Florida Bill Would Restrict Insurers in Underwriting Gun Owners

By Michael Adams | January 17, 2014
Gun

  • January 17, 2014 at 12:53 pm
    Gork says:
    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 16
    Thumb down 26

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    • January 17, 2014 at 2:27 pm
      Blondie2 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 7

      Huh? Both the sponsor and the opposition are Republican!

      • January 17, 2014 at 3:24 pm
        Guest says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 2

        Senator Gwen Margolis is a democrat & not republican!

  • January 17, 2014 at 1:17 pm
    Tom Harvey says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 26
    Thumb down 27

    Why should the general insurance buying public subsidize the risks of gun ownership? If insurers can’t ask about guns they will tighten up exclusions in general (not referring to guns) ways that will be bad for all insurance buyers.

    • January 17, 2014 at 2:16 pm
      jack says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 25
      Thumb down 17

      Tom- You should look at the amount paid out by homeowners carriers in dog bite claims before you go the “subsidize” route. Us cat owners are tired of subsidizing dog owners. You get it Tom?

      Is that simple enough Tom? And before you go down the road of animal exclusions for bad dogs, Labs bite more people than any of them. I know Tom its because there are more of them. But there are more cats than labs. Should we stop subsidizing dog owners.

      Stop the madness! Ban all Labs!

    • January 21, 2014 at 1:52 pm
      KY jw says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 8

      Since criminal acts are already excluded, what makes you think you are subsidizing guns?

      • January 21, 2014 at 1:55 pm
        Libby says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 10
        Thumb down 0

        An accidental shooting of a child or neighbor wouldn’t be a criminal offense, but you most certainly would be held liable for it.

  • January 17, 2014 at 1:44 pm
    Lisa says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 29
    Thumb down 17

    If insurers can ask about guns then they should also be asking about chainsaws, knives, and whether or not you have anti-skid strips in your bathtub and shower. How invasive should we allow them to be?

    • January 20, 2014 at 10:27 am
      Libby says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 27
      Thumb down 5

      They can ask anything they want to. They’re providing the coverage. If you don’t want to answer, don’t and buy your insurance somewhere else.

    • January 21, 2014 at 1:56 pm
      KY jw says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 0

      I think most HO3 policies include coverage for stolen guns and jewelry (less than $3K). Plus you can purchase additional coverage. Why wouldn’t the insurer ask if you have any guns? Guns can be very expensive.

      • January 22, 2014 at 9:02 am
        Libby says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 1

        KY – I think it’s more of a liability issue than a property issue.

        • January 22, 2014 at 9:38 am
          KY jw says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 1

          My point is that if you own guns you want coverage for theft, so you’ll answer the questions anyway. Why is this all of a sudden an invasion of privacy?

          If companies are declining to write a policy because the applicant owns guns, then there are other carriers who have no problem with gun ownership.

          Accidents do happen, true, and in most cases there would be some coverage in the basic HO form. I would hazard a WAG that theft is the bigger claim driver than accidental shootings.

          • January 22, 2014 at 10:22 am
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 1

            The theft hazard is addressed by limitations on coverage. The last 2 sentences in the article make it pretty clear they’re talking about liability:

            Senator Gwen Margolis (D-Miami) said insurers should have the right to question policyholders about gun ownership given the potential danger a firearm can represent. “Your liability is greater if you don’t put them away or there are children around,” said Margolis.

            If I were an underwriter, I’d be more worried about a $1M liability exposure than a $2,500 theft exposure.

  • January 17, 2014 at 2:11 pm
    Captain Planet says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 3

    Yeah, and they shouldn’t be able to ask if you have popcorn in the house, too!

  • January 17, 2014 at 2:54 pm
    Guest says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 0

    Blondie2- Senator Gwen Margolis is a democrat district 35 & not republican.

    • January 17, 2014 at 4:20 pm
      Blondie2 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 2

      I swear the article said (R-Miami) when I read it. Insurance Journal? Anyway, thanks for pointing that out.

  • January 17, 2014 at 5:00 pm
    John Gardner says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 15
    Thumb down 5

    There are several Florida carriers that take issue with firearms, some ask the question on the application but others simple exclude the coverage for firearms in the policy language. Sad fact is that carriers do not really tell agents about some exclusions or limitations in the policy, the agents have to read the policies just like the customers do. You DO read your policies, right?

    • January 20, 2014 at 2:15 pm
      Mr. Solvent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 12
      Thumb down 1

      I guess you never have an opportunity to read the contract do you John? It’s not the carrier’s responsibility to point out every limit and exclusion to you and frankly as an agent you should know what you’re selling.

      • January 23, 2014 at 6:43 pm
        John Gardner says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 1

        Not sure why you assume that I (an agent) do not read the policies. Those that know me are aware of how anal I am about this. As a Florida Agent representing about 28 Florida Domestic carriers it is difficult to imagine how every carrier can have different policy language and forms but they all do. Yes I do read the policies and forms. I do find it odd that you think it is not the carriers responsibility to make the agents that sell its products aware of coverage changes, why wouldnt they want the sales force to know when they put the customer at a higher risk. In Florida many carriers have informed us that they no longer have the time to maintain a forms or coverage library because it changes to often. Marketing reps sometimes get a lesson on their own products when they come visit us. Truth is many agents don’t read forms on a regular basis because they dont know when they change. Shame on the carriers for not doing a better job.

    • January 21, 2014 at 3:22 pm
      Amy says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      John Garner, shouldn’t you know what you are selling to your customers? I can’t imagine not reading each policy I am offering to those that I sell coverage to.

      • January 23, 2014 at 6:44 pm
        John Gardner says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 0

        I do read the forms and coverages, But I think it is crazy for Florida carriers to not make a point to its sales force when they make changes.

  • January 17, 2014 at 5:33 pm
    Boonedoggle says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 21
    Thumb down 8

    Exclude firearms liability from the Section II coverages. No questions necessary and problem solved!

  • January 17, 2014 at 7:08 pm
    farmerjohn says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 10

    Those lawmakers should be shot!

  • January 20, 2014 at 10:55 am
    idk says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 24
    Thumb down 7

    Republicans regulating a private business (insurance) when it suits their philsophical leaning on a certain issue…but contrary to their usual overall political position. What is that about???

    • January 20, 2014 at 11:11 am
      Libby says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 19
      Thumb down 9

      Hypocrital business as usual.

    • January 21, 2014 at 11:26 am
      txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 16
      Thumb down 5

      Because of this. I think it’s called the Creed of the Small Penis Brigade. It was initially used by the USMC but has since been ruined and taken over by rich white guys that either never served or served in one of our various occupation camps in Europe and Asia. It goes like this:

      This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will…My rifle and I know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit…My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strength, its parts, its accessories, its sights and its barrel. I will keep my rifle clean and ready, even as I am clean and ready. We will become part of each other. We will…Before God, I swear this creed. My rifle and I are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life. So be it, until victory is America’s and there is no enemy, but peace.

      So instead of focusing on righting our economic ship, this is just one of the many diversions that have been created.

      Oops, I forgot to add the other code words: Freedom, Liberty, ‘Murrica.

      ‘Murrica F Yeah!!!!

      • January 21, 2014 at 11:51 am
        Libby says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 12
        Thumb down 2

        I love the Team America reference!

  • January 23, 2014 at 2:01 pm
    Mike says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 3

    There have been for more Liability claims with shotguns and rifles while hunting than with the ‘intent’ to do bodily harm with an assault weapon. How many of the owners of assault rifles with ‘intent’ have a homeowners policy? The assault weapons sold over the counter are no more than glorified semi-automatic hunting rifles with larger cartridges.
    This is no more than another way to take away our ‘Freedom and Rights” to BEAR ARMS…………CONTROLL !

  • January 23, 2014 at 6:56 pm
    FL Ins Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 2

    If the public only knew what their Homeowners policies already didnt cover they would be amazed. Each carrier is different in Florida because there is no normal or standard policy language. Specific exclusions for liability resulting from a lawn mower, or one carrier that has a provision that you must have copies of receipts or photos for contents coverage to apply. unoccupancy (not vacant)exclusion that kicks in at 30 days, no long vacations. Or a flat exclusion for ANY business use. no definition needed, ANY business use so dont read your work email at home or you could lose coverage A, B and D. Is it an agents responsibility to tell the client everything that is in the policy? NO, it is the customer responsibility to read the policy and ask questions.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features