Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: There a bill hearing on 3-19-13 regarding Insurance mandates?????

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    There a bill hearing on 3-19-13 regarding Insurance mandates?????

    I saw a posting on ccdl but I don't and won't have a FB account .... the posting did not state the bill number or committee it's going to be before ..

    Anyone have info on this?

    That's why you have to put bill #'s on subject lines ...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Anyone have info on this?
    H.B. 6656

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyUberAlles View Post
    Thanks! The Insurance committee website has not been updated.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 03-17-2013 at 09:06 PM.

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyUberAlles View Post
    AN ACT CONCERNING LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR FIREARM POSSESSORS OR OWNERS.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

    Section 1. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2013) (a) Any person who possesses or owns a firearm, as defined in section 53a-3 of the general statutes, shall procure and maintain (1) excess personal liability insurance that provides coverage for bodily injury or property damage caused by the use of a firearm, and (2) self defense insurance that provides coverage for civil and criminal defense costs and provides for reimbursement of criminal defense costs if such person uses a firearm in self defense. Any person subject to this subsection who does not procure and maintain such insurance shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to a person who possesses a firearm on a temporary basis while on the premises of a rifle or gun club.

    (b) The Insurance Commissioner shall adopt regulations, in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54 of the general statutes, to implement the provisions of this section, including, but not limited to, minimum coverage amounts of such insurance policies, form and filing requirements for such policies and any permissible exclusions under such policies.
    Statement of Purpose:
    To require any person who possesses or owns a firearm to procure and maintain excess personal liability insurance and self defense insurance, and to require the Insurance Commissioner to adopt regulations to implement the provisions of this section.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Yes, this bill is meant to:

    a) be a means of registration

    b) be a means of confiscation

    Its main purpose is confiscation

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    I have a little bit of optimism that this proposal is so far out there, and so obviously unconstitutional, that it will never make it out of committee. But then again, you never know with these politicians now that they see the opportunity to unleash their life-long adgenda of gun control on all of us.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Testimony I prepared HV 6656

    INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL NOT PAY

    “does not cover illegal acts… President of the Insurance Institute.” (pg 1 of exhibits)

    GOAL IS REGISTRATION OF FIREARMS

    The bill requires that firearm owners provide a list of the firearms (type & serial #) to the state through their insurance companies. “Property tax databases would be modified to accommodate variable firearms records per dwelling”. (pg.3 of exhibits)

    ULTIMATE GOAL OF CONFISCATION

    “Gun owners .. would protect their Second Amendment right to bear arms. Owners unwilling to pay liability premiums would remove the burden by either eliminating or refusing to acknowledge possession of firearms. Absconders are far more likely to abuse second amendment rights”. (pg 2 of Exhibits) Since when do people need to perform an affirmative act to “protect” a constitutional right? What’s next? Getting insurance to pay for damage in case of an illegal search of a person’s home, and if home owners do not get it then they waive their 4th amendment guarantees against unwarranted searches?

    RESULT – SWAT TEAMS DESENDING UPON HOUSEHOLDS

    If a citizen forgets to pay a premium they will be arrested and their guns taken away and will lose $50,000 in fines and lawyers fees (the insurance company won’t pay) and spend one year in jail, lose their jobs, and have their life’s ruined. Just for having a gun that is our right. Clearly the Connecticut democrats are willing to go to these lengths.

    IS THIS BILL THE RESULT OF ILLEGAL AND SECRET MEETINGS??

    There are complaints pending in the Freedom of Information Commission that oversees illegal meeting legal complaints. It appears as if secret meetings between legislators that have been meeting in secret this session in respect to the production of anti-gun bills (the basic premise behind the FIC complaints). Is this bill one of many that are the result of such meetings held outside of a public venue as required by Connecticut General Statues Chapter 14 provisions?


    You can send e-testimony to: instestimony@cga.ct.gov if unable to make the 1:00pm meeting
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 03-18-2013 at 01:18 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    Watch the hearing here. No idea when 6656 will come up.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    The committee is taking votes on raised bills and will hold public hearing on HB6656 at 1:00.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    Sen. Beth Bye is testifying now. Wow! She says that guns are no different than cars. We have to register and insure our cars so why not guns? She does insist though that she would never want to infringe on anyone's rights -- of course not.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyUberAlles View Post
    Sen. Beth Bye is testifying now. Wow! She says that guns are no different than cars. We have to register and insure our cars so why not guns? She does insist though that she would never want to infringe on anyone's rights -- of course not.
    I was going to add on to the end of my testimony that "Hey, idiots! Mandatory insurance on vehicles does not exist in this state!" Which is true .... you can also post a bond instead.

    AND she basically admitted to having secret meetings - a point I did touch on and accused Bye of doing....illegal meetings. She's already the subject of one violation of our open meeting laws.

    Oddly enough, when my buzzer buzzed, they stopped me ASAP. Well...they just lost a friend...no Xmas cards for them this year form me.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyUberAlles View Post
    Sen. Beth Bye is testifying now. Wow! She says that guns are no different than cars. We have to register and insure our cars so why not guns? She does insist though that she would never want to infringe on anyone's rights -- of course not.
    I stuck my tongue out at her ... was this on the broadcast?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Oddly enough, when my buzzer buzzed, they stopped me ASAP.
    Oh yeah -- they obviously didn't want to touch your accusations of secret meetings with a 10 foot pole. When is the proper time for you to raise that administratively or judicially?

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyUberAlles View Post
    Oh yeah -- they obviously didn't want to touch your accusations of secret meetings with a 10 foot pole. When is the proper time for you to raise that administratively or judicially?
    This is done through the freedom of information commission..an admin agency

    Oddly enough, I filed a complaint in respect to Bye about 2 hrs before the hearing ... I guess I'll be filing another since she "spilled the beans" in an open and recorded hearing.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Ctclassic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Plainfield, CT, ,
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I stuck my tongue out at her ... was this on the broadcast?
    Atta boy Davey...that'll show 'em......WTF!? Your part of the reason the anti's think we gun owners are just a bunch of irresponsible, uneducated, embreds.

    Let us not forget she ( Bye ) is the same one who was caught surfing on FB during some of the testimonies a couple weeks back.

  16. #16
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    "Hey, idiots! Mandatory insurance on vehicles does not exist in this state!" Which is true .... you can also post a bond instead.
    since when? vehicle insurance is definitely mandatory in CT
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    since when? vehicle insurance is definitely mandatory in CT
    Nope nope nope ... you CAN post a bond ... its a 25K bond (yonkers!) but it relieves you of having insurance ...

    So, technically, one does not have to have insurance....I talked to one legislator today about it and he grumbled "ok"

  18. #18
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    763
    interesting. I'll have to look into this. I'd discuss it more in here, but it's obviously OT for this website lol
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    interesting. I'll have to look into this. I'd discuss it more in here, but it's obviously OT for this website lol
    And an interuption of the thread - such discourages people from following the OP topic
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  20. #20
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    763
    so, back on topic; people argue car insurance is mandatory, so gun insurance should be too.
    but in many states, including here in CT, car insurance is NOT mandatory. Also, driving a vehicle is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights, and is a privilege not a right. whereas owning/carrying guns IS protected by the Constitution, and IS an inalienable right, Not a privilege
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Ctclassic View Post
    Atta boy Davey...that'll show 'em......WTF!? Your part of the reason the anti's think we gun owners are just a bunch of irresponsible, uneducated, embreds.

    Let us not forget she ( Bye ) is the same one who was caught surfing on FB during some of the testimonies a couple weeks back.
    Irresponsible, uneducated, embreds....??

    I think you worry too much about what people think of you ... the sticking out of the tongue is a time honored why of expressing disapproval.

    I think my testimony speaks for itself. You were free to come down and stick your tongue out too

    You would sit there with a smile on your face while they take away your rights though ?
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 03-20-2013 at 10:49 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by motoxmann View Post
    so, back on topic; people argue car insurance is mandatory, so gun insurance should be too.
    but in many states, including here in CT, car insurance is NOT mandatory. Also, driving a vehicle is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights, and is a privilege not a right. whereas owning/carrying guns IS protected by the Constitution, and IS an inalienable right, Not a privilege
    And I am NOT required to insure my truck that never leaves my farmland in Litchfield county. It is a "yard truck" that never hits public road ways (OK well almost never -- sometimes I take a shortcut from the south 40 up to the barn -- but don't tell anyone). So certainly there are exceptions even to the "you need car insurance" rule and, for that reason and Moto's reasons above, the argument just does not translate to firearms.

  23. #23
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613

    Slightly off topic

    The handgun in my holster IS my insurance.

    My next level is my attorney.

    You do not want to meet either in an adversary position.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post

    My next level is my attorney.

    .
    The firm Smith & Wesson ?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •