Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

S.D. Bill Would Require Citizens to Buy a Gun
Newsroom America ^ | Jan. 31, 2011 | Jon E. Dougherty

Posted on 02/01/2011 8:44:21 AM PST by george76

A bill introduced by five state legislators in South Dakota would require all citizens over the age of 21 to purchase a firearm "sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense."

The measure would not apply to persons who are legally barred from owning a firearm. The bill also does not specify the type of firearm citizens must purchase - only that it be "suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference."

(Excerpt) Read more at newsroomamerica.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: South Dakota
KEYWORDS: banglist; guns; individualmandate; southdakota
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101 next last

1 posted on 02/01/2011 8:44:22 AM PST by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: george76

Sounds good to me.


2 posted on 02/01/2011 8:46:30 AM PST by dynachrome ("Our forefathers didn't bury their guns. They buried those that tried to take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

They must be Ann Coulter fans.


3 posted on 02/01/2011 8:47:29 AM PST by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

If the government can force a man to buy an insurance product, why not a gun as well? Right dems?


4 posted on 02/01/2011 8:47:45 AM PST by RC one (Come get some.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Just to help finish off Obamacare.


5 posted on 02/01/2011 8:47:54 AM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

What does the State Constitution say? Can they force people to buy anything?


6 posted on 02/01/2011 8:48:23 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

If, as people of a conservative mind maintain, it is unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance, wouldn’t it likewise be unconstitutional to compel them to buy a firearm?


7 posted on 02/01/2011 8:49:41 AM PST by davisfh (Islam is a mental illness with global social consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
If, as people of a conservative mind maintain, it is unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance, wouldn’t it likewise be unconstitutional to compel them to buy a firearm?

Exactly.

8 posted on 02/01/2011 8:51:14 AM PST by cowboyway (Molon labe : Deo Vindice : "Rebellion is always an option!!"--Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
If, as people of a conservative mind maintain, it is unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance, wouldn’t it likewise be unconstitutional to compel them to buy a firearm?

I agree. Except I think in this case you'd have to refer to the state constitution to check for constitutionality.
9 posted on 02/01/2011 8:53:43 AM PST by mmichaels1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: george76

Y’all know doggoned well that if such a measure passed it would be mere nanoseconds before another politician came along and demanded that, in the interests of fairness, those who have more than one gun start giving them away to those that don’t have any.


10 posted on 02/01/2011 8:54:15 AM PST by Tucsonican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mmichaels1970

Depends. Is there a penalty for not buying one? Do they have the government tax services audit and attack and fine you.

Big differences - but I would guess over 90% of SD residents that can legally own a weapon already have one or more.


11 posted on 02/01/2011 8:56:03 AM PST by artificial intelligence (Your data will be processed by me for future input. Thank you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tucsonican

How about people who have a driver’s license but don’t own a car be forced to buy auto insurance? After all, they MIGHT drive some day.


12 posted on 02/01/2011 8:58:16 AM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

Didn’t Kennesaw, Georgia do this way back when? I wonder if that precedent’s been cited in any of the Obamacare briefs.


13 posted on 02/01/2011 8:58:57 AM PST by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
Actually, it's unconstitutional for the FEDS to tell us we have to buy something. It's not necessarily against the federal Constitution for a state to oblige its citizens to buy something.

The bill also does not specify the type of firearm citizens must purchase - only that it be "suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference."

Full auto LWRC in 6.8, I think, is the only non-crew-served weapon that is suitable to my temperament.

14 posted on 02/01/2011 8:59:08 AM PST by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

Come now. Does what any old must document say truly matter? It’s for the common good, don’cha know.


15 posted on 02/01/2011 8:59:21 AM PST by FourPeas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: george76

Sometimes I just love living here in SD. Winters just suck though. ;0)


16 posted on 02/01/2011 8:59:35 AM PST by DadOfFive ("Miss me yet?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

I think it is likely a symbolic gesture, pointing out absurdity by being absurd.


17 posted on 02/01/2011 8:59:58 AM PST by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: george76
sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense

my "ordinary" self-defense worries about organized gangs of thugs with APCs

So I need something with a bit of AP ability like


18 posted on 02/01/2011 9:01:19 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

-——wouldn’t it likewise be unconstitutional to compel them to buy a firearm?———

Think on this a moment. If the law passes, everyone must go buy a gun. Do you thing Dashle will buy a gun or sue?

If he sues andd loses he will ultimately go to the Supreme court which will likely rule in his favor and establish a precedent. The state can’t force folks to buy stuff unless like car insurance it is required to facilitate the privilege to drive


19 posted on 02/01/2011 9:01:27 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 .....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: george76

Only one? :)


20 posted on 02/01/2011 9:01:55 AM PST by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
I like the effect of this *a lot*. However, I'd go about funding it differently.

When you apply for a South Dakota drivers license, the fee will go up by about $200-$400. When your license is issued, you get a "free" gun as well.


Today is a good day to die.
I didn't say for whom.

21 posted on 02/01/2011 9:02:17 AM PST by The Comedian (It's 3am all over the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

individual mandate

unconstitutional


22 posted on 02/01/2011 9:02:42 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

*mandatory bang ping*


23 posted on 02/01/2011 9:02:51 AM PST by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC one
If the government can force a man to buy an insurance product, why not a gun as well? Right dems?

There is actually a much more solid Constitutional basis for doing so, under the Second Amendment and the state's duties regarding the Militia.

In the Federal Militia Act of 1792, male citizens were required to equip themselves with firearm and military gear:

I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.

24 posted on 02/01/2011 9:05:51 AM PST by PapaBear3625 ("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
If, as people of a conservative mind maintain, it is unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance, wouldn’t it likewise be unconstitutional to compel them to buy a firearm?

The state government doesn't have to rely on the interstate commerce clause of the US Constitution. Completely separate issue, since a different constitution is involved.

25 posted on 02/01/2011 9:12:37 AM PST by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: george76

Having grown up in SD - this bill may lead to the sale of 5, maybe 6 guns. Most everyone in the state has at least a varmit rifle, a shotgun and the trusty old .22.

My fear is that ANY idiot who decides that they can dictate what a citizen can do - needs to be removed from office. We are Citizens, not Subjects.

This is an over-stepping of their authority, they have no Constitutionally authority of forcing us to purchase anythign - insurance, cars, firearms or T-shirts.


26 posted on 02/01/2011 9:13:28 AM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie; jazusamo; Flycatcher; rellimpank

State governments, unlike the federal government, are not limited to the US federal enumerated powers ?


27 posted on 02/01/2011 9:14:53 AM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: george76

Assuming responsibility for a firearm is like singing. If you can’t do it capably and well, no one should encourage you to do it. It won’t end well


28 posted on 02/01/2011 9:20:06 AM PST by muir_redwoods (Obama. Chauncey Gardiner without the homburg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

If it is truly a right, then it can’t be imposed by statute. It would be unconstitutional in same way commanding you to ‘speak your mind’ is unconstitutional. State constitution shouldn’t matter.


29 posted on 02/01/2011 9:28:58 AM PST by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
How about people who have a driver’s license but don’t own a car be forced to buy auto insurance? After all, they MIGHT drive some day.

Don't get me wrong here; in no way, shape or form am I advocating for the mandatory purchase of health insurance. All I'm doing is pointing out the folly of this type of legislation; which even the guy who is proposing it admits.

30 posted on 02/01/2011 9:31:53 AM PST by Tucsonican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: george76

I know the feds don’t have the right to force citizens to purchase a product. But I can’t believe a state can have this power.

What if the state of CA passes a law stating that I must buy a hybrid automobile? There’s got to be a limit on state power also.


31 posted on 02/01/2011 9:32:12 AM PST by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: george76

I like the thought of everyone being armed for self protection but don’t like the state making laws telling me what I have to buy. If passed I doubt it’ll be enforced.


32 posted on 02/01/2011 9:33:26 AM PST by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: george76
The flip-side of the health-insurance mandate raises its ugly head.
33 posted on 02/01/2011 9:36:02 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum ("If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." -- Barry Soetoro, June 11, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

This is a twist on an older idea.
Vermont State Rep. Fred Maslack once proposed a bill to register “non-gun-owners” and require them to pay a $500 fee to the state.

