Did you read it? It isn’t an amendment change. It’s insurance. You can bet money if insurance companies can make a profit, and it survives a challenge, it will catch on quickly.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sense_legal @ScottAdamsSays
“The devil’s going to be in the details,” adds Jake Charles, executive director at Duke’s Center for Firearms Law. “The concept of an insurance mandate doesn’t seem to raise 2A issues in the sense that it’s trying to internalize costs of firearms misuse to firearms owners”
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sense_legal @ScottAdamsSays
That isn’t the point. It is NOT grade 8 civics when Duke Law scholars say there is an arguement.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @TypicalDad71 @sense_legal



I enjoyed the hell out of your tweets on this. You won.1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @sense_legal
Thank you.pic.twitter.com/Ala6MpW2Sh
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Scott, I pre-ordered your book from Amazon. Your cover hooked me and the review in your profile reeled me in.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.