Up Schidt Crick

Terrorism

Up Schidt Crick

Got Insurance?

By Stephen L. Wilmeth

            Shall we start by the reminder that the ‘50s and early ‘60s were the best of times?

            For whatever reason, the first thing that comes to mind is when my maternal grandfather had a night light installed out in the flat in front of their home near the mouth of Bell Canyon and across the road and the west side ditch from the original Jim Bell field. He thought it was quite the deal. A real improvement for the times peppered his assessment.

I disliked it from the get-go.

The glare of the light interrupted the solitude of dark nights. Without realizing it, dark nights were an important ingredient to the restful sleep that Nana had taught us from the time we were babies. There were no night lights allowed, and, like good eating habits, her demand was an enforced with finality.

Sleeping out on the screened porch wrapped in the freshness of sundried sheets with the sweet smells of the valley wafting in with the cool night breezes was actually codependent on dark nights for full effect. Of course, the moon was the welcomed exception. Mix that with the arrival of a nighttime monsoonal storm and heaven on earth was certainly approached.

Then the dang night light appeared.

Perhaps it was an omen. Maybe it was simply a stepwise move to the modern age. Whatever it was the modern world would do well to revisit the change and consider what it has brought us. The only real beneficiaries were the toads that moved out of the yard and sat around the base of the pole in legions and gorged themselves on the hordes of attracted insects. On second thought, maybe the first verse needs revision.

The ‘50s and early ‘60s were the best of times … before the nightlight came.

Terrorism

By U.S. code, terrorism is defined as a premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets. Further, terrorism includes any acts that are dangerous to human life in violation of the law and intended to intimidate or coerce a population, influence governmental policy or affect conduct of same (18 U.S. Code §2331 and 22 U.S. Code §26561).

How can any reasonable person look at that definition and suggest that terrorism is not being perpetrated against the population of Portland, Seattle, Kenosha, or any other burning city across our country?

The fact is those cities aren’t the only people affected. America is the victim. Daily, we watch the nonsense with a growing realization that we cannot count on our government to stop it. Portland is approaching 100 straight days of violence and the official stance of the weighted leadership is that these savages have a right to destroy the city.

Couple that with the writs of COVID protocol and the dark reality comes into focus. Our government is enabling the destruction of our union. Terrorism is alive and rampant in our midst. Our investment in this government is a colossal failure, and, even if this storm can be weathered, we will be expected to pay the bill for the entirety of the destruction.

As for the deaths, that apparently and simply is … collateral damage.

Got Insurance?

The suggestion that all this is going to be covered under existing insurance is not true and the problem lies, in part, in the actuarial data gaps needed to structure coverage. The official position of the insurance carriers seems to fall along the lines that terrorism of this form is new to our shores. The threats are not well defined and that creates all kinds of havoc in modeling the personal policies.

Good luck in trying to find coverage for standard homeowner policies.

What may be used in the absence of defined terrorist coverage for personal property and possessions is the fact explosions, fires, and smoke are generally covered. This remains conditional, however, because acts of terrorism are silent in current policies.

Condominiums are similar except the common areas which must be addressed by the ownership or the board overseeing the covenants and restrictions. How this is going to work with terrorism remains to be seen.

In the case of renters, personal property coverage is similar to homeowners, but the owner of the dwelling must assume the risk of terrorism.

Cars and vehicles will likely be covered in the near term if the policy includes coverage for “other than collision”.

It appears that businesses are in no man’s land. No doubt those owners who have watched their life’s investments burned while the hooligans exercise their rights to destroy without consequence know exactly what that means.  Before 9/11, coverage for terrorism was part of a standard policy inclusion. Since then such acts are only covered if it is offered separately and distinctly. What makes the business community more at risk is the fact such acts can only be covered if the Secretary of the Treasure declares them “certified acts”.

Can we only imagine how the left will react if their peaceful protests get certified as acts of terrorism?

Up Schidt Crick

The emergence of the tale of the toads under the night light pole is looming in importance.

If such a state is contemplated, the actuarial data gap there, too, makes a learned discussion difficult. For example, who are the toads in the definition. Are they the paid throngs cavorting like masked Taliban raiders, or are they us watching this whole show in obedient wonder?

Both scenarios could be argued.

If the masked raiders were the toad impersonators, we could cast further dispersions on their reliance of their perpetual gravy train all-the-while growing bolder with zero expectation of repercussions. If they were us with that look of institutional bewilderment, we could assume the added guilt of yet another government debacle while peeing on ourselves in blame acceptance.

Some of us are … sick and tired of both.

Stephen L. Wilmeth is a rancher from southern New Mexico. “Jefferson told us what to do.”