Gary doesn't want to say "I told you so," but... Will the Private Sector Steal Your 2nd Amendment Rights?
Remember Gary? He's the fellow in rural South Carolina who State Farm cancelled after a thirty-year relationship, when the company's agent found out Gary occasionally went shooting in a ravine behind his house.
Gary tried to work out an arrangement that would allow him to keep his State Farm coverage, yet still allow him to shoot on his 13½ acres. But State Farm wasn't interested in any arrangements, and wasn't interested in trying to work things out. State Farm wouldn't budge.
Gary turned to GrassRoots GunRights South Carolina, a civil rights organization that promotes public acceptance of responsible firearms ownership, and also protects the rights of law abiding firearms owners. GrassRoots investigated Gary's story and his supporting documents, and posted the details on its website for all to see. The information quickly spread to other websites, as well as print and electronic media, and became a hot topic of discussion in several Internet forums. State Farm policyholders began contacting the company.
State Farm may be willing to accept premiums from people who own guns. The problem comes up when people legally and safely shoot on their own land. Like many insurance companies, State Farm even writes policies on specific guns through a Scheduled Personal Property Endorsement. This practice gives the insurance companies a nice database of who has what guns, rather like having their own gun registration plan. But what happens, Gary asks, when State Farm takes the next step, and imposes a "no guns" rule? What happens when some nameless, faceless corporate types decide to impose their social agenda on the policy holders?
Gary's question is no longer theoretical. Prudential recently cancelled coverage on a Connecticut police officer because it didn't like the Mossberg 500 shotgun he included in his list of guns. "Prudential's preference is to insure … firearms which are designed for sporting activity (i.e. hunting, target shooting, etc.) or historical types of firearms which are normally collected" the company explains. Prudential, by corporate whim, is forcing its own "sporting purposes" rule on its policyholders!
This is precisely the situation Gary feared. It is precisely the situation he warned us about. When politicians make bad laws, the courts sometimes protect those whose rights are infringed. But who will protect us when big businesses try to force their social agendas down our throats? Gary takes little satisfaction in saying, "I told you so".
K-Mart hid behind the First Amendment as Rosie attacked the Second Amendment. When people complained, the company saw the light. Rosie doesn't work there any more.
Citibank began closing the accounts of "businesses that deal in weapons". When people complained, the bank saw the light. It changed its rules to treat firearms businesses "the same as any other small business".
State Farm cancelled Gary's coverage because, it said, his occasional recreational shooting was "the operation of (a) shooting range". Gary (and others) complained, but State Farm hasn't seen the light.
Now, Prudential is refusing to insure people who own guns that don't meet the "sporting purposes" test. What will it take for Prudential to see the light?
How High will State Farm Let this Counter Get
Before Coming Clean with Gun Owners?
Remember Gary? He's the fellow in rural South Carolina who State Farm cancelled after a thirty-year relationship, when the company's agent found out Gary occasionally went shooting in a ravine behind his house.