Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
New Rider for Auto Insurance?
In @kozak’s post to The Firing Line, he suggested that when people in vehicles are threatened by gun-waving or gun-pointing Antifa thugs to “Duck and FLOOR it.” To which I responded:
Maybe a new rider to your auto insurance? Seems like with all the publicity there would be a large market for such a rider. Pattern after conceal carry insurance. My guess is that if a lot of people buy it, it should only have to be used a few times before the word got out that “protesting” in this way can get you killed by your well-insured citizens and the actuarial estimates would make such coverage very profitable.
There are insurers having to pay (I hope for the owners’ sake) for riot damage. I think they might be able to make some of the money back by offering this new insurance line. If you live in a major metropolitan area why wouldn’t you spend a couple of hundred bucks to get
- death and medical payouts if found liable
- defense costs
- bail money coverage
As I said in my comment, yes, the initial payouts might be large. But as soon as the “pajama boys/girls” rioters see that there is a personal cost the potential for claims would drop precipitously and the collected premiums would be quite profitable.
Maybe President Trump can sign an Executive Order adding this to the national flood insurance program.
Published in General
And they may win a court case after the law breaks them and if they are not forced to plea out.
today the government is backing the protestors. Any individual citizen getting in the way of protestors riots may have full force of law thrown at them. Especially if they have resources the government and its cronies can take one way or other.
There are two types of bullies – the one we are all familiar with, having poor social skills and conveniently larger than those around them that beat up on people smaller than them. The thug.
The other bully is less well known. They are the natural machiavellians… the ones where manipulation comes easy. The have high social intelligence and possess a kind of confidence in their intellect and cunning. They know how provoke while appearing innocent. They will provoke their less socially intelligent peers to act violently and then play victim, illiciting sympathy from authority. They frequently get away with provocation while one who responded in violence is punished.
Those with enough social intelligence to not be provoked are then hemmed in by the machiavellian. We become their prisoners, trapped in the space they want us in, lording over us with their superiority, knowing there’s nothing we can do about it.
It is the act of a sociopath. What these protestors are doing is forcing us to act the way they want us to act. We are trapped by our better natures and they are manipulating the situation. We are blocked from living our lives. Trapped and stuck to revolve our worlds around how to best avoid them, ceding common areas to them to avoid violent confrontation – but they want the violence, so they will seek you out to provoke you – so they can be the victim and you can be the evil doer.
How do you deal with such sociopathy?
I wouldn’t have used the word “Machiavellian,” because I think it’s misused here, but otherwise I agree.
Nah. Buying fire insurance doesn’t mean I intend to commit arson.
Bingo!
If you have a mortgage on the property, the bank usually requires you to have fire insurance on said property as a condition of the mortgage loan.
No one would be required to purchase the sort of insurance @ontheleftcoast is talking about,
In NC, the “castle doctrine” prevents the one whose house/car is being invaded from being charged. In addition, s/he is given immunity from civil suits.
(NOTE: I had to remove the law cited due to word count restrictions.)
So only the people without mortgages would be suspected of planning to commit arson.
If you house burned via arson then a prosecutor would claim it did.
Fire insurance is an accepted practice. If riot insurance were an accepted practice, then it too would be unobjectionable. However, since it is not, and is in fact an oddity, there’s no reason it couldn’t be used against you. That doesn’t mean that they would succeed, but you can expect them to try.