Newtown apparently LOVES guns. Yep. It’s a lovely bucolic setting with lots of 4000 sq ft McMansions set back in the trees. It sounds a lot like Bernardsville, NJ. Let me guess, there are probably a lot of corporate executive types out there. Probably a lot of Libertarians and Republican members of the NRA too. The New York Times reports that the sound of guns, rifles and assault weapons is a common thing in Newtown and all efforts to curtail it just to make it safe to walk in the woods, have met with stiff resistance.
It must be a great place to live where your neighbor is allowed to shoot his gun 20 feet from your house and you have no right to protect yourself. Where are the homeowner’s insurance companies?
When I moved into this modest little townhouse, I couldn’t get homeowner’s insurance. Was there a major safety problem? Gas leak? No, there was a crack in the pavement around the municipal access cover that was buried in the apron of my driveway. Let me be clear, the crack wasn’t ON my driveway. It was located on a piece of pavement that was owned by the municipality. It wasn’t a deep crack or a wide crack. But because it was elevated by about half an inch and someone might trip on it in front of my house, my homeowner’s insurance company wouldn’t write a policy. The crack had to be fixed first. That proved to be a problem because it was owned by the township and I wasn’t allowed to touch it. Eventually, the township did fix it but for a couple of weeks there, no policy for love or money.
Over a crack.
So, verily I say to the state of Connecticut, the solution to this problem seems pretty easy to me. If you have more than one gun or an assault weapon in your home, no homeowner’s insurance. Just try to get that 4000 square foot monstrosity with the nice granite countertops and the finished basement covered. Go on. The owners will have to stash their guns somewhere else away from the property. That should keep them away from the young male hotheads in the family. A gun is much more lethal than a pavement defect.
Money changes everything.
****************************
Commenter John R. posted a link to a DailyMail article that says that Nancy Lanza was a survivalist in the Glenn Beck mode. In any case, Beck and his ilk have been predicting catastrophe for a couple of years now from the collision with Nibiru, a wayward planet/dwarf star thingy that doesn’t exist, or some other catastrophic event. Ex Jehovah’s Witness kids have been through this crap before and know a scam when they see one but the people who buy into this nonsense keep getting sucked in by every new scenario. I knew people who quit school and bunkered down leading up to 1975. Many more quit their jobs to pioneer for the Watchtower full time. If you live with people who are into eschatological fantasies, the world can start to look a little nutz. It’s a bit like child abuse to be terrorized all day, all year for years on end by an eschatological parent. For all we know, Adam Lanza might have thought he was doing those kids a favor by killing them before the end of the world as they knew it.
Yes, it’s insane. But what’s more insane is that we allow people like Glenn Beck to promote these doomsday scenarios without any accountability whatsoever. It’s like shouting Fire in a theater. Glenn Beck-why am I not surprised. His shadow has been lurking behind so many violent events in the past couple of years. But you want to know how to tell that Glenn Beck and his end-of-the-world fantasies aren’t serious? How many times lately has he talked and fretted about the “Fiscal Cliff”? People who expect to be fighting for their lives in the next week and have reserved space in long term survivalist residences don’t have time to be worried about losing their Bush Tax cuts. If he is, that’s because come January 1, 2013, he expects to be sitting behind his microphone in a nice safe location spewing nonsense to the gullible and he’s probably got tickets to the Superbowl.
For all we know, there will be more violent incidences this week. Some people don’t know when they’ve been taken for suckers. They really take this seriously.
Filed under: General | Tagged: concrete cracks, eschatology, Glenn Beck, Guns, homeowner's insurance, Newtown, survivalists |
The Confluence 
well said RD
i think the need to renstall the assult weapons ban
I love your Homeowners cudgel to get rid of guns. I have always suggested that in order to own or purchase guns, you had to have them insured, like a car. You had to prove you had mega liability insurance to allow you to have them in your house. Each gun or rifle would have to be insured separately. Believe me, if you had to spend a huge amount to insure them, there would be alot fewer firearms. But refusing to issue homeowner’s policies because you had guns would be perfect. And rightly so! We can have capitalism butt heads with the right to own firearms. I will bet capitalism would win.
On December 21st for the record, the local Natives dancers are planning a ‘normal’ Sun Rise ceremony locally at the beach and there was no talk of the world ending. I was sent an invite (Eldest and family are dancers…traveling the Western States.) and no I wasn’t told to prepare for anything, but there was some link to future event dates, which leads me to conclude life will continue.
PEACE
Someone I shared this link with tells me that this insurance idea would be in defiance of the 2nd amendment. But, I don’t think the insurance company would be saying that you can’t own a gun. Just that they won’t insure you. Right?
I remember being charged an extra $150 for having a baby wading pool at work even though it wasn’t filled for my toddler who would sit in it on hot days while supervised. On days it wasn’t in use it was stored away. The insurance company also charged extra for my dog…even though he was a working dog and docile.
So, why not charge for having automatic or semi-automic weapons on the premise of your home…seems as though that many weapons are high powered for multiple use, to shoot many people or hunting for flock of birds or herds in my opinion. A bullet can travel upwards of two miles and still cause a fatality.
It is high time these ‘gun enthusiasts’ pay to insure their hobby and the deadly ends such weapons can have. At minimum, they should carry a five million dollar policy. Just my thoughts.
One report said one of these semi-automatic guns could unload 10-12 bullets in 3-5 seconds, so how can anyone out run that power? Seriously, when people buy these guns they must know that they are lethal, very lethal and should take care and be held legally responsible, including insuring their guns and the potential for disasters if someone uses them to hurt innocent people.
On what do they base their reasoning, other than wishful thinking?
Oh, my SUV seats seven and my premium is about $198. a month, maybe we should ask that they be charged likewise if their guns can shoot multiple bullets, then charge them like seats in a car.
Who ends up paying for the shooting victims and all the mayhem? We the tax payers. So, I am with RD on this, lets have them insure their guns and bullets.
Of course, your SUV is demonstrably more likely to cause death or serious injury.
Survivalist don’t generally live right in town in big expensive houses that are not fortified with fences at the very least. I think she was just a person who liked guns and liked target practice. She had guns she didn’t need, not because she felt she needed them, but because she liked guns and so she wanted them. She didn’t do enough to keep them out of the hands of her son. She didn’t realize he would do what he did. She loved her son and probably did not see him clearly.
One law that should be considered might be called “The Sandy Hook Act” and require that all people certain types of mental illnesses have their homes free of weapons. It could work if our mental health/health system were not so weak.
You’re thinking of big time Ruby Ridge and Branch Davidian survivalists. That’s so 20th century.
Survivalism has trickled down to average people in average houses with no fencing. Have you seen nancy lanza’s house? That’s no compound.
This is what you get when one party and its followers and media arm decide to induce fear and paranoia in the culture. They’ve been very successful. You think it’s just too crazy but you know, back in the late 60s and early 70s, Jehovah’s witnesses were thought to be out of their fricking minds. No one took their Armagedon shtick seriously. And now there is a series of books about Raptures and being left behind and antichrists and except for the Rapture, it’s indistinguishable from the nutty crap you’d hear in a Kingdom Hall. I can say this with some authority. It’s like half the country went JW.
I know you live in central PA so you should be aware that there are survivalists among you. They might look like regular people but they’re all twitchy about the end of the world and they have their plans and meetup locations and generators and food and all kinds of things you never even thought of. They are prepared for a siege. This is no joke and it’s time people stopped thinking that it’s just too crazy to be true.
Like gasoline to a match:
Adam Lanza…was obsessed with video games.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2249452/Nancy-Lanzas-chilling-instructions-babysitter-Never-turn-Adam.html
Obviously we should repeal the First Amendment.
Nonsense, we don’t allow publication of numerous nefarious recipes for disaster. See my responses to you and RiverD below:
To paraphrase, Video games don’t kill people, people kill people.
Nonsense, See my responses to you below:
I reposted this to a facebook discussion and was immediately confronted with an angry male gun owner who doesn’t want Allstate limiting his gun rights (although of course it limits his house rights, car rights, and business rights) . I finally told him, “The only contribution you can make to this discussion is to go to the corner with your gun and examine your conscience. The people most at risk of being shot at, the mothers, wives, children, and colleagues will discuss this matter.”
Touchy! Who is limiting his gun rights? He would still have the right to bear arms. It wouldn’t be infringed at all. I’m not even opposed to a person having one hunting rifle or revolver for hunting or self defense as long as it isn’t an assault rifle or semi-automatic. All this is saying is that the insurance companies don’t have to cover a house where assault weapons and armories are stored. The gun owner would have to make a choice, store the guns somewhere else not on the property or go without insurance. Just like I could either fill the crack in my driveway or go without insurance. Is the gun nut going to tell me that a gun is less dangerous than a cracked pavement?
Most studies suggest that “the people most at risk of being shot” are, in fact, criminals. Every analysis of gun homicide victims that I’ve seen shows that well over 50% of those victims have a criminal history.
What does that have to do with preventing mass murders with guns? What does that have to do with keeping guns out of the hands of people who are young, male and mentally disturbed? The worst incidences in the past couple of years have been at the hands of the young, male and disturbed who had access to stashes of guns, ammo and camouflage. And from what I can recall, none of them had a criminal record. I think only Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris had criminal records but their crimes were hardly more than pranks at the time. What they all had in common was easy access to a stash of guns on their property and by the way, landlords also have to obtain insurance for their properties. Would my proposal stop gun massacres from happening? Probably not without additional measures but it would make it much harder for the shooters to access their weapons. Sure they could always have someone else buy the guns and store them but let’s remember the kind of people we’re dealing with. They kind of stand out for their lack of social skills, their alienation from society, their strangeness. Even better, allow those insurance companies access to the registration database or credit card purchases. Make every gun purchase a credit card purchase. No credit card, no gun.
Even better, allow those insurance companies access to the registration database or credit card purchases. Make every gun purchase a credit card purchase. No credit card, no gun.
And purchase a gun, and your homeowner’s premium goes up. That could be practical. But what would the insurance companies have to gain by refusing to insure gun owners?
If someone in your household drives your car and has a wreck, it’s usually clear who did it. If that person isn’t listed as an ‘additional driver’, the insurance company can get out of paying the claim.
Are they currently paying claims for damages when someone steals your gun and shoots someone with it? Maybe this would save some claims for liability for damage caused by your child, but isn’t that limited to a child under 12 or so anyway?
Riverdaughter
1) Excellent idea about homeowners insurance for gun owners. Finally insurance companies could perform some public good instead of just ripping off sick people and flood victims…
2) A truth-speaking “survivalist” (if one could be found) would probably admit they are collecting guns to protect their horded can goods from rampaging N-word people when the end of the world comes any day now…
3) If that gutless President Pushover doesn’t speak out plainly for serious gun supervision/control now and put some political balls behind that (instead of using Social Security and Medicare for target practice), he should resign…
ditto
Subject: Adam Lanza…was obsessed with video games.
On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society – Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman draws unsettling, even sinister parallels between the psychological conditioning required to make soldiers kill in war and the similar effect that videos, films, games and movies have in civilian society.
==================================
“Most sane humans, if given the choice, will not kill their fellow man and are extremely reluctant to do so, despite what holly wood would like you to believe. When they are forced to do so, many can experience a great deal of psychological trauma.
Superior training currently used by military organizations helps make the decision for the individual. This is a form of brainwashing but it is frequently necessary. In WW2 people learned to fire on a firing range at paper targets. When they got to the battle field they may have been excellent shots but they realized they were shooting at another person, someone named Hans or Frederick, or whatever. Today, more realistic targets are used in more realistic environments. Killing a ‘target’ becomes more automatic, more instinctive so when push comes to shove the trooper may be scared and unthinking, but his body knows what to do and does it, sometimes before the soldier can rationalize what he is doing.”
Killing; The psychology and realities behind it
http://www.military-sf.com/Killing.htm
Are those video games banned in other developed nations? If not, the young people in those other countries play those same games, but how often do any of them go on murder sprees?
To compare the US to Europe holding all things as constant with only variable is a one dimensional comparison of little value. But you have an agenda so let me indulge your un-scientific thinking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games
Actually, I don’t have my agendas any more. They were removed when I was seven–or were those my tonsils? 😛