Americans Need a “ReVOTElution,” Too

by Bobby Reyes

| Photo by www.cemillerphotography.com on Creative Commons via Flickr

Part XXIII of the “ReVOTElution of H.O.P.E.” Series

Yes, the United States of America people, including its churches, also need a ReVOTElution of H.O.P.E. Why? Because many gun owners that belong to white supremacist and Neo-Nazi groups are threatening to unleash a 21st-century version of the Civil War.

A ReVOTElution can elect non-Republican candidates in the coming mid-term elections with filibuster-proof coalition majorities in both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. And they can pass simple legislation that will nip in the bud the alleged civil-war plan of supremacist gun owners. The suggested bill will respect at the same time rights to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The suggested legislation can propose that all gun owners buy insurance to provide third-party liability (TPL) coverage when their firearms are used to cause injuries in cases where self-defense is not raised and proven in a court of law. They can bundle TPL gun coverage with their auto-insurance and/or homeowner’s policy. This insurance requirement was introduced by American colonial authorities in the then-Philippine Commonwealth starting in the 1930s. And some American states — like the Great State of Florida — require this TPL-gun coverage presently, too.

The ReVOTElution proposes to revive the same TPL-insurance coverage for gun owners in the Philippines.

If drivers cannot drive their vehicles without insurance coverage, why not require the same for gun owners? The U.S. insurance industry will like this proposal and lobby for its approval. It will mean billions of greenbacks in additional insurance premiums. The insurance firms can pressure congresspersons and senators not to give their political donations if the legislators do not support this suggested legislation. And lobby money talks persuasively.

“If drivers cannot drive their vehicles without insurance coverage, why not require the same for gun owners? The U.S. insurance industry will like this proposal and lobby for its approval. It will mean billions of greenbacks in additional insurance premiums.”

Then secondly, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), to protect the health of all Americans, can be given additional responsibility to require that gun owners join a “National Rehabilitation Assistance for Gun Owners” (NRAGO) program. It can conduct tests to prove that all the owners are not addicted to their weapons and/or banned drugs. If the Division of Motor Vehicles can suspend and/or revoke the driver licenses of those found guilty of illegal-substance addiction, why can gun owners not be subjected to the same treatment (pun intended)?

Again, the DHHS can work with the healthcare providers and their insurance company partners. If they are addicted, then the gun owners may have to undergo treatment in the rehab facilities of private-and/or-public hospitals as part of their healthcare coverage. Again, healthcare providers and insurance firms can effectively lobby legislators in the U.S. Congress and even in the state assemblies and senate.

“Again, the DHHS can work with the healthcare providers and their insurance company partners. If they are addicted, then the gun owners may have to undergo treatment in the rehab facilities of private-and/or-public hospitals as part of their healthcare coverage.”

Perhaps, my neighbor, Fernando B. Perfas, Ph. D., may like to discuss more aspects of the additions mentioned in this article in his column, When Ideas Matter. Dr. Perfas is an internationally recognized expert in drugs and other forms of addiction.

The next column will discuss how the ReVOTElution of H.O.P.E. can dramatically change the exercise of suffrage in the U.S. And even “reinvent” the mission statements of American churches and their missionaries abroad. Hopefully, Dr. Perfas would have joined this online conversation with our combined tens of thousands of readers by then.

You may also like

1 comment

Bob Haran September 15, 2021 - 10:38 pm

My friend, Bobby Reyes, with the Philippine Daily Mirror, has suggested that American gun owners should be required to buy liability insurance for their firearms, in the event they negligently do harm with their firearm. In his column, The Straphanger, he asks, “If drivers cannot drive their vehicles without insurance coverage, why not require the same for gun owners?” The answer is very simple, driving is not a right, it is a privilege granted by the government and requires a license or permission from the government.

Gun ownership is a right granted by the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States under that section of the constitution referred to as, The Bill of Rights, which states, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. Requiring insurance to own a firearm is an infringement of that right and therefor the state can not mandate insurance to own a firearm, as it can with driving a motor vehicle.

Bob Haran,
Founder and President,
Democratic Centrist of America.

Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

X