/

This sort of stuff always makes me wonder what unseen forces may be at work, using the insurance companies as cover. I wouldn't put anything past those of great power, with anti-hunter leanings.

Would be a good thing to list the names of the Insurance Companies in question and post them on every available gun-site and make a press release to all sporting mags. And suggest that all hunters and shooters take their business elswhere.

While I dont know that here is no hidden agenda,as some seem to imply,I will strongly vouch that the principle is alive and one of the biggest expenses we face in the "civilized world".
We allowed our judicial system to persuade us that the state will take care of "us".If we dont see a hole in the ground and fall,its not our mistakes-sue the landowner -principle.And yes of course we will find a willing attorney who protects us from that uncaring landowner-for a small fee.Every business in the US has suffered from this misguided philosophy- and we are all paying with steep prices- for this right to have an attorney protect us and deliver what is rightfully "ours".The insurance companies are not in business to protect anyone,they are not bleeding hearts,they are risk oriented profit machines.They take advantage of the need for their "services" thats all.The real underlying problem is a judicial philosophy that sanctions anyone to start costly legal battles,where one person always wins: the attorneys on both sides.
This amounts to given away lottery tickest for free- cant loose- just at the end we all have to pay.
sheephunter

Sheephunter:

I love you, but the problem isn't just the attorneys. It is 10-fold more the actions of the insurance companies that are hurting guys like gunsmiths, or filling station owners... even doctors.

Ever since the early 80's, in a concerted effort, the insurance industry has made calculated, unified efforts to convince the "public" and media that verdicts are too high... all with two purposes. First, to raise premiums (without any reason to do so, other than greed), and secondly to have an excuse to quit writing policies and convert reserves to liquid assets.

Every single State's attorney general who has investigated the "insurance" crisis has concluded that insurance company profits are not just high, they are obscene. (Of course there are examples here and there of stupid verdicts, usually overturned on appeal, that are "fun" for newspapers to report, but the fact is, the number of suits is diminishing, and verdicts are lower, in real dollars). For example, Florida doctors believe they are being run out of business by lawyers... the fact is that a study of the malpractice insurors by the Florida Times Union showed that claims and verdicts had decreased, while premiums had doubled in the last 10 years. A funny aside, was that Doctors were putting ads in the paper urging the legislature to implement "tort reform". Not a one of the doctors had ever read the profit figures of their own insurors, and when questioned as to whether the insurance lobby paid for the ads, they refused to comment. And... here's the kicker.. the insurance companies refused to agree to reduce premiums if their liability was limited... go figure???

There are Princes of Darkness out there... and the money changers of the major insurance carriers proudly carry that mantle.

Trust me, I've been to the 102 floor of the Sears Tower and deposed insurance C.E.O.'s... I've read the internal documents... It's a nasty, nasty business, and they have hundreds of billions of dollars to finance their quest to keep injured litigants out of the courtroom, and to pull the wool over the eyes of those who must purchase their products.

Lawyers need to clean up their acts.... but what lawyer is going to finance a liability claim if it has no merit. It just doesn't make sense to make a claim unless you are going to win it.
I've yet to see a successful attorney stay in business filing frivilous lawsuits.

There probably needs to be tort reform. My state was among the first to recognize by statute that "guns don't kill people" and stop the stupidity (at least in Georgia) of suits against gun makers for third-party murders. But lets not throw out a system that gives access for all citizens to the courts, just because insurance companies want more profits.

[ 11-23-2003, 02:00: Message edited by: JudgeG ]

There's no good reason for the gunsmithing industry to have high insurance rates; what lawsuits? No my friends this does smell of corrupt anti-gun government officials pulling the strings to do away with guns once and for all. Don't forget they tried to make our guns unuseable by putting excessive taxes on ammo and components.

JudgeG,
because you love me so much I shall return.Love you too,should drink some beer together
I believe everything you say,and I dont condone it.We are getting pretty political here.
Big business is always buying their politicians,be it insurance,oil companies or banks.Oil costs the same today/barrel as in th '50's give or take,the diff is the oil companies manufactured "shortage".I have no doubt the insurance companies are a pack of vulchards.I hear they rub their hands in pleasure with every hurrican - as they feel its the right time to increase premiums yet again.
Nevertheless,at the start of this money making cascade is the ever increasing notion that "we" are not responsible for our stupidity,misfortune or happening.The legal system - at great cost to us- is making big bucks themselves and for the insurance companies.This makes our products and services very expensive to not available.Nobody argues with a fair compensation where liability belongs.But we are suing the rifle manufacturer,the gun shop,the neighbor for the stupidity of some people that misuse the tool.
If a burglar breaks into my house and falls,he can sue because I didn't leave the lights on.
Yes this is a stupid exageration-but not by far.

