Maryland House Democrats introduced a controversial gun safety bill requiring gun owners to forfeit their ability to wear or carry without firearm liability insurance.

Introduced by Del. Terri Hill, D-Howard County, the legislation would prohibit the “wear or carry” of a gun anywhere in the state unless the individual has obtained a liability insurance policy of at least $300,000.

"A person may not wear or carry a firearm unless the person has obtained and it covered by liability insurance issued by an insurer authorized to do business in the State under the Insurance Article to cover claims for property damage, bodily injury, or death arising from an accident resulting from the person’s use or storage of a firearm or up to $300,000 for damages arising from the same incident, in addition to interest and costs,” the proposed Maryland legislation reads.

  • Shiggles@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s okay, Billy McFucksHisSister was kinda outgunned by “the gubmint’s” F-35s already I don’t think his walmart glock was anything the rich ever feared.

    • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’d to ask what should then we do in case of a dictatorship, for example? Just lay down and fear the F-35s?

      Yes, even if everyone has a wallmat glock we’d outgunned by a mile by let’s say the military, but also you can’t just bomb and kill the shit out of your labor and infrastructure — I mean, you can, also you can bomb and kill enough to get them to submit, but that is just not something you can just keep doing indefinetly. It is also very hard to maintain a economy going with a big insurrection going and there is were guns bring a point, they give you at least a figthing chance, way better than nothing.

      I’d also like to point out the ad hominem of calling the hypotetical gun owner a “McFucksHisSister” it brings nothing of value to the conversation.

      I also do not belive carrying a gun around is something needed -by almost anyone- but ownership is important.

      • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Also important to note is that the military is not some faceless automaton that does whatever they’re told. It’s very hard to justify killing the family and townspeople and neighbours of the people that you send to commit the killing. If we get to a state where it isn’t hard, we’re already lost as a people.

        • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’d like to agree with you, but given the experiences and horrors carried out by the military in my country (not the USA) I just can’t. I guess I agree with your last sentence, and I really hope you guys (whoever is reading) do better than us.

        • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Don’t know about the US, but in most places the military wouldn’t send you tonserve or even less fight to, say, Shithole, Alabama if you are from there. Of course you wouldn’t shoot your uncle or brother. They figured this out centuries ago, before firearms.