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.

  • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Pretty sure I haven’t fell for right wing ideas in a few decades. Bear in mind I’m not from thebstates and this all thing of carryingnguns makes me think of somalia, not a civilized western country.

    I’ve been to civil rights protests elsewhere, no firearms but acab everywhere. I’d expect carrying (and showing) a gun would be making l rich kids and the pigs a favour: they can now write off your murder as self defence even if it was filmed by a body cam.

    • olivebranch
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      They can still claim self defence that they were attacked by a knife or a rock, changes nothing.

      Right-wing politics is everything that promotes giving power of one group over the other. Giving the rich more power to own weapons, while taking it away from working class, is a right-wing idea, by definition. It is not right-wing to claim everybody should own weapons, it is right-wing to claim, only the rich, or only the state or only the white should own the weapons, while others are not allowed,

      • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Sorry that might be the politically correct definition that kids give it today to feel good and click on each other but every bill, law or decision shifts power from a group to another and that’s not always a bad thing. And not always a right wing thing.

        • olivebranch
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          It is only definition that makes sense. There is a good video about it. If you shift power back to the people that are a working class, or in other words, if it promotes equality in decision-making power, than it is a left-wing policy. If it is a law that gives more power to the ruling/capitalist/rich class, it is a right-wing policy.

          • ToxicWaste@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Look at history: there where big and powerful right- and leftextreme goverments not far apart. Both sides where not a fun place to be in. Both where authoritarian dictatorships. If you go too far left or right you end up in an authorion regime with no power for the many.

            • olivebranch
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Videos from this channel, “What is politics?” exactly explain that those governments that are calling themselves left, where right wing rich politicians pretending to be left wing. And leftist at the time, called them out on it multiple times. But it just ended with them in jail. Every dictatorship is right wing by definition. Having an excuse that you will be a nice king, doesn’t make a you a leftist. The excuse of those regimes was that they will only be there for a while, after which they will disolve the state completely. That autoritarianism is just temporary. Of course, that day never came and instead they focused on propaganda that redifined what being left is, which is very common in history.

    • endhits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The rights you enjoy are fleeting without enforcement mechanisms.

      I’m not right wing. I’m a socialist.