Washington WASHINGTON STATE SB 5963 (2023/2024) - Insurance requirements even for personal firearm ownership

[Stomper]

Well, since solv3nt doesn't rock a chute, he won't be skydiving nekkid for long...

OK, a nekkid lawndart…..

 

[sobo]

OK, a nekkid lawndart…..

OK, now that would be funny to watch... the last seconds up to and including impact, I mean...

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Well now ...
If at first you don't succeed....then skydiving ain't for you...
Andy

 

[Jim Horn]

Well, at least the reserve parachute comes with a lifetime warranty!

 

[ATCclears]

 

[cog357]

A person who owns a firearm shall obtain and continuously9 maintain in full force and effect a residential dwelling policy from an insurer that is authorized to do business in this state, covering losses or damages resulting from the 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 property damage.

Washington State Legislature

app.leg.wa.gov

Another way to limit our 2nd Amendment rights

 

[Sporting Systems]

Testimony and hearing recap. Executive session on this tomorrow.

"Good morning committee members, Daniel Mitchell from the 49th legislative district, speaking against this bill on behalf of the Washington Civil Rights Association.

Years ago, when proactive, responsible firearms owners in Washington carried insurance for legal bills resulting from the use lawful use of a firearm, the state insurance commissioner determined this was illegal under Washington law, the policies were cancelled. We wished to insure ourselves against the known peril of criminal violence, and the state declared it illegal. Today, the state is now declaring insurance should be mandatory. The jusxtoposition of the policies is noteworthy.

For those that have done any due diligence on this issue, they will know that most homeowners policies are named exclusion policies, and accidental discharge is not a named exclusion in any policy I could find among 12 major insurers. Furthermore, there is no surplus line policy or insurance rider for such a risk.
Safe Storage in Washington is specifically undefined by the RCWs, it was found to be Unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, in the landmark case of Heller V Washington DC. The state is simply seeking for 3rd parties to define safe storage and enforce an Unconstitutional requirement.
In Washington, 22% of drivers do not carry the required auto insurance. Many of our residents are not the named lease holders or home owners. This bill lacks any enforcement mechanism and no penalty mechanism. In fact it really has no structure at all. So what's the actual point?

This bill fails to provide any protection for our community, creates more government regulation, for a product that largely exists entirely without state intervention. We strongly encourage safe storage, we provide free locks and youth outreach to our community through the our work with the KIDSSAFE foundation, reaching 25,000 kids with free gun safety training across Oregon and Washington.

This bill has no need, and provides no benefit. So what's the actual point, just another contribution to your re-election fund? "

Notes:

Nice to see the NRA, Sharpshooters Range and Conservative Ladies of Washington for testifying against this bill. Great follow up questions by the Senators opposed to this bill. Great testimony in opposition from Teo Morca, Eric Pratt, Jonathan Nelson, Ralph Rieger, and Michael McKinley as well.

Those supporting this bill spoke of mass shootings, gun owner liability insurance outside the home, safety training, and even the insurance industry professional didn't understand current INCLUSIONS under current insurance policies. They testified of their disdain for guns but added nothing to the conversation about the actual bill (par for the course with the anti crowd).

Senator Wagoneer asked the state insurance commissioner rep, "So, I already have this coverage, if it's not a named exclusion?" The answer from the state, "Yes".

 

[Diamondback]

Not good, Executive that fast means it was being fast-tracked no matter what the testimony said.

 

[Sporting Systems]

Not good, Executive that fast means it was being fast-tracked no matter what the testimony said.

It had a hearing today, and was scheduled for executive session tomorrow. It was REMOVED from Exec session about an hour ago. For intents and purposes, its as closed to dead as it can be. There is no law and justice exec session called for Wednesday, and it has to pass out of committee before Thursday. A certain State senator emailed us a "congrats, great testimony today" along with the legislative agenda change note, removing 5963 from the exec session.

 

[Diamondback]

Thanks for straightening me out, Dan. How many of these rectal fissures are dead now and how many are left?

 

[Sporting Systems]

Thanks for straightening me out, Dan. How many of these rectal fissures are dead now and how many are left?

2118 is the elephant in the room.