makes me glad I live in TN, where if the state gov't ever tried to pass a gun control law like this, the citizens would likely literally rise up. Unfortunately, given their voting record, the citizens of Illinois will simply roll over.
    By KB @ 02/17/09 10:21:35 AMreport abuse
  • Francisco's Money Speech from Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
    "Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard--the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money--the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law--men who use force to seize the wealth of DISARMED victims--then money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, ONCE THEY'VE PASSED A LAW TO DISARM THEM.


    Sound familiar people?
    By Galt @ 02/17/09 10:17:29 AMreport abuse
  • Gun Control
    Who owns guns? what are these people in the 19th century defending their saloon?
    By Stan Gable @ 02/17/09 10:05:39 AMreport abuse
  • gun responsibility
    When I lived in Denver I had a gun stolen from me. I had purchased it years before and did not know the serial number or even brand. I tried to call the police and report it stolen. I was asked for all the information I did not have. When I could not give it to them I was told i would be held responsible for any crime committed with the gun. I wondered how they could trace the gun to me if it was used in a crime but not if I reported it stolen?
    The answer is they cannot hold criminals responsible so they will hold the law abiding people responsible.
    By mharrell @ 02/17/09 09:58:56 AMreport abuse
  • DISARMING THE LAW-ABIDING
    It is a proven fact that DISARMING THE LAW-ABIDING only increases crime - it empowers the criminal element and the Socialist politicians – yes, I realize that's redundant.

    The Social-fascist Democrats KNOW this.

    And THEY JUST DON'T CARE!!!!!!!

    All they care about is raw political power and they don't care how they get it. The people – as in 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ' Need wake up and understand this.
    By HR @ 02/17/09 09:46:38 AMreport abuse
  • What I Have Learned from the 20th Centruy
    http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2009/02/vanderboegh-classic-what-i-have-learned.html

    LESSON NO. 3: If a bureaucrat tells you that he must know if you have a firearm so he can put your name on a list for the common good, or wants to issue you an identity card so that you be more easily identified -- tell him to go to hell. Registration of people and firearms is the required precursor to the tyranny which permits genocide. Bureaucrats cannot send soldiers to doors that are not on their list.

    Visit the url and read the other lessons.
    By Scott @ 02/17/09 09:41:49 AMreport abuse
  • Francisco's Money Speech from Atlas Shrugged by Ayn rand
    "Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard--the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money--the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law--men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims--then money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them.
    By Galt @ 02/17/09 09:34:52 AMreport abuse
  • Illinois Gun Control
    Where was it Obama was from?? The same question begs an answer...will the crooks be taking out an insurance plan?? No wonder ammunition sales continue to expand exponentially across the nation?
    By Barry C @ 02/17/09 09:29:42 AMreport abuse
  • Interesting!
    Of course, this law is by design discriminatory since only the law abiding will follow it and the criminals will never report they own a gun in the first place. Firearms owner's identification card? This is a direct violation of the Second Ammendment since it gives Government the opportunity to deny a person such card even if he would otherwise qualify under Federal regulations. This is one reason I'm glad I live in Arizona. It's an open holster state. A person can walk into a bank with a six-shooter strapped to the side and there would be no problem. No permit required for open carry. I've even done it with my S&W M&P .45 strapped to my side. Nobody freaked out and dived under tables.
    By Bill Gamelson @ 02/17/09 09:29:33 AMreport abuse
  • Sinister or Stupid?
    On the one hand it is easy to see this as a sinister plot to do away with gun ownership without a constitutional challenge. However, could it be that Rep. Kenneth Dunkin and those who think like him are really just painfully stupid? Could it be that he really thinks that those individuals who are given to committing crimes with guns are going to run out and buy insurance?
    By Lynn @ 02/17/09 09:28:45 AMreport abuse
  • The Second Amendment Says .......
    Amendment II

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Just what does having to maintain a $1 million insurance policy do the the right to keep a firearm? Sounds like an infringement to me!

    UNCONSTITUTIONAL !!!!!!!
    By O'Dissious @ 02/17/09 09:26:23 AMreport abuse
  • Hey i've got an idea...
    Hey, I've got an idea. If you own golf clubs you should have to carry $1 mil in liability. You own clubs, you obviously golf. If you golf, you may through negligence hit a golf ball into someone. As a result, you need to carry insurance. How many of these "elites" would be outraged by that?
    By Trey @ 02/17/09 09:18:29 AMreport abuse
  • Watch carefully
    Watch the attacks begin on the first and second amendments. Elimination of both and any and all opposition are cruitial to their goal of a communist style dictatorship with Democrats at the helm.
    By Jim @ 02/17/09 09:14:40 AMreport abuse
  • Insurance for gun owners
    I have an idea! Make it mandatory for individuals to have proof of $1M liability to file as a candidate for elected office.
    By jon Jambor @ 02/17/09 09:06:44 AMreport abuse
  • Illinois
    so who needs the U.S. Constitution ? Lets allow Oblama re-write everything and make this country the Socialist country the general populace wants.
    By Michael the Generator Guy @ 02/17/09 09:06:07 AMreport abuse
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement