You Can Fool the NRA, But You Can’t Fool the Underwriters

I love this story:

A new Kansas law allowing gun owners to carry weapons in public buildings, including schools, has thrust a major Des Moines-based insurer into the national gun control debate.

The EMC Insurance Cos. insures 85 percent to 90 percent of all Kansas school districts and has refused to renew coverage for schools that permit teachers and custodians to carry concealed firearms on their campuses under the new law, which took effect July 1. It’s not a political decision, but a financial one based on the riskier climate it estimates would be created, the insurer said.

“We’ve been writing school business for almost 40 years, and one of the underwriting guidelines we follow for schools is that any on-site armed security should be provided by uniformed, qualified law enforcement officers,”
said Mick Lovell, EMC’s vice president for business development. “Our guidelines have not recently changed.”

The Kansas Legislature passed the law after the fatal shootings of 20 elementary school children in Newtown, Conn., in December.

***

“It’s one thing to have a trained peace officer with a gun in school; it’s a completely different situation when you have a custodian or a teacher with a gun,” Skow said. “That changes the risk of insuring a school and magnifies it considerably.”

Insurers simply don’t know how to price the added risk yet, he said, but they know it’s there.

No kidding.

Somewhat related, the fraternity boys are always bitching about how slow the college is to fix things, and some things are dangerous and no one pays attention to them (they have a deck on the back of the house that really needs to be redone, as it is, it is starting to slide down the hell)> I always tell them, if they are serious about it, take some pictures, walk up to the President’s office, show them the pictures, and then tell him that if it isn’t fixed in a timely manner you are going to send them to whomever insures the school. A bunch of lazy administration folks might not pay attention to you, but boy howdy will the idea of a deck with dozens of young men and women sliding down the hill on a Saturday night causing who knows how many injuries and fatalaties raise some eyebrows at the insurance company HQ.

Although knowing this current college admin, their solution would be to rip down the deck and just put yellow danger tape everywhere and be done with it.






106 replies
  1. 1
    Keith G says:

    Hell, the insurance underwriter might be the one advocating for the “no deck” solution.

  2. 2
    Shakezula says:

    Sometimes the invisible hand of the free market sticks its middle fingers in the appropriate eyeballs.

  3. 3
    Gravenstone says:

    Free market, bitches!

    /cue the wingnut chorus that the insurance company was “gotten to” by Obama …

  4. 4
    RaflW says:

    @Shakezula:
    But you know that conservatives will find a way that the market has been failed, since, like conservatism itself, markets can never fail, they can only be failed (by “distorsions” dontcha know. Distortions, BTW, are things generally passed by Democrats, where as what Republicans pass are market “incentives”).

  5. 5
    ppcli says:

    The moral of this story is clear. The government needs to subsidize insurance for schools that allow teachers and janitors to carry.

    /NRA

  6. 6
    catclub says:

    The insurance companies also know about global warming and sea level rise. Florida home insurance is just about priced out of reach.

    Contrariwise, GM always should have been for national healthcare and they never were.

  7. 7
    the Conster says:

    It strikes me that a lot of gun nuttery would be cured by higher insurance premiums for anyone who owns a gun. Like owners of fast cars and younger drivers have to pay a higher premium – aren’t gun nuts always screaming about how guns are just like cars?

  8. 8
    catclub says:

    @ppcli: A rider to Obamacare that the GOP can get behind.
    (Yes, I know it is not healthcare insurance.)

  9. 9
    MikeJ says:

    If you look around online you can find gun fetishists who whine about higher homeowner insurance rates if the company finds out you own a gun. If owning guns made you safer insurance companies would require it.

  10. 10
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Thank FSM for extortionists, right?!

  11. 11
    catclub says:

    @Keith G: true, but if the admin tells them, they will have underwriters on campus uncovering OTHER bad situations.

  12. 12
    Gretchen says:

    I live in Kansas. These idiots are suing for the right to bring their guns to the city swimming pool that I go to. The pool shares grounds with a playground, skatepark, and the city offices and police station. Who do these guys think they’re going to be defending themselves against, standing their ground in their swimshorts for the 30 seconds it takes the very bored suburban cops to stroll over from the police station 20 feet away?

  13. 13
    Shakezula says:

    @ppcli: No, no, no, no, no. The schools should be required to make such adjustments to the budget as necessary in order to pay for the insurance.

    Surely the teachers will be willing to take a pay cut if they don’t want the blood of children on their greedy, clutching, paws!

  14. 14
    me says:

    Forrest Knox, the Kansas state senator who is the chief advocate of the new gun law

    He said three community colleges in and around his district in Altoona, Kan., have found an insurer who will work with them. Shriver, the Kansas school board group insurance director, identified the company as IMA, or Insurance Management Association, which he described as a brokerage that would market the coverage to different companies.

    He thinks they’ve found an insurer but it’s just a broker. How will he rationalize it once the broker fails to find an insurer? Will the state provide insurance?

  15. 15
    Forum Transmitted Disease says:

    This is how America’s gun problem gets solved. It won’t be quick, but individuals, businesses and building owners can’t take the risk of being uninsured. When your medical and homeowners premiums go to ten times that of your neighbors because you’ve got a pistol in the house, sooner or later that pistol is going to go away.

  16. 16
    quannlace says:

    The insurance companies also know about global warming and sea level rise.

    Facts are stubborn things.

  17. 17
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    NRA bitten on the ass by the market.

    I love it.

  18. 18
    Sibling Nonspecific Firearm of Random Adjective Followed by a Noun That Describes a Mental State (fka AWS) says:

    @me:

    He thinks they’ve found an insurer but it’s just a broker.

    Why does this sound like something from the financial meltdown – tranches of coverage?

  19. 19
    balconesfault says:

    From the beginning, I was offering the opinion that there was the potential for a couple to “own the building” when their young son or daughter was gunned down by a school staff member, intentionally or accidentally. And certainly the “allowed to carry” provision doesn’t only increase the chances of this happening, but also the reduction in liability from pointing out that the staff member shouldn’t have had the gun on school property in the first place.

    Next move I guess will be for the Kansas Legislature to make it so schools can’t be sued for putting kids in lethal situations.

  20. 20
    Shakezula says:

    @me: And mightn’t the risks of guns on a college campus be different than those of guns on a elementary school campus?

  21. 21
    TR says:

    I love it when conservatives get punched by the invisible hand.

    Maybe the Koch Brothers will step up and start a new insurance company to keep the holy cause alive?

  22. 22
    gypsy howell says:

    @Shakezula:
    Bingo.

    They’ll fix the glitch through other budget cuts to the schools. Teachers don’t educate children, guns educate children!

  23. 23
    joes527 says:

    Insurance is a soshulist practice anyway. Real ‘muricans take the good and the bad themselves without a safety-net/ hammock like “insurance.”

    No wonder it is interfering with teacher’s god given right to be responsible gun owners

  24. 24
    Trollhattan says:

    My kid’s school’s budget is so bad they can only afford to pay the janitor to come on weekends. How the hell is he supposed to afford ammo, much less defend the kids when they’re not even there? Kansas sounds like a Paradise!

    OT: Goodhair calls it a warp.*

    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_.....ernor?lite

    *In the first draft, he called it a “burrito.”

  25. 25
    KXB says:

    In IL, a number of restaurants are trying to get exempted from a new concealed carry law. They don’t want the risk of either angry/drunk/out-of-control customers firing shots.

  26. 26
    Trollhattan says:

    @TR:

    Mutual of Koch-Walmart to the rescue.

  27. 27
    TR says:

    So if these schools can’t get coverage because of the gun policy, does that mean they’re at risk of ruin the next time a natural disaster strikes as well, or is that a separate issue?

    Because we are talking about a state known for its tornados, right?

  28. 28
    Napoleon says:

    @me:

    He thinks they’ve found an insurer but it’s just a broker.

    Man those people are idiots. Does he have any clue that any broker/3rd party sales person is always “going to work with you” to find some insurance company to take the risk while the broker/3rd party sales person walks away with a commision and no liability for the risk.

  29. 29
    Tractarian says:

    I don’t understand the subject line. Who is fooling the NRA?

    Should be, “You can fool the Kansas Legislature….”

  30. 30
    cvstoner says:

    “It’s one thing to have a trained peace officer with a gun in school; it’s a completely different situation when you have a custodian or a teacher with a gun,” Skow said. “That changes the risk of insuring a school and magnifies it considerably.”

    OMG really? What a brilliant stroke of deductive reasoning that is! No wonder the folks running the Kansas government couldn’t figure this out.

    The bean counters shall inherit the earth. God bless ’em.

  31. 31
    catclub says:

    @KXB: I am trying to figure out how this will work… and it is not really working.

    I think I heard that concealed carry licenses (in some states) say that the gun owner agrees not to violate certain places. But maybe I am just spreading misinformation (which is my perfect right on the internet).

  32. 32
    Violet says:

    I love this story. The more insane laws wingnuts pass, the more stories like this will appear.

    Does anyone remember when conservatives were the people running sober-minded businesses like insurance? Now even the insurance companies are considered to be a bunch of liberal soshulists because they don’t want to get mixed up with guns on school campuses.

  33. 33
    JCJ says:

    But won’t the loons just blame all of this on trial lawyers? After all, if it weren’t for trial lawyers and their frivolous lawsuits following a potential gunning down of an innocent 8-year-old there wouldn’t be a need for the insurance in the first place.

  34. 34
    PeakVT says:

    @Gretchen: Their feelings of inadequacy? A gut feeling that gay liberal Islamofacists are about to invade? General paranoia? A cop isn’t much protection against that kind of thinking.

  35. 35
    Hal says:

    Thinking back to some of the nuns I had in elementary school makes me great full none of them carried guns.

    I’ve given up on gun nuts though. Dirty Harry fantacists cannot be reasoned with.

  36. 36
    Redshirt says:

    @Gretchen: Because it’s become “A Thing”. Now, we must have guns EVERYWHERE, because Liberals are against it.

    Just like 35 years ago, very few Republicans were anti-abortion, and now they all are and try and outdo each other with more draconian laws. Why? Because it became part of the Team Slogan, and so, being a good team player, you must believe in it.

    I pray to FSM that sanity in the general public can outweigh the Wingnut’s blind allegiance to an insane ideology.

  37. 37
    burnspbesq says:

    @Trollhattan:

    That’s not as funny as it seems. It would be pretty easy for anybody with as much money as the Kochs to set up a reinsurance company in Bermuda or the British Virgin Islands to take on this risk, and if the primary insurers can cede 100 percent of the risk and keep enough of a ceding commission to cover their admin costs and make a little profit, there’s no downside to writing the coverage. That’s no fucking way to run a reinsurance company if you’re trying to make money, but the Kochs would rationalize it as campaign contributions by other means.

  38. 38
    jon says:

    Back in the undergrad days, I had a huge lecture class. It fulfilled a general ed requirement, the professor was willing to let anyone sign in and take it, and it was in a huge hall. But not big enough. Some students sat in the aisles. The professor asked the administration to move it to an even bigger hall, but he was stonewalled. Admin would be happy if some students couldn’t fill their requirements so they’d take another semester, I guess.

    Anyway, someone didn’t ask admin or the department for a change of venue. When the fire marshall found out about it, a new lecture hall was located the very next day. Sometimes you just have to call the right authority figure, because when you see a danger and when someone else sees a danger the results are not equal.

    It’s not enough to redress grievances to government. You also need to know the right department.

  39. 39
    The Tragically Flip says:

    If this keeps happening, they’ll just outlaw insurance taking guns into account at all when assessing insurability or determining rates, and force insurance companies to raise rates on everyone in order to cover their real extra costs.

    Remember, they pass special laws prohibiting any form of manufacturer’s liability for making guns without adequate consumer safety measures (in some cases, not even a regular old style safety catch). If a fucking coffee machine scalds people the manufacturer is liable, but not gun makers. Why? America, Shut Up!

  40. 40
    raven says:

    @Hal: The Nuns would be kickin your ass for this too “great full “???????

  41. 41
    KmCO says:

    @Gretchen: Well, some blahs might show up.

  42. 42
    MikeJ says:

    @burnspbesq:

    there’s no downside to writing the coverage.

    And keep in mind that until something happens these schools don’t need insurance. As Vern Fonk[1] and his brethren will tell you they need proof of insurance.

    AIG was able to sell proof of insurance with no way to pay off when it was needed. I imagine there’s plenty of people out there creative enough to get Kansas’ money.

    [1] Vern Fonk actually sells real insurance to the best of my knowledge.

  43. 43
    Hal says:

    @raven: I’m blaming my phones spell check. Besides, Catholic schools are notorious for lax academic standards. It’s hard to teach coherently when you haven’t had sex. Ever.

  44. 44
    Eric S says:

    @catclub: It is my understanding that the restaurant and bar group here in Illinois is seeking an exception to the new concealed carry law to ban concealed weapons from establishments that serve alcohol. So it would be a more global ban. This would certainly be more effective than individual restaurant and bar owners instituting the rule at their establishments.

    Gov. Quinn put it into his amendatory veto. My confidence of that veto withstanding is not strong.

  45. 45
    Haydnseek says:

    @Hal: Well, age appropriate heterosexual sex at any rate.

  46. 46
    Shakezula says:

    @KXB: I wonder how laws like that are affecting employees. If memory serves bartending already ranks up there with coal mining in terms of jobs that make you a bad insurance risk.

  47. 47
    burnspbesq says:

    @Hal:

    The vast majority of Catholic high school teachers come from the laity. Pun intended.

  48. 48
    Mnemosyne says:

    @jon:

    Sometimes you just have to call the right authority figure, because when you see a danger and when someone else sees a danger the results are not equal.

    It’s especially useful when the authority figure can use naughty words like “fine” and “citation.” Those are the kinds of things that get an administrator’s attention.

  49. 49

    @Gretchen:

    Cowards Carry Guns. Pure and Simple.

  50. 50
    Hal says:

    @burnspbesq: I meant the Nuns. The priests are of course a whole other matter.

    The kids though are all dirty whores.

  51. 51

    @The Other Bob:

    Just had a thought. Maybe if the gun owners all wear speedos we can put this whole d*ck size and gun-owning thing to rest.

  52. 52
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Shakezula:

    If memory serves bartending already ranks up there with coal mining in terms of jobs that make you a bad insurance risk.

    You mean as far as future health problems go? That was the rationale for banning smoking in restaurants and bars here in California — it’s actually a worker protection law, not a health law. If that’s what you mean, then restaurant workers and bartenders aren’t a bad risk anymore, at least in states where restaurant and bar smoking is banned.

    If it’s just a general risk, last I heard the two most dangerous jobs were convenience store clerk and taxi driver, because you’re very likely to be killed in a holdup.

  53. 53
    Mike E says:

    The reaction to open carry by underwriters reminds me of the pay off line in this ad.

  54. 54
    Shakezula says:

    @Mnemosyne: No, I mean as far as getting killed on the job.

  55. 55
    Violet says:

    Is there anyone who lives in Kansas posting here? Curious how this issue is being covered in the local news. Are Kansas parents happy that the schools their kids are going to may not be insured.

  56. 56
    raven says:

    @Hal: Just foolin around! Sister Mary Elephant is my fav!

  57. 57
    Neutron Flux says:

    @Violet: 1) yes 2)Not much 3) No kids in school, but grandkids. See #2. It will take the schools thru local outlets to get this story out there. It would be one thing if the insurance rates went up, but they are saying no insurance. It will take some months for this to play out.

  58. 58
    Roger Moore says:

    @Gretchen:

    These idiots are suing for the right to bring their guns to the city swimming pool that I go to. The pool shares grounds with a playground, skatepark, and the city offices and police station.

    Sure, maybe they’re safe while they’re at the pool, but they need their gun while they’re going to and from the pool. They want to be able to bring their guns absolutely everywhere so they don’t have to leave them at home (or in their car, where they’re a theft magnet) because one of the many places they’re going doesn’t allow guns.

  59. 59
    👾 Martin says:

    Can’t wait for Patriot Insurance to be launched by the Tea Party to great Fox fanfare, only to die out as soon as the adults with the non-gastritis calculators arrive to shit on their parade. Should be an entertaining two weeks.

  60. 60
    Violet says:

    @Neutron Flux: Thanks for the local perspective! It’s probably a bit early for it to be big news, since it’s still early July and people aren’t paying too much attention to back to school yet. In another couple of weeks kids the back to school supplies will start to be up in every Target, Wal-Mart and office supply store and if it isn’t resolved it’ll be much more newsworthy for the average parent.

  61. 61
  62. 62
    gene108 says:

    @the Conster:

    aren’t gun nuts always screaming about how guns are just like cars?

    It’s actually the opposite.

    Every time a liberal comes up with a point regarding gun regulations that mirror car regulations – like mandatory insurance for example – they scream it is unpossible to impose this on gun owners because gun ownership is a right protected by the Constitution, while car ownership is not.

    EDIT: It’s funny because the same people think nothing of imposing voting restrictions, which probably violate the intent of one or of all of the 4-5 voting rights amendments in the Constitution, especially the 15th Amendment.

  63. 63
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Shakezula:

    According to Yahoo!, bartenders don’t even make the top 10. Mining is #10, with commercial fishing at #1. Who knew?

  64. 64
    The Other Chuck says:

    Can’t be that hard to insure, seeing’s how cheap human life appears to be over there. Unless it’s a fetus, then by golly it’s more precious than anything.

  65. 65
    RSA says:

    @Roger Moore:

    Sure, maybe they’re safe while they’re at the pool, but they need their gun while they’re going to and from the pool.

    Maybe in the pool. But do you want to be the one without a spear gun in an underwater knife fight?

  66. 66
    The Tragically Flip says:

    @RSA: Swim your..err..ground, brave citizen.

  67. 67
    Redshirt says:

    @RSA: Aquaman agrees!

  68. 68
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Roger Moore:

    They need them for the locker rooms. Because of the gheys.

  69. 69
    les says:

    @Violet:

    Are Kansas parents happy that the schools their kids are going to may not be insured.

    They’re too busy being outraged at the teaching of evolution to worry about such things. Besides, they like guns being everywhere; you never know when a Planned Parenthood employee might turn up. Yeah, I live there.

  70. 70
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @gene108: yeah, but none of those amendments were originally in the Constitution, and cannot be found anywhere in the Articles of the Confederation. A strict reading of the Constitution shows that there’s a right to bear arms, but not a right to vote: Only the right that if anyone can vote, then minorities, women, and those over 18 have to be allowed to vote.

  71. 71
    Craigo says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): A strict reading of the Cobstitution requires that you read the entire Constitution, not just certain parts, and that you ignore the Articles, which are, you know, not part of the Constitution.

  72. 72
    Roger Moore says:

    @RSA:
    I’m actually more or less serious. The people who want to carry guns all the time really want to carry them all the time, and having to worry about even a few places where they’re forbidden makes it a big hassle. I suspect that’s a big reason you hear about people forgetting about their gun in the security line at the airport. They’re so used to packing absolutely everywhere that they totally forget that there are some place where they aren’t allowed to bring their guns.

  73. 73
    gene108 says:

    @Craigo:

    Actually a strict reading of the Constitution requires you acknowledge the fact the main document and the Bill of Rights were given to the Founders by Jesus and therefore will always supersede the other 17 Amendments, though the 11th and 12th Amendments sort of get a pass on this because a bunch of the same guys, who made the Constitution were around to get those two Amendments passed and therefore they still had the effects of the residual Jesus-dust or whatever Jesus-effect Jesus gave them at the Constitutional convention.

  74. 74

    Hah! I just posted about this too. Here’s the part I love:

    The Kansas law passed in the wake of the Newtown, Conn. school shooting went into effect July 1, allowing Kansas schools to permit teachers and staff to carry weapons to protect children. No school districts in the state had adopted a concealed-carry policy as of Saturday, according to the Register.

    Once again, Republican grand ideas that absolutely NOBODY wants. Who coulda predicted, I ask you?

    Hilarious.

  75. 75

    sorta on topic: Non-fraternity bros exhibit more hypermasculinity and sexual aggression than frat-bros. http://www.insidehighered.com/.....ed-broader

  76. 76
    👾 Martin says:

    @gene108: You realize the Mormons actually sorta do believe that.

  77. 77
    EriktheRed says:

    Once again, here’s Steve M. to rain on what little parade there is over this:

    http://nomoremister.blogspot.c.....rance.html

  78. 78
    gene108 says:

    @👾 Martin:

    I think a got some vague hints about it during the 2012 campaign because of Romney’s religious beliefs, but they – the beliefs and Romney – weren’t interesting enough to make me actually look into this more.

    Any religion that will further restrict my access to coffee isn’t getting good hard look from me. No sireee. I’ve already had to switch to decaf because of health reasons and I sure as hell ain’t gonna go give it up.

  79. 79
    Redshirt says:

    This country, and due to our influence, the world, is being held hostage by about 27% of the US voting population. It’s astounding, in its epic shittiness.

  80. 80
    Baud says:

    @Redshirt:

    27% of the full population. Much higher percentage of the voting population, especially in the midterms.

  81. 81
    The Pale Scot says:

    Insurance is a soshulist practice anyway

    Any would be capitalist or industrialist with a checking account would tell you different. Insurance is the bedrock of the modern economy. There is no industrial or construction activity possible without assessment and protection from liability.

    The problem is that the FIRE (Financial,Insurance,Real Estate) lobbyists have focused relentlessly on reducing Big Biz exposure to liabilities.

    Nuclear power plants are covered by the Feds, (no private insurer will touch it) and there a 500 billion? or so limit to total liability from claims generated from a major nuke accident, that wouldn’t even cover setting up the refugee centers for a Fukishima type event in a populated area.

    Fracking has the same kind of protection against claims of damaging water supplies.

    Somehow we’re responsible for shoveling snow off the sidewalk but not for keeping a gun collection in a glass fronted cabinet.

    The medical community wants protection from lawsuits but won’t allow court records of doctors to be public.

    There could be a viable strategy of pointing this out these to the public and presenting it as simply those who benefit from risking others safety have to assume and pay for that risk, but any political entity who tried it would by run over by a full lobbyist press.

  82. 82
    Soonergrunt says:

    Christ, even Oklahoma didn’t pass legislation to allow staff to carry guns on school grounds. In fact, our wingnut governor’s task force specifically called that idea out as not being an appropriate response to the threat that would in fact increase the likelihood that a child would be hurt or killed by a gun on school grounds. The bill to allow carry on grounds died quietly in the state Senate.

  83. 83
    Shakezula says:

    @Southern Beale: And yet, the portion of the population that owning a gun is a substitute for things like bravery will blame the stupid liberal unionist teachers’ collective and demand that our children be taught by Rambo impersonators.

  84. 84
    Chris says:

    @Redshirt:

    Yes, it’s a fascinating process… but whatever it is that brings people to wingnut ideology seems to basically serve as a gateway drug that inevitably leads to embracing the full spectrum of their beliefs. Probably because their all-or-nothing ideology doesn’t leave much room for anything else; you can’t disagree with them on any single point without being tarred and feathered as a heretic, a liberal and a RINO, and exiled from the tribe.

  85. 85

    @Shakezula:

    Actually, we’re all pretty sure that the KS legislature will pass an ALEC-sponsored law (boilerplate leg soon to be before lawmakers in Tennessee, Mississippi, Oklahoma, etc.) making it ILLEGAL for a private insurance company to not write policies for schools with armed teachers.

    I mean, seriously. Howmuchyawannabet? I’m calling it in 5… 4… 3…

  86. 86

    Interestingly, last week I was at a bluegrass concert and happened to be sitting next to the head of our state’s biggest environment advocacy group. We got talking about repealing the Price Anderson Act — which is soshulist gummint insurance for the nuclear power industry, since no private insurer will touch a nuke plant.

  87. 87
    gene108 says:

    @Shakezula:

    stupid liberal unionist teachers’

    What’s fascinating about teacher’s unions is the number of places they get blamed for crappy schools, in states where teachers are not unionized and/or not allowed to unionize by state law.

  88. 88
    Botsplainer says:

    OT, but damn, this dude sucks.

    http://gawker.com/evil-boyfrie.....-706880138

    I love a good prank, but I think that the gawker commenter who summed it up best called it “the night the blowjobs died”.

  89. 89
    TomG says:

    I’m a libertarian (without the “g-” prefix) and it amazes me that the gun lobby is so powerful that they can supersede the rights of private property owners. These laws that allow concealed carry (or just carry) should never be able to over-ride the right of homeowners, churches, private restaurants and others to set their own standard of permission where guns are concerned. Weren’t conservatives all in favor of letting restaurants set their own rules about cigarette smoking years ago? Same thing should apply to guns. You want to bring a gun, better make damn sure that property owner WILL ALLOW YOU THE PRIVILEGE.

  90. 90
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    @TomG: Your antigunness makes little baby LiberJesus cry.

  91. 91
    Flying Squirrel Girl says:

    A friend’s kid attends CSU in Ft. Collins, CO. As a result of the Aurora shootings the school quickly made he decision that one of the dormitories on campus would be designated for students who wish to carry firearms. As it turns out, students have more sense than most legislators because despite being told that we need moar gunz everywhere! and everyone agrees, no students signed up to live in concealed carry-friendly dorm.

  92. 92
    Roger Moore says:

    @TomG:

    Weren’t conservatives all in favor of letting restaurants set their own rules about cigarette smoking years ago?

    Plenty of Libertarians believe that businesses should be free to set their own rules about the race of their clientele. Rand Paul is a good example of somebody who has said just that.

  93. 93
    TomG says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead: I know…it is a bit naive of me to expect that the absolute right of private property should actually mean something when the gun lobby waves lots of money at various legislators.

  94. 94
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Botsplainer:

    WT fucking F? How do you decide that’s a good prank to pull on your spouse/spouse equivalent?

    Okay, look, guys — 9 out of 10 women hate practical jokes. HATE THEM. There is a slight possibility that you’ve managed to find the 1 in 10 who’s okay with them, but don’t start with one that’s designed to scare the shit out of her when she’s asleep.

  95. 95
    Robert Sneddon says:

    @Southern Beale: Actually that’s not true. It’s one of those lies that circulates until it’s taken as true because “everyone says so!” Basically nuclear plant operators in the US carry insurance to cover a $10 billion dollar liability in total. The Price Anderson Act has the US government cover liabilities greater than ten billion dollars as insurers of last resort, in the same way they are stepping in to rebuild the areas of New York and Jersey trashed by Hurricane Sandy.

    ” The average annual premium for a single-unit reactor site is $400,000.”

    http://www.world-nuclear.org/i.....ar-Damage/

    The sidebar on that report on how nuclear power plant insurance works is interesting:

    “…the misconception was addressed as follows in 2006 by a broker who had been responsible for a nuclear insurance pool: “it is wrong [to believe] that insurers will not touch nuclear power stations. In fact, wherever they are available to private sector insurers, Western-designed nuclear installations are sought-after business because of their high engineering and risk management standards. This has been the case for fifty years.” ”

    The Price Anderson Act also covers insurance for non-power nuclear reactor accidents and incidents at research reactors and DoE facilities so if it goes way then those reactors and research establishments might have to close, so no more nuclear medicine, medical tracers etc.

  96. 96
    Gex says:

    @Mnemosyne: We live in a world where we are writing laws that make homicide legal if you feel scared for your life. In a world with SYG laws, you don’t fuck with people like this. You just don’t.

  97. 97
    gene108 says:

    @TomG:

    Cigarette smoking is not a Constiutionally protected right. Gun ownership is.

    Big difference for a lot of people.

  98. 98
    Violet says:

    @Botsplainer: That sucks. He’s also advertising his other pranks–follow him on Twitter and YouTube. So this isn’t an isolated incident.

  99. 99
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Gex:

    I don’t have a whole lot of dealbreakers, but pulling elaborate pranks to fuck with my head is definitely one.

    How’s summer life in the big city? I keep hearing that Minneapolis is now the #1 bike city in the USA after beating out Portland, OR.

  100. 100
    Xecky Gilchrist says:

    I’d guess the next step is legislation forcing insurers to recognize – whatever their (sneer sneer) “data” might say – that guns make everyone safer and therefore they should charge less for sites that have moar guns.

    Because regulation is bad unless it serves the wingnut worldview.

  101. 101
    TomG says:

    @gene108: To which I would point out that you do NOT have absolute “free speech” rights on private property – which is another constitutionally protected right (Amendment 1). The rights spelled out by the constitution are rights specifically in relation to the federal government (and later the states), not your rights in relation to individual property owners.

  102. 102
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    @TomG:

    To which I would point out that you do NOT have absolute “free speech” rights on private property

    I do if I got my gun, bitch.

  103. 103
    Lee says:

    @gene108:

    Except the constitution pertains to the government not private individuals. Gun ownership is just like free speech. The government can not infringe on your speech but a private individual (or business) can.

  104. 104
    JR in WV says:

    @KXB:

    In lots of places, you can’t carry a weapon into a bar or restaurant where alcohol is served, and most places any business can post a sign to keep weapons out of their establishment.

    My drug store [the drug store I patronize to be more specific], for example, has a no weapons allowed sign. My bank, on the other hand, has no such rule, perhaps because people who bring in large amounts of cash prefer to be armed.

    In AZ I think they recently allowed concealed carry in bars etc. if the gun owner doesn’t drink any alcohol, an exception to that restriction.

  105. 105
    Mo says:

    What I want to know is why the insurance industry is letting hospitals get away with religiously dictated rather than medically indicated healthcare for women, especially the pregnant kind. Why aren’t malpractice lawyers gathering victims for a class action suit by infertile women who had ectopic pregnancies surgically removed per Catholic dogma rather than the far safer and fertility sparing standard drug treatment. Why?

  106. 106
    liberal says:

    @Gretchen:

    I live in Kansas. These idiots are suing for the right to bring their guns to the city swimming pool that I go to. The pool shares grounds with a playground, skatepark, and the city offices and police station. Who do these guys think they’re going to be defending themselves against…

    That’s been clear all along. They’re defending themselves against lower revenues for the thug owners of firearms and ammo manufacturering companies.

Comments are closed.