This sends an incomparably strong message ~ and I hope it's a trend that catches on like wildfire ~ I bet the NRA didn't think this was possible or probable ~ Sooz

Insurers Refuse To Cover Kansas Schools Where Teachers Carry Guns Because It’s Too Risky
By Aviva Shen on Jul 8, 2013 at 10:00 am

In the wake of the Newtown massacre, several states passed laws to allow school officials to carry firearms on campus, arguing that more guns would keep students safe. Insurance companies apparently disagree now that these laws are beginning to take effect. In Kansas, where the law kicked in July 1, major insurers have deemed the new policy too risky and are refusing to cover schools that arm their employees.

Des Moines-based EMC Insurance, which covers 85 to 90 percent of Kansas school districts, has a longstanding policy of denying coverage to schools that arm employees, and they seem unlikely to change it to accommodate Kansas’ new law. Two smaller insurance firms that cover the remaining 10 percent of Kansas schools are also adopting the same policy. Insurers say the risk of giving guns to anyone but law enforcement in a building full of children would make a school’s coverage much more expensive.

“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,” EMC executive Mick Lovell told USA Today.

While no Kansas schools have thus far taken advantage of the new law, districts all over the country started encouraging and even requiring teachers to carry weapons after the Newtown shooting. Over the weekend, a school district in Newcomerstown, Ohio, announced that they would allow employees to carry guns starting in the 2013 school year. The selected employees will undergo tactical training and get certified by the Sheriff’s department.

A week after the Newtown shooting in December, the National Rifle Association pushed for more guns in schools, arguing that “gun-free zones” attract killers. However, as the insurers recognize, arming teachers and custodians poses a far greater danger. Nor do more weapons do much to stop gunmen from doing harm; Columbine High School, the site of one of the most deadly shootings in U.S. history, had an armed guard. Most gunmen wreak havoc in just a few minutes, which would require an armed staffer to have a lightning-fast response time to disarm the shooter. Indeed, even gun shows require aficionados to check their weapons at the door for safety reasons.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/08/2262861/insurers-kansas-armed-teachers-risk/

The NRA and the Insurance Industry at odds. That ought to be interesting. They could bill it as "Slimeball vs. Slimeball."

This is an excellent place to begin dismantling the NRA's choke-hold ~ Sooz

Fooling politicians is easy; fooling actuaries is hard
By Steve Benen - Tue Jul 9, 2013 9:26 AM EDT

Politicians and pundits care about talking points. Actuaries care about data. (Thanks to reader C.R. for the heads-up.)


The insurer's letter explained to officials in Kansas, "We are making this underwriting decision simply to protect the financial security of our company."

And this, of course, makes quite a bit of sense. In the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, far-right policymakers in a variety of states decided the appropriate response was bringing in more loaded firearms into schools, to be kept around children. This is precisely what the NRA recommended -- schools will be safer, the group insisted, with armed school personnel -- and policymakers acted accordingly.

But insurance companies don't much care about political rhetoric, and have fiduciary responsibilities to consider. And wouldn't you know it, the actuaries ran the numbers and decided insuring schools that may include gun-toting teachers is not a wise investment.

Remember, it's not like EMC Insurance was lobbied to make this decision by the White House, Michael Bloomberg, or Gabrielle Giffords. Rather, the company made a straightforward business decision based on the same policies EMC Insurance has always maintained.

"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," Mick Lovell, EMC's vice president for business development, told the Des Moines Register. "Our guidelines have not recently changed."

Kansas schools aren't the only ones affected by insurers' concerns.

From the NYT article:


As other states consider related policies, plenty of insurers aren't looking forward to making these decisions.

The political impact is real. Officials who originally thought the question came down to, "Do we listen to the NRA or not?" are quickly realizing that the better question is, "Can we afford the higher premiums for a dangerous policy or not?"

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/07/09/19373369-fooling-politicians-is-easy-fooling-actuaries-is-hard