In a move that should surprise no one familiar with how many Democratic Party politicians operate, SAF’s Gun Mag Editor in Chief Dave Workman is reporting that Washington State Senator Patty Kuderer, who earlier this year sponsored a bill to require all gun owners to obtain liability insurance is now running to become the state’s next insurance commissioner.

Kuderer’s proposed measure, Senate Bill 5963, never made it out of committee, Gun Mag reports. She did, however, have nine co-sponsors, all Dems, as is typical as well.

Gun Mag wrote:

But Kuderer will be facing a Senate foil, at least in the primary. State Sen. Phil Fortunato (R-Auburn), an ardent Second Amendment advocate, has also filed for the position. Neither Kuderer or Fortunato would lose their Senate seats this fall…

Beyond Kuderer and Fortunato, there are four other Democrats, one other Republican and two candidates without party affiliation currently running for insurance commissioner. Kuderer, however, is the only one who “linked to the proposed liability insurance mandate.”

Gun Mag goes on to say:

Under her bill, any person who owns a firearm would have been compelled to obtain “in full force and effect,” an  insurance policy “covering losses or damages resulting from the accidental or unintentional discharge of the firearm, including but not limited to, death or injury to persons who are not an insured person under the policy and property damage.”

The law would also have required the gun owner to keep valid and current written evidence of the coverage readily available where each firearm was stored.

The law would also have required insurers to ask whether anyone named on the policy owned a firearm and whether it was securely stored.

Conservative talk show host Jason Rantz for KTTH on exposed how Kuderer, in an almost predictable political move of smoke and mirrors, tried to argue “By setting this requirement Washington intends to reduce the risk and subsequent cost of hardships of gun accidents. This bill achieves these goals and reallocates costs without compromising any Second Amendment rights. This is true because this requirement does not regulate, limit or control the manner or method in which people may keep or bear arms. Instead, it simply says you must have liability insurance.”

Kuderer is either stupid, but as an attorney, probably not, or she thinks she is so much smarter than everyone else, that they are simply stupid, the most likely scenario.

The stipulations of the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision aside, she argues that forcing people to have insurance wouldn’t limit their 2A rights, yet, if you don’t get insurance and keep written proof with the firearm at all times, you would be violating a law that would in itself jeopardize your right to own and possess firearms.

“This is astonishing. The bill literally regulates and controls both the manner and method in which we may keep and bear arms” Rantz writes.

He also poses the question with an answer obvious to everyone but Kuderer: “And how is paying a monthly fee, in the form of insurance, to enjoy a constitutionally protected right not considered “compromising” our Second Amendment rights?”

It is astonishing actually, but with the way many Democrats operate today, it shouldn’t be surprising. And that’s just sad, because there was a time, actually not so many years ago, when there were a sizable number of rural Democrats who were willing to stand up for their constituents Second Amendment rights.

“With no sound legal argument, Kuderer continued to simply deem the bill constitutional, as if deeming something constitutional is how any of this works. Kuderer relied on either a complete misunderstanding of Bruen, or a strategy to simply lie. Both possibilities should be considered,” Rantz writes.

The conservative radio show host and podcaster went on to slam Kuderer.

“Watching ‘My Cousin Vinny’ would arm one with the necessary knowledge to apply the majority decision to the law to know it’s unconstitutional,” he writes.

And that’s most likely why Kuderer’s weak bill died so quickly. It may also be why she is shooting for insurance commissioner, so she can attempt an administrative end-around on her desire to impose what would be a lucrative insurance requirement on a huge number of Washingtonians. Beware voters. Be very aware.



Editor’s Note: Oh, and by the way, both Rantz and Workman have open invites to contribute to TTAG anytime they want. We particularly liked Rantz’s rant on Kuderer and look forward to checking out his podcast. Read his full article in the link in the story.

Read the full article here

Leave A Reply