Washington State Senator Paddy Kuderer
Previous Post
Next Post

In a move that should surprise no one familiar with how many Democratic Party politicians operate, SAF’s Gun Mag Editor in Chief Dave Workman is reporting that Washington State Senator Patty Kuderer, who earlier this year sponsored a bill to require all gun owners to obtain liability insurance is now running to become the state’s next insurance commissioner.

Kuderer’s proposed measure, Senate Bill 5963, never made it out of committee, Gun Mag reports. She did, however, have nine co-sponsors, all Dems, as is typical as well.

Gun Mag wrote:

But Kuderer will be facing a Senate foil, at least in the primary. State Sen. Phil Fortunato (R-Auburn), an ardent Second Amendment advocate, has also filed for the position. Neither Kuderer or Fortunato would lose their Senate seats this fall…

Beyond Kuderer and Fortunato, there are four other Democrats, one other Republican and two candidates without party affiliation currently running for insurance commissioner. Kuderer, however, is the only one who “linked to the proposed liability insurance mandate.”

Gun Mag goes on to say:

Under her bill, any person who owns a firearm would have been compelled to obtain “in full force and effect,” an  insurance policy “covering losses or damages resulting from the accidental or unintentional discharge of the firearm, including but not limited to, death or injury to persons who are not an insured person under the policy and property damage.”

The law would also have required the gun owner to keep valid and current written evidence of the coverage readily available where each firearm was stored.

The law would also have required insurers to ask whether anyone named on the policy owned a firearm and whether it was securely stored.

Conservative talk show host Jason Rantz for KTTH on MyNorthwest.com exposed how Kuderer, in an almost predictable political move of smoke and mirrors, tried to argue “By setting this requirement Washington intends to reduce the risk and subsequent cost of hardships of gun accidents. This bill achieves these goals and reallocates costs without compromising any Second Amendment rights. This is true because this requirement does not regulate, limit or control the manner or method in which people may keep or bear arms. Instead, it simply says you must have liability insurance.”

Kuderer is either stupid, but as an attorney, probably not, or she thinks she is so much smarter than everyone else, that they are simply stupid, the most likely scenario.

The stipulations of the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision aside, she argues that forcing people to have insurance wouldn’t limit their 2A rights, yet, if you don’t get insurance and keep written proof with the firearm at all times, you would be violating a law that would in itself jeopardize your right to own and possess firearms.

“This is astonishing. The bill literally regulates and controls both the manner and method in which we may keep and bear arms” Rantz writes.

He also poses the question with an answer obvious to everyone but Kuderer: “And how is paying a monthly fee, in the form of insurance, to enjoy a constitutionally protected right not considered “compromising” our Second Amendment rights?”

It is astonishing actually, but with the way many Democrats operate today, it shouldn’t be surprising. And that’s just sad, because there was a time, actually not so many years ago, when there were a sizable number of rural Democrats who were willing to stand up for their constituents Second Amendment rights.

“With no sound legal argument, Kuderer continued to simply deem the bill constitutional, as if deeming something constitutional is how any of this works. Kuderer relied on either a complete misunderstanding of Bruen, or a strategy to simply lie. Both possibilities should be considered,” Rantz writes.

The conservative radio show host and podcaster went on to slam Kuderer.

“Watching ‘My Cousin Vinny’ would arm one with the necessary knowledge to apply the majority decision to the law to know it’s unconstitutional,” he writes.

And that’s most likely why Kuderer’s weak bill died so quickly. It may also be why she is shooting for insurance commissioner, so she can attempt an administrative end-around on her desire to impose what would be a lucrative insurance requirement on a huge number of Washingtonians. Beware voters. Be very aware.



Editor’s Note: Oh, and by the way, both Rantz and Workman have open invites to contribute to TTAG anytime they want. We particularly liked Rantz’s rant on Kuderer and look forward to checking out his podcast. Read his full article in the link in the story.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. It’s baffling to me that these people are so unaware. It is illegal to require an insurance company to cover something that is a deliberate act and they will not have to pay out on a claim if the insured acted criminally.

    • Follow the money. In this case Kuderer was after a fat paycheck with “performance bonuses”.

    • “It is illegal to require an insurance company to cover something that is a deliberate act and they will not have to pay out on a claim if the insured acted criminally.”

      Californacatia is way ahead. About three or so years ago, the state supreme court took a case where the plaintiff declared that micro-stamping firearm firing pins was impossible. The state supremes ruled that a law impossible to comply with was still a valid, enforceable law.

    • The law as reported only required the insurers to cover accidental, unintentional injuries, which are insurable. And which are covered under the typical HO or renter’s liability policy.

      On the other hand, even the Trace reported that (per the CDC), according to provisional mortality statistics from 2021, a total of 224,935 people died in accidents in the United States, 549 of them in unintentional firearm discharges (out of 728 incidents). The risk is so low that premiums would naturally be low as well, if the insurers even charged an increased premium for liabilities THEY ALREADY COVER.

      • “The law as reported only required the insurers to cover accidental, unintentional injuries, which are insurable.”

        Perhaps, perhaps. “Law” isn’t simple.

        I live in a jurisdiction where discharging a firearm within town/city limits is illegal on its face…unless at a gun range, or in self defence. This leaves room for an insurance company to avoid liability for covering “accidental/unintentional fire arm discharge injury. Seems that in order to male a successful claim against liability insurance, you must first prove the firearm discharge did not result from the crime of discharging a firearm* within town/city limits.

        *defined as any object expelled from even slingshots. (apparently, even food fights could be considered as illegal use of a firearm)

  2. There’s the tyranny of experts where overly-educated people without any real experience attempt to apply their book learnin’ to inapplicable scenarios operating on an empty ideal of how things “should work.”

    Then there’s the tyranny of the elected official. Where no experience or education is required. Only a title. And with that title they can play expert, professional, advisor, sage, whatever still operating on the empty ideal of how a thing “should work.”

    It never matters that things objectively and sometimes physically do not operate how they “should” because they’re going to pass all the laws and spend all the money to try and force it.

    Like children who think if they just tantrum and scream hard enough their dead goldfish will come back to life.

  3. Remember kids, corrupt traitors to the revolution like this will vote us in to communism but you and your kids will have to shoot their way of it. She’s a criminal, this is unconstitutional, and she should be jailed for this criminal act which will cost the state millions in legal fee’s, but does she care? So corrupt and evil.

  4. The annals of human ingenuity are marked by creations that have shattered the barriers of speed, with each innovation serving as a milestone in the chronicles of advancement. These swift messengers, whether cutting through the Earth’s atmosphere or hurtling through the vacuum of space, represent the culmination of years of scientific endeavor and the unyielding human spirit to explore and excel, constellations in summer. They are not merely instruments of travel or exploration but symbols of the boundless potential that lies within the grasp of collective human intellect and ambition.

Comments are closed.