Vice News Says, ‘Don’t Ban the AR, Require Insurance For It’

Vice News contributor Krishna Andavolu doesn’t want to ban modern sporting rifles, he wants gun owners to buy insurance for them.

In a new series tackling the gun debate, titled, “Maybe I’m Wrong,” Andavolu lays out his argument. He starts by admitting what few gun-control advocates will…

“Maybe I’m wrong, but gun bans don’t really work,” writes Andavolu. Hold the phone! Did he really just say that?! Wait, it gets better (watch the video, too).

“There are too many AR-15s in the country—approximately eight million, according to the NRA—for a ban on future sales to prevent their use in further mass shootings,” he continues. “Unless the US were to enact an Australian-style buyback and amnesty initiative, there’s little to suggest these kinds of guns wouldn’t be used in illegal ways to kill people again, regardless of future regulation.”

Quick point on that Australian-style mandatory buyback, even that didn’t work out so well. Because surprise! surprise! Not everyone turned ‘em in. Over 600,000 were seized and destroyed during that time period between ’96-97. About a decade later, in 2007, however, there were still 3 million guns still in civilian hands, according to Small Arms Survey Data.  And that tally doesn’t account for the number of street guns in the hands of gangs and drug dealers.

What’s more is that its effect on crime rates wasn’t statistically significant, as pointed out in a rather detailed article. Bottom line is even the most massive and “successful” confiscation in history was a failure. Just so we’re all on the same page.

Anyways, Andavolu also mentions the “axiom of prohibition,” which is “If you tell people they can’t have something they want—something they feel they have the right to own—they might just want it even more.” He’s right! Nothing whets an appetite like forbidden fruit.

SEE ALSO: NY Bill Would Require $250K in Liability Insurance for Gun Owners

While Andavolu starts out making sense he inevitably veers off into absurdity by calling for AR insurance.

“So instead of banning these rifles, states should require gun owners to buy insurance in case their gun is used to kill wrongfully; that way, at least victims and their families might recover some financial damages. In most states, individual gun owners can be held liable, but it’s rare that any one person might have enough money to compensate victims. Mandating insurance would collectivize the risk posed to broader society by the constitutional right to bear arms.”

First off, most mass killers buy their own guns because they have no criminal or mental health records that would disqualify them purchasing them in a gun shop, as Criminologist James Alan Fox has documented.

Second, Virginia Tech, one of the deadliest mass shootings of all time was committed with handguns. Proving that one doesn’t need an AR to kill a lot of people. The most critical component to limiting the death toll in a mass killing situation is reducing the amount of time it takes for armed resistance — be it law enforcement, a resource officer or a concealed carrier — to engage the killer.  Maybe this should be at the forefront of the conversation on stopping mass killers?

Third, AR insurance only works for the insured.  Criminals won’t opt into the insurance pool.  This is a criticism that Andavolu acknowledges, albeit briefly.  “If you decide to own a gun, are you willing to bear the cost of it causing the damage it was designed—in the most extreme cases—to inflict? Some might argue this would dissuade people from owning guns legally, simply incentivizing people to buy guns under the table.” Duh, ya think?

Lastly, AR insurance is nothing more than a way to tax and regulate AR ownership out of existence.

“The gun prohibition lobby is pushing an extremist agenda that would force gun owners to have mandatory gun liability insurance or face fines up to $10,000. I call this a gun ban because you can only keep your gun if you can afford to pay the mandated insurance premium,” said Alan Gottlieb in an email to GunsAmerica.

“And the big catch is the insurance must be a ‘qualified’ insurance company approved by the government. If your state does not approve an insurance company you can’t own a gun period,” Gottlieb added.

Safe to say, Andavolu, you’re right when it comes to gun bans. They don’t work. But you’re definitely wrong about AR insurance. It’s only going to put a financial burden on law-abiding citizens while doing nothing to stop mass killers.

***Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE!***

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 21 comments… add one }
  • Hondo September 15, 2018, 7:16 pm

    I’m so tired of these LEFTIST assholes, It looks to me they are stoking the flames of revolution, this will not end well for anyone.

    These people will eventually feel the wrath of the silent majority.

  • Kent September 14, 2018, 8:14 pm

    Nice try. After all are signed on to this scheme. Insurance goes out the roof. Can’t fool tha wise 2nd amendment citizen. 🖕🖕🖕🖕

    • I Love Liberty September 16, 2018, 6:41 pm

      I agree. If my guns are in my house and someone invades my home and steals my firearms why should I be liable for any actions the criminal commits with the firearms? We need to hold the murderers responsible for their actions and not blame firearms, knives, archery bows, cars or whatever else.

      No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.

