The Gun Insurance Mandate That Nobody Can Actually Buy

San Jose just became the first US city to require gun owners to carry liability insurance—but there’s a catch: no major insurer offers standalone gun liability policies.

In January, the city council passed an ordinance forcing homeowners and renters with firearms to maintain insurance covering “death, injury or property damage” from negligent use. Gun owners must carry proof at all times or face impoundment.

The Numbers Behind This

US murders spiked 30% between 2019-2020 (highest in 100 years). Gun sales hit 20 million in 2021. San Jose’s move is clearly a response—the ordinance also funnels fees into a nonprofit for suicide prevention and mental health services.

Why It’s Actually Unenforceable

The catch? Insurance companies won’t touch it. Standard homeowners policies (HO-3) already cover accidental shootings and stolen firearms—up to $300K liability. You can stack umbrella policies for $1M+ coverage if you want.

Only a handful of small players like Lockton Affinity offer dedicated gun liability coverage. Major insurers see no business case.

The Second Amendment Fight

The NRA claims it violates the right to “keep and bear arms.” Gun rights advocates also point out that criminals won’t buy insurance anyway—so the mandate only affects law-abiding owners. The ordinance faces court challenges.

Historical precedent? Zilch. Since the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting, Congress has proposed gun liability requirements multiple times. None passed. One recent settlement: Remington paid $73M to Sandy Hook victims’ families in 2022.

Bottom line: San Jose’s insurance mandate is legally questionable, unenforceable, and solving a problem that insurance companies say doesn’t exist. The real debate isn’t about getting coverage—it’s about whether gun ownership itself should carry a legal financial burden.