NRA Might Be Going Bust

[Sovaal]

Do we know exactly what the state means by "acts of intentional wrongdoing?"

Insuring rage shootings or even mass shootings?

Is the Automobile lobby also responsible vehicle attacks?

[Paddy O Fernature]

Insuring rage shootings or even mass shootings?

Swing and a miss ol Gauth buddy.

You expected anything else?

Except that's not what it covers. At all.

It covers self-defense shootings by people who choose to carry a firearm. Which isn't murder, even if idiots like Cuomo think it is.

Indeed it does. Which is why I'm very curious what part of that the state feels falls under "acts of intentional wrongdoing" here.

[Ifreann]

The issue at hand is that New York state has decided that the "Carry Guard" insurance program the NRA marketed, isn't legal within their state. It "unlawfully provided liability insurance to gun owners for certain acts of intentional wrongdoing." In general, it isn't lawful to insure people to do illegal things. A company isn't allowed to offer an insurance policy to "cover the legal costs" if someone for example, stole a car and got caught, among any number of other illegal actions that can be taken.

Carry Guard supposedly ran afoul of this and the NRA paid a large fine related to it, but they're choosing to play the victim and are spinning a false narrative that New York is persecuting them unnecessarily.

>Can't insure illegal activities. Whelp, fuck auto insurance I guess.

Saiwania is very obviously talking about insurance policies that cover committing illegal activities. Not insuring your car against being stolen, insuring yourself against getting caught stealing a car.

[Claorica]

>Can't insure illegal activities. Whelp, fuck auto insurance I guess.

Saiwania is very obviously talking about insurance policies that cover committing illegal activities. Not insuring your car against being stolen, insuring yourself against getting caught stealing a car.

WHICH IS NOT WHAT CARRY GUARD IS FOR.

it insures you from being sued when criminal scum breaks into your house and gets their ass shot.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Saiwania is very obviously talking about insurance policies that cover committing illegal activities. Not insuring your car against being stolen, insuring yourself against getting caught stealing a car.

WHICH IS NOT WHAT CARRY GUARD IS FOR.

it insures you from being sued when criminal scum breaks into your house and gets their ass shot.

The fact that it's becoming more and more acceptable for criminals to victim blame to a point where they can sue their victims is mind boggling to begin with, honestly. It's also sad that, in my experience, most home insurance carriers that Ive come across won't even touch the subject. However, they did try pushing flood and hurricane insurance on me for a pad that wasn't on the coast and built on a hill with the nearest body of water ten+ miles away.

[Zurkerx]

They'll rebound, it's not like you can erase them and even if you could, someone else would take their place.

[Paddy O Fernature]

They'll rebound, it's not like you can erase them and even if you could, someone else would take their place.

Considering the record year of donations and membership increase they just had, I actually think this is more an overstatement for the courts that was then grasped at by the anti's and shouted from the mountain tops then them actually being in financial trouble.

[Zurkerx]

They'll rebound, it's not like you can erase them and even if you could, someone else would take their place.

Considering the record year of donations and membership increase they just had, I actually think this is more an overstatement for the courts that was then grasped at by the anti's and shouted from the mountain tops then them actually being in financial trouble.

I mean, I never believed they were going broke. They have ze money. It's more of a political stunt to get their members to contribute more to fight for what they think is right.

[Sovaal]

Considering the record year of donations and membership increase they just had, I actually think this is more an overstatement for the courts that was then grasped at by the anti's and shouted from the mountain tops then them actually being in financial trouble.

I mean, I never believed they were going broke. They have ze money. It's more of a political stunt to get their members to contribute more to fight for what they think is right.

Basically.

[Grinning Dragon]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

[Paddy O Fernature]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

One would think so, not that anyone is going to actually do anything about it though as the acceptable trend right now is these tools can do whatever they want and the law be damned.

[Vassenor]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

So what makes it illegal?

[Northeast American Federation]

They'll rebound, it's not like you can erase them and even if you could, someone else would take their place.

But if the precedent is set that any Second Amendment advocacy group can be shut down under spurious claims that somehow their existence feeds into mass shootings and other such acts of violence, progressives like Cuomo will be able to shut down any potential successors with greater ease, as any newer organizations won't have over a century of work and buildup behind them. Removal of all access to even the most basic financial services makes it kind of difficult for any large organization to function or even exist.

[Grinning Dragon]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

So what makes it illegal?

In doing so, cuomo appears on the surface of violating the interstate commerce clause and the insurance and banking companies for conspiring to restrain interstate commerce, which could fall under the Sherman Act.

[Ifreann]

Saiwania is very obviously talking about insurance policies that cover committing illegal activities. Not insuring your car against being stolen, insuring yourself against getting caught stealing a car.

WHICH IS NOT WHAT CARRY GUARD IS FOR.

Okay, no need to shout.

[Aclion]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

So what makes it illegal?

What make it illegal for the government to threaten businesses that provide services with a political activist group? The first and fourteenth amendment, and probably several acts of congress, and precedent from several court cases, since I doubt this Cuomo is the first person to try this.

[Hurdergaryp]

So what makes it illegal?

In doing so, cuomo appears on the surface of violating the interstate commerce clause and the insurance and banking companies for conspiring to restrain interstate commerce, which could fall under the Sherman Act.

If it's called the Sherman act, there better be tanks involved. Destroying several Southern towns is entirely optional.

[Telconi]

>Can't insure illegal activities. Whelp, fuck auto insurance I guess.

Saiwania is very obviously talking about insurance policies that cover committing illegal activities. Not insuring your car against being stolen, insuring yourself against getting caught stealing a car.

A great number of car crashes are the results of illegal activities. Shoot. you don't even need a license to get a car insurance policy, which means they are insuring your driving while the very act of driving is illegal.

[New Wrepland]

Wow, Andrew Cuomo is overperforming. I might not feel as mellow when I vote for him over Cynthia Nixon.

[Kernen]

Saiwania is very obviously talking about insurance policies that cover committing illegal activities. Not insuring your car against being stolen, insuring yourself against getting caught stealing a car.

A great number of car crashes are the results of illegal activities. Shoot. you don't even need a license to get a car insurance policy, which means they are insuring your driving while the very act of driving is illegal.

I actually figured out why this is an issue. I think.

Car insurance insures against the costs of civil harms where illegal acts are not necessarily an issue, while NRA insurance insures your criminal defense against an act that is potentially illegal (can't figure it out until after you win or lose).

Car insurance carriers will refuse to indemnify you if you broke the law in the process. Attorneys are forbidden to offer contingency fee representation for criminal acts. So the NRA runs into potential issues with only covering your defense if you win, and there is arguable grey area surrounding the insurance policy's use at all.

I suspect that the uncertainty as to whether a shooting is lawful to begin with is what should save the policy. We have as equal an interest in promoting the use of an individual's rights as we do preventing incentives for illegal actions. Since we don't know its illegal until the jury returns a verdict, its probably best to permit the insurance scheme.

[Saiwania]

WHICH IS NOT WHAT CARRY GUARD IS FOR. It insures you from being sued when criminal scum breaks into your house and gets their ass shot.

I'm unfamiliar with whether or not the state of New York has a castle doctrine or not. If there isn't, this insurance might be problematic if there is a duty to retreat (at least initially) but again, am no legal expert. In any case, the insurance the NRA was offering wasn't licensed for New York.

There is no risk for a civil suit to have standing if you can get it ruled as a justifiable homicide. You can be sued if you injure an intruder instead of killing them, which is perhaps unfortunate. But it is how it works in most (if not all) states, including mine. If defending your home from an intruder breaking and entering, there is less risk of a negative outcome if you resort to lethal force as opposed to trying to capture them. Just be sure to wait until someone actually tries to break in, and isn't merely crossing through your yard in trespassing.

[Shofercia]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

I thought Cuomo was supposed to be Governing New York, not acting like a rabid anti-gun nut, nationwide. Doesn't his title say "Governor of New York" or am I missing something?

[Kernen]

There is no risk for a civil suit to have standing if you can get it ruled as a justifiable homicide.

Not really. You can have a jury find that there is reasonable doubt as to whether the killing was unjustified, but not that it there is a preponderance of evidence that it was justifiable.

You can be sued if you injure an intruder instead of killing them, which is perhaps unfortunate. But it is how it works in most (if not all) states, including mine. If defending your home from an intruder breaking and entering, there is less risk of a negative outcome if you resort to lethal force as opposed to trying to capture them. Just be sure to wait until someone actually tries to break in, and isn't merely crossing through your yard in trespassing.

Its a fascinating area of tort law that I am routinely surprised that no judges have tried to remedy. You would think we might reward using less lethal defense when possible, but time and time again, trespassers are deemed to have increasing protections, despite themselves committing a wrong.

[Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol]

Yeah...I’m going to bet a dollar that the NRA are lying in order to scare pro-gun people like me into donating to them. They are not going away anytime soon, if ever. If they to go bust, I say good. Fuck them and their blaming art for real word violence.

[Grinning Dragon]

Apparently, cuomo is out n about and suggesting other states implement the same type of illegal activity against the nra.
Cuomo urges other states to hit NRA finances as group claims losses

Wouldn't such suggestions now be considered a violation of the commerce clause, extortion, and abuse of power?

I thought Cuomo was supposed to be Governing New York, not acting like a rabid anti-gun nut, nationwide. Doesn't his title say "Governor of New York" or am I missing something?

I'm thinking at this point he's reaching for the higher bar of being the son of Benito Mussolini or Joseph Goebbles.