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
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t think the Dallas argument is true. Firstly because you’re really unlikely to be bitten by a rattlesnake in an urban area, secondly because they sneak attack and so you would be unlikely to shoot one before it bites you anyway and thirdly, they have hospitals in Dallas that can administer antivenin and you don’t have to waste a bunch of bullets in a futile effort to shoot a snake that’s already bitten you.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      hate to break it to you. There are more reasons to own guns than “snakes”

      you ever wonder why people like motorcyles, off-roading, racing, etc… Same idea.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes, I realize that. The person I was talking about thinks snakes, bears and mountain lions are why guns should be legal.