Various correspondents have wondered just how much South Dakota's school gunslinger law would cost our schools in increased liability insurance premiums. We now have an answer: $2,500 per armed teacher per year.
The Oregon School Boards Association, which manages liability coverage for all but a handful of the state’s school districts, recently announced a new pricing structure that would make districts pay an extra $2,500 annual premium for every staff member carrying a weapon on the job [Steven Yaccino, "Schools Seeking to Arm Employees Hit Hurdle on Insurance," New York Times, 2013.07.07].
Then again, maybe gunslinging South Dakota school districts will save money by getting rid of their insurance... since insurers may refuse to cover the added risk of guns of campus. That's what's happening in Kansas:
Allowing teachers and other employees to carry guns under a new state law would cost most school districts their insurance.
EMC Insurance Companies, the state’s main insurer of schools, won’t insure districts with armed employees under the new law, which takes effect July 1. Districts already insured by EMC wouldn’t have their policies renewed.
“We understand that school districts have every right to decide which way they want to go,” Bernie Zalaznik, EMC’s resident vice president in Wichita, said Monday. “But we have to make the decision based on what we perceive to be our best financial interest.”
EMC, which Zalaznik estimated insures about 90 percent of Kansas’ 286 school districts, has issued a letter to its agents around the state, explaining that concealed carry would pose too great a risk [Celia Llopis-Jepsen, "No School Insurance for Teachers with Guns," Topeka Capital-Journal, 2013.06.18].
The South Dakota legislators spun hard in two directions at once, seeking man points for voting for our foolish school gunslinger law even while trying to avoid taking responsibility for the risks of placing guns in the classroom. The green eyeshade folks at the insurance company don't fall for such bushwah. Their actuarial tables speak quite clearly: more guns mean more risk. Allow guns in your school, and you will either pay more for insurance coverage or lose your coverage completely.
Liability insurance is just one of the complications that, along with good sense, will keep the number of South Dakota school districts signing on the Legislature's classroom-gun posturing at zero.
Update 08:05 CST: EMC offers a library of more than 250 online courses in school safety. EMC claims that school districts implementing this training program have reduced property and liability claims by up to 51% and workers' comp claims by up to 58%. None of this safety training appears to involve bringing guns to school. EMC made this training available to schools in Iowa, Nebraska, and South Dakota last February free of charge.
It might even be that government by the people for the people happens no matter what the legislature or the lobbyists do.
The free market, Ya gotta love it!
this isn't a surprise. Insurance was brought up before this stupid bill was passed. But it was ignored by our gun-happy legislatures.
IMO - all gun owners should be required to carry liability insurance for their weapons. I'm sure the insurance industry can calculate the rates for various makes and models - based on likelihood of reckless use of same. plenty of evidence/data out there as a basis. This would NOT require gun registration with the government - only with insurance companies (hooray for private enterprise). Being found in possession of an uninsured gun would lead to a hefty fine, not confiscation - all satisfying the 2nd amendment.
I agree Richard, but I would require registration and gun training. Just what you have to do to be able to drive a car.