It’s a general rule of common or statutory law that insurance does not cover intentional actions. Yet, time and again, we see proposals for “gun liability insurance”. The recent call for it is from San Jose’s mayor:
And that way we can ensure that victims are compensated where there’s an insurable event. And of course, insurance companies will help us make gun possession safer.
Firearm homicides and assaults with deadly weapons are, typically, intentional actions. Which means the events the San Jose mayor envisions would be “insurable” aren’t. They are excluded by common or statutory law or State regulation. California specifically denies liability insurance coverage for intentional actions:
An insurer is not liable for a loss caused by the wilful act of the insured; but he is not exonerated by the negligence of the insured, or of the insured’s agents or others.California Insurance Code §533
So this makes the San Jose mayor’s attempt to require such moot. Since California’s Insurance Code cannot allow for such. And where a municipal ordinance conflicts with State laws or regulations, the latter controls.
And, again, virtually every other State has a similar law or regulation.