I can't see how it could *not* be considered such. Can you imagine the uproar if folks were legally required to purchase insurance so you'd be able to cover someone's therapy payments in case you exercised your freedom of speech and hurt their widdle feewings or offended them. ??? Sounds a little ludicrous, doesn't it? How then can people suggest insurance for gun owners who are simply exercising their unalienable, Constitutionally-recognized right to keep and bear arms?Andrew wrote:Would be considered an infringement, the same as a poll tax?
Imbeciles.