The legal system forced hammer manufacturers to label the tool as a deadly weapon!

Our judicial system is NOT run by professionals,it is a money making machine that takes no prisoners.

sheephunter

Insurance companies are screwed right now.

They used to make tons of money on the market. They lost a bit, just like I did, after 2000.

So the market doesn't look good. Intrest rates are at an all time low.

In other words, they used to take all that premium money, invest it, and make a ton of money, that financed, their government like excess of money. That period is over, so now they want us all to pay high premiums, for no services, to finance their previous life style.

Judge has pretty much nailed it. They go after anyone that really needs insurance, and rape people where they have a monopoly.

People that actually file claims are bad. So, look through each application, and if they are likely to ever need insurance, or, if it's required by law, they charge giant rates.

The real answer maybe to not require insurance by law. Doesn't bother the criminals, and, the law abiding citizens just get screwed.

By the way, I think one could make a REAL solid case for anti-trust violations when insurance is required by law...

Problem is, if the cause is politically incorrect, then the government agencies are unlikely to take up the battle.

s

Judge

Great post...

Think about it this way:
Insurance companies are the only companies LEAGALLY able to discriminate because of race, religion, creed, sexual preference, and age inside the USA.

Judge,
Great post. Sorry to hear this is happening to gunsmiths. I've fought with insurance companies consistently. Dog trainers who train police canines for police work have a tough time getting insurance. "You train dogs to bite." Yet, they're just a tool like a gun. They find dope, bombs, bad guys and save lost kids. It's cut throat. I even have a client and friend who owns his own insurance company and can't touch me, and I trained a home protection dog for him. With me, you stand much less chance of being bit at my kennel than in a vet's office. Sounds they think you can get shot easier in a gunsmith's shop. Rediculous.
J
PS: Sorry for whining but this is one of my soapbox issues. Then they want arson dogs to ferret out insurance fraud. Arson dogs ought to cost 100k.

ALF,

In a recent issue of Rifle Ross Seyfried writes about a division of the Hartford Group (I think it is called Collectibles Insurance or something of the sort) that has brought out a policy for insuring guns specifically. This applies to all kinds of guns, not just antiques, and you could try and check the past 5 or 6 issues of Rifle out for the piece. If you can't find it, I could trace it and send it to you or post it here so that interested members might give them a call.

Good hunting!

Alf...you are correct about shops having helll getting insurance. At one time I went 6 weeks without insurance on my shop as the least expensive premium I could find at that time was $10,000 a year.
I was dropped from various insurance companies for various reasons even though I never had a claim against them. If they have to insure guns or reloading equipment then ...no thanks.
If you think the insurance problem for the fireamrs industry is something.... here is something that is going to make that look like childs play. It is called ELECTRONIC PRODUCT CODE.
This is a RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION tag that can and will be imbedded into product labels.It will replace the bar code we know today and will track serial numbers for ANYTHING purchased. Manufactures will be forced to put this into firearms and other products in order to do business with many major vendor...aka Wal Mart et al. You might say it is the ON STAR / GPS for firearms. Welcome to the back door for firearms regestration world wide. Bar Codes are everywhere on everything but at least you can throw them in the trash..

I'm sorry to hear Canada is becoming a sub division of California.

I knew there was a reason I didn't want the 10 Commandments taken out of that courthouse, I didn't want that soldier, a real hero, to be court marshalled, I didn't want to see another liberal democrat in office or In God we Trust taken off our coin, or a Supreme court that makes law as opposed to interpeting law.....God bless America, we're going to need that blessing more and more as we move away from our creator and the rightousness this country was founded on.....

If judge's didn't mind being reversed once in awhile a lot fewer cases would ever get heard. Judge's need to step up and say "enough is enough" and not allow these cases to proceed at the local level.

Lawyer's will continue to take short-term flyer's on potentially very profitable cases knowing that once judge's allow something to go to trial the jury pool typically awards compensation at some level.