  • Greg September 14, 2018, 8:00 pm

    I don’t see how you all missed this but if you require everyone to carry insurance, then you are implying that everyone must inform their insurance company of their inventory and presumably serial numbers etc. It’s a back door gun registration to require you have insurance for something theycurrently don’t know you even own. As soon as you apply for the insurance, then they can build the list they so desperately seek.

  • Deadmeat99 September 14, 2018, 4:37 pm

    This is perfect liberal trap: require insurance to own an AR, act astonished when there are no insurers who will issue a policy that covers illegal actions of the policy holder.

  • Carl September 14, 2018, 4:36 pm

    What a complete imbecile

    No matter what insurance you have they don’t do “crazies insurance ….”

    Give everybody free guns protect america as you know we have terrorists ready to take us down again, stay trained stay armed and stockpile your ammunition…we are gonna need it

  • Leonard September 14, 2018, 4:32 pm

    The gun ban in Australia has been largely not enforced anymore. Friends in Canada tell me they are armed as well. Most of Europe is gun-free, yet they have terrorists armed with full auto AK-47’s? Meanwhile, I just heard that the number of deaths due to long-term usage of Tylenol may approach 500,000 per year because of kidney disease worsened by that drug. So, I offer that as a comparison to the statistics keepers.
    They want to ban guns, but they also want to tax ammo as well. I am glad I am a reloader.

  • Leonard September 14, 2018, 3:29 pm

    What is the purpose of having insurance for your insurance? A criminal won’t buy it, so it only falls to the ordinary law-abiding gun owner to make this extra purchase. Since I can’t afford it, it infringes on my Right to own this gun. Perhaps require Life Insurance for people who don’t own a gun, because they are living more dangerously than a gun owner?

  • Brass September 14, 2018, 2:12 pm

    In order to require (= force) AR owners to purchase insurance, government agencies has to know who has them, first. That would require universal gun registration which doesn’t now exist and has been deemed unconstitutional by SCOTUS. Criminals won’t buy insurance. People who are not allowed to own guns will not buy insurance, so as always, only law abiding gun owners are affected.
    I think this is another Trojan horse attempt to force universal gun registration through illegal and surreptitious means. There have been many attempts before, this is just another one.

  • RonnieU September 14, 2018, 1:47 pm

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ makes it OK !!!!!!!!!!!!
    OMG, Please help America

  • John Carp September 14, 2018, 1:22 pm

    Unfortunately New York has already decided to ban that type of insurance coverage, so I guess they have to think of another creative way of trying to ban our weapons

  • Peter ondrasek September 14, 2018, 1:15 pm

    If you tried to confiscate guns you will have a war on your hands. Gun owners here wint give them up. As matter of fact you will probably see some type action being taken by them

  • T September 14, 2018, 11:31 am

    Vice and Viceland are interesting outlets. Another “look angle” for me.

    Agree w very little of the political side. BUT you want to peel back a bandage and look underneath? This is da place!! Human behavior that really has no bounds… And that isn’t FAKE

  • Kole September 14, 2018, 10:44 am

    And here in komiforinia moonbeam has issued a order to the NRA to stop selling firearm insurance. Crazy huh. They just can’t make up the tiny little minds.

  • Rich September 14, 2018, 9:56 am

    As long as Insurance is required for the electronic gaming community. Until these video games came out, there was no such thing as school shootings.’

  • Jackie Chan September 14, 2018, 9:19 am

    This liberal twit can\’t count his shoelaces, let alone forge a believable argument. Moron.

  • Walt Morris September 14, 2018, 9:04 am

    It sounds a little like odumma care where if you cannot afford it the gov’t Will steal it from you by reducing your income tax returns. This makes me wonder if this rocket scientist is a Muslim. Just sayin’.

  • Jay September 14, 2018, 6:15 am

    Out of the mouths of fools come stupid ideas! Maybe this buffoon should do a bit of research instead of spouting idiocies! The Ar15 is used in less than .0001% of crime! Maybe this guy can’t do math!

  • Steven September 14, 2018, 3:41 am

    How many bong hits did it take for him to come up with this idea?

  • Bobs your uncle September 13, 2018, 1:15 pm

    More ineffective BS, how about requiring all convicted felons to have insurance? you know people that have already demonstrated a predisposition.All gang members? All IV drug users? Oh and by the way you are wrong and a stupid fool.

  • Gary MacNeill September 13, 2018, 12:42 pm

    “Unless the US were to enact an Australian-style buyback and amnesty initiative, there’s little to suggest these kinds of guns wouldn’t be used in illegal ways to kill people again, regardless of future regulation.”

    1. It wasn’t a buyback it was a confiscation. You can play with words all you want but a rose is a rose.
    2. There’s little to suggest they would be used in illegal ways. Innocent until proven guilty ring a bell? Of there are 8 million in private hands now and a fraction of a percent have been used illegal that suggests they are not likely to be used illegally.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend