House bill would require gun owners to have liability insurance http://thehill.com/regulation/243425-house-bill-would-require-gun-owners-to-carry-insurance …
-
-
Replying to @ColMorrisDavis
@ColMorrisDavis Btw, did you see this -- Burr trying to add gun possession/crime violence to terrorism enhancements? https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/05/29/richard-burr-wants-to-label-people-who-make-threats-and-carry-guns-terrorists/ …1 reply 2 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I don't see the gun provision in his original bill. Is that an amendment?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ColMorrisDavis
@ColMorrisDavis Bottom of page 65 here. https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/EAS15585-FISA-Improvements-Act-2015.pdf … Section 204.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel It appears it adds a gun enhancement to 2332 (acts of terrorism), not to 2339 (material support).1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ColMorrisDavis
@ColMorrisDavis That's what my post says (3rd ¶). (Though that would mean the 2339 applies to it as well.) Seems horribly ripe for abuse.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I don't see the 2332 to 2339 link that would tack the 2332 gun enhancement onto 2339.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ColMorrisDavis
@ColMorrisDavis But my big worry is that this would (if passed) let govt use possession as reason to call dissidents terrorists.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I'm often surprised how gov't interprets law, but here I don't see it creating a new offense, just >punishment if gun involved.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@ColMorrisDavis No. It doesn't create a new offense. It creates a new way to dub dissidents "terrorists," w/all that connotes.
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.