At least this order to own a firearm is Constitutionally based. I don’t find the same basis for Obamacare.


34 posted on 02/01/2011 9:36:35 AM PST by Steamburg (The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: george76

Nice thought, but largely redundant. Most SD citizens already have a gun.

How about a Federal law requiring all Americans to own a gun.

After all, Jefferson wrote, regarding ownership of guns by the American citizen, that it was “their right and duty to be at all times armed”.

Good enough for Jefferson is good enough for me.


35 posted on 02/01/2011 9:43:41 AM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principles,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

I can be responsible with gun ownership, but I can’t carry a tune. So I guess I’ll stick with one and not the other. :)


36 posted on 02/01/2011 9:52:13 AM PST by darkangel82 (I don't have a superiority complex, I'm just better than you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: george76

And the bill would be unconstitutional.


37 posted on 02/01/2011 9:52:18 AM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged (Liberalism is against human nature. Practicing liberalism is detrimental to your mental stability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

Oh yeah, GREAT idea. /s
We really need folks who have neither interest or desire to RESPONSIBLY own a firearm being required to do so.


38 posted on 02/01/2011 9:58:47 AM PST by PalmettoMason (It's easy being a menace to society when WAY OVER half the population is happy being sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: george76

Brillinat!


39 posted on 02/01/2011 10:02:38 AM PST by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
RE: M113

Easily penetrated in the sides and rear with M2 Blacktip .30-06 out of an M1903a3. Nasty effect of staying inside and zinging around.

40 posted on 02/01/2011 10:07:28 AM PST by DCBryan1 (FORGET the lawyers...first kill the "journalists". (Die Ritter der Kokosnuss))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
Assuming responsibility for a firearm is like singing. If you can’t do it capably and well, no one should encourage you to do it.
But you do recognize that your children have the obligation, in school, to sing "mmmmmmmm, mmmmmmmm, mmmmmmm, Barack, Barack, Obama, mmmmmmmm, mmmmmmmm, mmmmmmm", don't you?

I mean, that's constitutionally SOLID, that is.

41 posted on 02/01/2011 10:07:28 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: george76
It's a stupid bill, but it does give me a chance to post some gun porn! Here's my nice tactical ParaOrdinance .45.


42 posted on 02/01/2011 10:11:59 AM PST by Poser (Cogito ergo Spam - I think, therefore I ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Easily penetrated in the sides and rear with M2 Blacktip

Thanx. Ma Deuce penetrates too, but not with the style of the RPG :-)

43 posted on 02/01/2011 10:15:16 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: george76

Another reason to move to where my wife is from.


44 posted on 02/01/2011 10:21:17 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

So, you’re in favor of allowing the government to compel a citizen to engage in behavior that it mandates?

How does that square with America’s founding principles?


45 posted on 02/01/2011 11:02:20 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Poser
What is it? At first I thought it was a P-12, but it has a beavertail grip.
46 posted on 02/01/2011 11:04:36 AM PST by JoeFromSidney (New book: RESISTANCE TO TYRANNY. A primer on armed revolt. Available form Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: JoeFromSidney
LDA Tactical. The only make a carry model with a shorter barrel now. Here's a sporterized 1903 Springfield



And the 200 yard target that goes with it!


47 posted on 02/01/2011 11:18:10 AM PST by Poser (Cogito ergo Spam - I think, therefore I ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
If, as people of a conservative mind maintain, it is unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance, wouldn’t it likewise be unconstitutional to compel them to buy a firearm?

Because the militia, composed of all free citizins, was part of the Common Law at the time of the Rebellion. Ans the Constitution clearly sees it continuing.

Also Posse comitatus (common law)

48 posted on 02/01/2011 11:19:02 AM PST by Oztrich Boy (History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce - Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

If obozo care is Constitutional, so is this. (I was trying for a bit of sarcasm)


49 posted on 02/01/2011 11:29:53 AM PST by dynachrome ("Our forefathers didn't bury their guns. They buried those that tried to take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: PalmettoMason

/s forgot.


50 posted on 02/01/2011 11:32:55 AM PST by dynachrome ("Our forefathers didn't bury their guns. They buried those that tried to take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson