RE: WAS: "heated" words... NOW: Guns = no insurance???

From: Rick Barnes (barnesrv@attbi.com)
Date: Wed Jan 15 2003 - 15:25:52 EST


No violation of Constitutional rights there my friend. There is nothing in
the Constitution that forces an insurance company to give me coverage.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of
jon@dakota-truck.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 3:06 PM
To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
Subject: Re: DML: WAS: "heated" words... NOW: Guns = no insurance???

"Mr. Plow" <adam_is_mr_plow@hotmail.com> wrote:

: How can that company exist in the U.S.???
: Wouldn't the scenario you described be a direct violation of your
: constitutional rights?

   Nah, as a non-gov't entity, they have the right to discriminate
and select their customer base however they see fit (or they *should*
have the right to, anyway). However, as consumers we also have the
right to boycott the commie pinkos. ;-)

-- 

-Jon-

.---- Jon Steiger ------ jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com ------. | I'm the: AOPA, DoD, EAA, NMA, NRA, SPA, USUA. Rec & UL Pilot - SEL | | 70 Cuda, 90 Dak 'vert, 92 Ram 4x4, 96 Dak, 96 Intruder 1400, 96 FireFly | `------------------------------------------ http://www.jonsteiger.com ----'



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:45:43 EST