If you'd read it you'd know so stop spamming, @Legalize.

who defines what a violent political organization @Mandatory Carry ? They're banned on your list, but I see no definition of what constitutes such a group, or what constitutes membership in said group?

Ok...
Let me look into that, @A. Spader.

I assume this is written with Antifa in mind but it seems like a hanging chad just a bit

Ok, fine. I will work on it.

considering that we had congresspeople comparing the tea party to ISIS

it seems like that would violate the due process we're so up in arms about red flag laws violating

since membership in something like say.....antifa is pretty losely defined nationally

Can confirm, people are retarded, buy HiPoint and mexican carry and shoot their dick off.

Ya... Red flag concept isn't in there for a reason...

@A. Spader, ¿any other observations? Ceph, I will unblock you in a minute.

"Ya... Red flag concept isn't in there for a reason..."
Except for the part where anyone who belongs to a group on the no-no list is automatically banned @Mandatory Carry

even if they haven't committed an actual crime

You keep provisions of the Gun Free School Zones Act (of 1990) in the bill that sort of defeat the point

90% of mass shootings occur in gun free zones

...
I could work on that. You have an idea how maybe?

it seems like if we're arming everyone barring them from schools and courthouses endorses the same logic as gun grabbers

one minute

Nuke the Government.

also when we're talking about liability insurance explain to me the legal ramifications of requiring insurance for cars but banning it for guns?

that is to say, what happens when lawsuits for wrongful death start to roll in?

On the gun free zones thing, as long as everything's categorized you could require a measure of training to carry in 'soft targets' that would be completely optional and subject to more oversight

it's far from perfect but that's probably your best play under the circumstances

Liability insurance is intrinsically racist; The idea of mandated LI for gun owners was ***ONLY*** meant to price blacks, hispanics, and asians out of the market.
I'll definitely consider that "soft target" issue...

Not in Mandatory Carry World

He is a binary thinker.

yes and no. If someone gets in a car wreck when with a senegalize illegal then the american citizen gets f---ed out of the money to buy a new car without insurance. More to the point in an at fault incident there is no way to cover the holpital bills without such provisions

that's the problem here

So if liability insurance is intrinsically racist because minorities are poor, why is it *not* racist to allow a paid exemption from carry @Mandatory Carry ?

@A. Spader
As to the liability insurance issue, I think I addressed that by *Limitations of liability* (section 17);
In short, if you can't be arrested, you can't be sued, either.

does that cover wrongful death/shooting though?

that's what I'm asking

*If you can't be arrested...*

So you're advocating abolishing the concept of wrongful death entirely?

Oh. Convicted, rather.

but who pays the attorney's fees?

criminal for the defendant, civil for both?

because the way our legal system without some way to pay for a decent attorney you're f---ed

Ok.
¿What is the issue? I don't understand.

I'm gonna through my $0.02 in the ring. I haven't read MC's stuff, but from what I've gathered in the comments it's a draft of a bill that would require everyone to own and carry a firearm. If someone doesn't follow the law they are penalized with a monthly fine. That sounds suspiciously like obamacare. If one doesn't have health insurance they are penalized on their taxes. I know because that happened to me. I'm guessing this would be implemented on the federal level. It rings like a top down law forcing citizens to do something that they may or may not want to do. Forget who said it but I guess you can get out of the carry by paying to the government a couple hundred a month? I know I sure as hell couldn't afford that. I'd have to buy a cheap ass pistol with dubious reliability to stay within the law. That brings up another question. How do you expect everyone to go out and buy a firearm. That's going to artificially drive up demand, driving up prices, and perhaps pricing some people out of the market. You could theoretically enforce price caps, but that is a problem in itself. Is the government going to provide everyone with a gun so they can stay within the law?

You got it in one Critter