Kansas gun law renders school uninsurable?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Kansas law thrusts Iowa insurer into gun debate

DES MOINES, Iowa -- A new Kansas law allowing gun owners to carry weapons in public buildings, including schools, has thrust a major Des Moines-based insurer into the national gun control debate.

The EMC Insurance Cos. insures 85 percent to 90 percent of all Kansas school districts and has refused to renew coverage for schools that permit teachers and custodians to carry concealed firearms on their campuses under the new law, which took effect July 1. It's not a political decision, but a financial one based on the riskier climate it estimates would be created, the insurer said.

"We've been writing school business for almost 40 years, and one of the underwriting guidelines we follow for schools is that any on-site armed security should be provided by uniformed, qualified law enforcement officers," said Mick Lovell, EMC's vice president for business development. "Our guidelines have not recently changed."

Continues...

Move okay without notification.

[MrJonno]

Who needs insurance when everyone is packing in a school, what could possible go wrong?

[Warren Dew]

Sounds like a good opening for another insurance company.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Sounds like a good opening for another insurance company.

The actuaries will make the call on the risk and the schools will have to decide if they can afford what's being asked for coverage.

[mistermack]

I'm sure that the NRA will step in and provide cover. After all, they are convinced that more guns means more safety.
It's their chance to put money where their mouth is.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm sure that the NRA will step in and provide cover. After all, they are convinced that more guns means more safety.
It's their chance to put money where their mouth is.

Yep, a win-win for everybody. Including the funeral home industry.

[klr]

Sounds like a good opening for another insurance company.

The actuaries will make the call on the risk and the schools will have to decide if they can afford what's being asked for coverage.

Yup. Actuaries go where the numbers point, otherwise they won't make money.

[Collector1337]

It should be illegal for insurers to discriminate against people exercising their rights. That's like refusing to insure particular religions.

[Jason]

Nonsense. It's perfectly logical and reasonable to allow insurers to discriminate against issuing policies which put them at risk of losing money. People exercising this political right are simply a liability so far as the underwriters are concerned.

[pErvinalia]

It should be illegal for insurers to discriminate against people exercising their rights. That's like refusing to insure particular religions.

Fucking what? What kind of libertarian are you? Insurers are in the business of risk assessment. If the risk is too high, then they don't insure. It's got nothing to do with groups of people. It's simple maths.

I can't wait till Seth finds out about this thread. What ridiculous contradiction is he going to invoke to support both capital and gun ownership?

[Robert_S]

It should be illegal for insurers to discriminate against people exercising their rights. That's like refusing to insure particular religions.

Or charging higher rates for smokers, people with longer commutes, people who choose to build their houses on floodplains. Not to mention crop insurers who make sure that farmers don't plant too early, placing their crops at a higher risk for late frosts.

Why not put the Hell's Angel's in charge of school security? What could possible go wrong?

[Clinton Huxley]

I think it's an affront to everything America stands for, these bean-counters putting obstacles in the way of turning schools into armed camps. For shame.

[Svartalf]

If people are free to carry guns, it ensues that insurers are free to choose whom they work with... making it mandatory for them to service a given undesirable customer would be marxist.

[Tyrannical]

It should be illegal for insurers to discriminate against people exercising their rights. That's like refusing to insure particular religions.

Oh don't worry, actuaries are banned from using certain criteria by law all the time.
Life insurance companies can't charge higher premiums for blacks, even though they have a significantly lower average life span.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It should be illegal for insurers to discriminate against people exercising their rights. That's like refusing to insure particular religions.

So, government can tell private companies what to do? Your libertarian card is at risk.