A conservative solution to America's gun safety problem

EVEN MANCHIN COULD AGREE WITH

Bryan Waldman and Barry Waldman, guest writers
Mon, December 20, 2021

There was a time that, whenever liberals called for limitations on gun rights, conservatives were quick to correctly point out that automobiles killed more people than guns. However, that argument lost ground in roughly 2015 when, after years of declining auto-related deaths and years of increasing gun deaths, the numbers of deaths caused by guns and vehicles were essentially the same. Since that time, gun deaths have continued to rise and auto deaths have trended downward.

Bryan Waldman

Even though the statistics no longer create a good argument for gun advocates, the comparison is still fair. The Constitution of the United States allows Americans to enjoy individual rights and freedoms. However, there can be no dispute that we sometimes must limit individual rights to protect the public from being harmed. So, it makes sense that we, as a society, should use the model that worked to increase automobile safety (and decrease auto deaths) to increase gun safety (and decrease gun deaths). We certainly aren’t the first to suggest this approach.

Barry Waldman

Others have argued that if we treated guns like cars, we would be looking at things like technology to make guns safer. However, as two people who have dedicated their lives to the law, we see the problem as one with a legal solution.

As an example, in Michigan, we have approximately 400 laws that make up what is known as the Michigan Vehicle Code. It tells motorists on which side of the road to drive, when they need to stop at an intersection, and how fast they can drive.

Importantly, it also requires all motorists to purchase insurance — and the law requires insurance companies to include coverage for intentional acts that harm innocent victims. It does so, because — like conservatives correctly point out regarding gun use — cars are typically driven safely, but they also have the ability to severely injure or kill people.

Some car owners recklessly increase the risks, but even responsible drivers can make mistakes. Very few people have the financial resources required to even begin to compensate victims and their families for the harm they have caused by their recklessness or honest mistakes. Indeed, this is exactly what insurance was designed to do: pay a loss that a person can’t afford on their own, in the unlikely occurrence of worst-case scenarios.

Auto insurers assess the true risk of owning and driving a car, and consumers are required to pay a premium which accurately reflects that risk. If a person has a history of reckless behavior, their insurance premiums go up. If their prior behavior is bad enough, they may become uninsurable.

Additionally, if an insurance company prices an individual’s coverage too high, that person has the right to shop for the same insurance coverage with different companies and get the best rate. This system of requiring all vehicle owners to buy insurance puts a price on the risk that comes with car ownership, and it does so in a way that conservatives should embrace — it allows the free market to decide what is fair and help solve a problem, rather than the government.

This free-market system to improve safety could be easily implemented for guns. Every gun would need to be insured. All those in a household would need to be identified. Insurers could give discounts for things that make guns safer, like trigger locks, just as they do for safety features in cars, like airbags.

Prior bad acts, like drunk driving violations, would increase premiums. Other risk factors, like age and whether one has taken a gun safety class, would be considered — as would the kind of gun being insured. A Ford F-150 costs less to insure than a Corvette. Likewise, a hunting rifle should cost less to insure than a semi-automatic handgun.

There is no doubt that in America individuals have the right to bear arms. Like it or not, the U.S. Supreme Court has made that point clear. But with any right comes a cost, and it is time to let the free market tell us the true cost of gun ownership.

Bryan Waldman is president of the Sinas Dramis Law Firm, where he handles cases involving auto collisions and auto insurance issues. He also teaches auto insurance law at Michigan State University College of Law. 

Barry Waldman was the president of the Sachs Waldman Law Firm, and retired after handling product liability cases against truck and auto manufacturers for 50 years.

This article originally appeared on Lansing State Journal: Gun safety vs car safety, the solutions are similar