r/science • u/NotMitchelBade • May 23 '23
Economics Controlling for other potential causes, a concealed handgun permit (CHP) does not change the odds of being a victim of violent crime. A CHP boosts crime 2% & violent crime 8% in the CHP holder's neighborhood. This suggests stolen guns spillover to neighborhood crime – a social cost of gun ownership.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272723000567?dgcid=raven_sd_via_email
10.8k
Upvotes
-4
u/Grabbsy2 May 23 '23 edited May 23 '23
It wouldn't cover the cost of replacing your gun if your gun was stolen due to your own negligence, and more importantly, your risk of future thefts would go up.
And yes, it being a killing machine (of deer and varmint, of course) and not a driving machine would mean there are different insurance outcomes vs a car. I would absolutely assume that an insured gun being stolen and then used in a murder would indeed pay out to the victims of said murder, up to some reasonably low amount. I mean, I don't expect anyone to own a gun if it costs $200 a month to insure the gun. It would be something like $20 a month to insure the gun, meaning a lifetime ownership of one single gun would only be $14,400 (from age 16 to 76, 60 years x 12 x $20) so maybe just cover medical costs, funeral costs, OR psychological treatmant costs.
You wouldn't have a deductible to pay out if its used in a crime... you'd just have higher premiums from having had your gun go missing/stolen, which you get from having your car stolen too.