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.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Okay, since you’re sharing links, how about sharing a link with me about how many people in Maryland have been attacked by a bear or a mountain lion in the last 10 years.

          Actually, I’ll make it even easier for you- how many people in the United States have been attacked by a bear or a mountain lion in the last 10 years?

          You know, since bears wandering around neighborhoods that aren’t in Baltimore (Howard county is next to Baltimore and a lot of it is rural- did you even know that?) are such a major threat that we need people to have AR-15s in downtown Baltimore.

          • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            im not making a case that bears are the onay reason to own a gun. i’m saying there are bears in maryland, and thats enough reason to own a gun there.

            dallas has rattle snakes.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              If bears are enough of a reason to own a gun in downtown Baltimore, you can tell me exactly how many bear attacks there have been in the U.S. in the last 10 years.

              Then tell me how many people in Dallas have been killed by rattlesnakes (which sneak attack).

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  See, the funny thing is that I know that there have been a grand total of two bear attacks in Maryland’s entire history, both non-fatal, 46 fatal bear attacks total in the U.S. in the last 10 years. I also know that no one in Dallas has been killed by a rattlesnake.

                  Reasoning that guns need to be legal in Baltimore because of two non-fatal bear attacks in the state’s entire history is ludicrous reasoning.

                  If you think that guns should be legal, come up with a better argument than ‘defense from something that almost never happens.’

                  I mean how about defense from people? Why did you have to go with something ludicrous like mountain lions? You really can’t come up with a non-ridiculous scenario where a gun might be needed in a city?

                • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  The easiest way to deal with a bear in downtown Baltimore is to tell them you aren’t into large, hairy dudes.