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

Skip to comments.

Bill would require all S.D. citizens to buy a gun
Community History ^ | Jan. 31, 2011 | unknown

Posted on 02/01/2011 9:40:23 AM PST by Fawn

Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.”

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.

Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one “suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference.”

(Excerpt) Read more at community.history.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: South Dakota
KEYWORDS: alreadyposted; banglist; guns; southdakota
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-131 next last
Haha
1 posted on 02/01/2011 9:40:25 AM PST by Fawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Now that is what was intended by a ‘well regulated militia’.


2 posted on 02/01/2011 9:41:29 AM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Why can’t we be more like Switzerland?


3 posted on 02/01/2011 9:41:38 AM PST by silverleaf (All that is necessary for evil to succeed, is that good men do nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

isn’t that a little like trying to force people to buy insurance?


4 posted on 02/01/2011 9:42:05 AM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Militia Act of 1792 required all able-bodied adult male citizens to own a military rifle, ammo and equipment. It was constitutional because of the specific delegation of power in Article 1 Section 8.


5 posted on 02/01/2011 9:42:19 AM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

This is kinda like Obamacare in reverse. :)


6 posted on 02/01/2011 9:42:19 AM PST by RexBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Isn’t that just like the federal government requiring us to buy health insurance?


7 posted on 02/01/2011 9:43:16 AM PST by BAW (I know whose ass to kick.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Give them some motivation. Fire all the police


8 posted on 02/01/2011 9:43:16 AM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
It's just as unconstitutional as ObamaCare.

The state cannot force people to purchase an item from another entity.

Much as I hate to say so. I think it would do us all good if everyone were armed.

9 posted on 02/01/2011 9:43:35 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Just as obamacare is unconstitutional, this proposal is too.


10 posted on 02/01/2011 9:44:26 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: paul51

If it were the Feds doing it, yes - the individual states are a different matter. Wonder how they would ever enforce it. I suspect that if you want a gun, you have a gun (except for me, who still doesn’t know what to buy).


11 posted on 02/01/2011 9:44:33 AM PST by Sioux-san
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

No liberal should have a problem with this. After all, if they believe the government can compel people to buy health insurance, then surely it can compel people to buy guns too.


12 posted on 02/01/2011 9:44:36 AM PST by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

It’s satire. Tongue-and-cheek. A wink and a nod.


13 posted on 02/01/2011 9:45:02 AM PST by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I don’t believe they can do this. It would be like the Healthcare Bill, forcing the people to buy something they don’t want.


14 posted on 02/01/2011 9:45:17 AM PST by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leftism is Mentally Deranged
"Just as obamacare is unconstitutional, this proposal is too"

How so?


15 posted on 02/01/2011 9:45:39 AM PST by I see my hands (_8(|)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Why in heck not?

They tried to use the law to force people to buy health insurance —something that gets no mention at all in the constitution, a fact that escaped the attention of a “ Constitutional Law Professor”.

Why not require this?

By comparison this is HUGELY reasonable.


16 posted on 02/01/2011 9:46:11 AM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Why in heck not?

They tried to use the law to force people to buy health insurance —something that gets no mention at all in the constitution, a fact that escaped the attention of a “ Constitutional Law Professor”.

Why not require this?

By comparison this is HUGELY reasonable.


17 posted on 02/01/2011 9:46:14 AM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Why in heck not?

They tried to use the law to force people to buy health insurance —something that gets no mention at all in the constitution, a fact that escaped the attention of a “ Constitutional Law Professor”.

Why not require this?

By comparison this is HUGELY reasonable.


18 posted on 02/01/2011 9:46:20 AM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

you just KNEW the headline didn’t mean San Diego...


19 posted on 02/01/2011 9:47:23 AM PST by WOBBLY BOB ( "I don't want the majority if we don't stand for something"- Jim Demint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paul51

Just so....


20 posted on 02/01/2011 9:47:31 AM PST by Adder (Part 1 Accomplished)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

SD used to have a program, in which state residents could buy an AR-15 at a substancial discount. 1 per legal age resident.

Now, I would like to see that program come back. These rifles could be used for Antelope and White tail deer, as well as prarie dogs.

But, I do take issue with ANY Gov’t group mandating that I buy anything. Cars, guns, insurance ... anything.


21 posted on 02/01/2011 9:48:09 AM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
Why can’t we be more like Switzerland?

Yup.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nf1OgV449g&feature=related

22 posted on 02/01/2011 9:48:59 AM PST by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Goofy law if passed, but let's not make everything a constitutional issue just because its repugnant. That invites more federal government power grab.

Much less threatening than ObamaCare of course because the people of the state can overturn it with a referendum, or those who they can move to another state.

23 posted on 02/01/2011 9:49:15 AM PST by Jim 0216
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Individual mandate, likely unconstitutional.

The government should not be able to force people to do that. Anymore than force them to buy healthcare insurance.


24 posted on 02/01/2011 9:50:01 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

I am surprised by the number of replies that are missing that.....


25 posted on 02/01/2011 9:50:31 AM PST by CSM (Keeper of the "Dave Ramsey Fan" ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Like the idea of arming everybody but it is unconstitutional.


26 posted on 02/01/2011 9:51:45 AM PST by DarthVader (That which supports Barack Hussein Obama must be sterilized and there are NO exceptions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

I need to move to SD. Maybe I’ll wait until after winter.


27 posted on 02/01/2011 9:51:55 AM PST by WKUHilltopper (Fix bayonets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
Lots of variables here, state law not Fed. Probably could be done by mandatory national service (conscription) training, and an issue rifle, not a purchase requirement. Conscientious objectors could opt out of rifle training and issue, but not service.
28 posted on 02/01/2011 9:52:04 AM PST by Navy Patriot (Sarah and the Conservatives will rock your world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sioux-san

Are you saying that states don’t fall under the US Constitution? Sorry but this law is unconstitutional. Governments can not force people to buy anything. That includes both health insurance and guns.


29 posted on 02/01/2011 9:52:33 AM PST by Graneros ("The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits." — Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

The gun manufacturers write this bill?

Simply ludicrous.


30 posted on 02/01/2011 9:53:02 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn; Envisioning; waterhill

To those who raise the Constitutional issue, my state (Texas) has for years required all motor vehicle owners to purchase liability insurance. Of course, if you don’t own a car, truck, etc. you don’t have to buy the insurance. This (S.D.) law seems to have no such predicate.... What does the state consitution say?


31 posted on 02/01/2011 9:53:06 AM PST by ixtl (You live and learn; or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

I don’t think the government should subsidies any corporations, even gun makers.

That is what this is.


32 posted on 02/01/2011 9:55:03 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
"suitable to their temperament"

So what guns go with what politicians?


33 posted on 02/01/2011 9:55:22 AM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

I live in Georgia, near Kennesaw, GA, which had the same law several (15?) years back.

Of course it was never enforced but it caused multiple liberal heads to explode.


34 posted on 02/01/2011 9:56:01 AM PST by freedomlover (Make sure you're in love - before you move in the heavy stuff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot

mandatory national service is slavery to the state.


35 posted on 02/01/2011 9:56:33 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf; Cobra64
Why can’t we be more like Switzerland?

Compulsory military service? Perhaps not a bad idea to whip some of the upcoming Yutes into shape and give them some dicipline.

36 posted on 02/01/2011 9:56:36 AM PST by DTogo (High time to bring back the Sons of Liberty !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Unconstitutional? Dead wrong.
The founders were alive and in the legislature in 1792 when the Militia Act was passed. They knew what was in the Constitution. Specifically Article 1 Section 8 and I quote (in part).
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
The Militia Act of 1792 is completely consistent with that objective. Again I quote in part...
" 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"
http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

37 posted on 02/01/2011 9:58:34 AM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Hey. If The Kenyan can require you to buy health insurance, any state can require you to buy a firearm. Touche’.


38 posted on 02/01/2011 10:00:07 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Wow a law I can actually get behind!!!


39 posted on 02/01/2011 10:00:38 AM PST by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graneros

See post 37. The gov CAN constitutionally require you to own a gun. Period. Militia Act of 1792 was clearly constitutional.


40 posted on 02/01/2011 10:01:05 AM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector
It’s satire. Tongue-and-cheek. A wink and a nod.

After reading comments on this post and those on the original article, I'm beginning to suspect that you and I are the only ones that get the point and intent of the introduced legislation.

Do most people post comments based only on a headline or opening statement without reading the article? Sad really how many miss great points made by the use of satire and humor.

On the other hand, hard to fault them sometimes as the whole politcal process lately reads like something from the Onion!

41 posted on 02/01/2011 10:02:03 AM PST by sjmjax (Politicans are like bananas - they start out green, turn yellow, then rot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DTogo
Compulsory military service? Perhaps not a bad idea to whip some of the upcoming Yutes into shape and give them some dicipline.

Slavery.

How about compulsory euthanasia at 62? Save some big bucks. We'll it call it Social Security for the rest of us.

42 posted on 02/01/2011 10:02:29 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Mandatory national service in a militia is clearly constitutional, slavery or not. Of course slavery was constitutional at the founding. Nor has article 1 section 8 of the constitution been repealed. Learn some history.


43 posted on 02/01/2011 10:02:58 AM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RKV

enrollment.

That means those who signed up.


44 posted on 02/01/2011 10:03:08 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.stink-eye.net/forum/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

IF the law says I am entitled to a lawyer, and if I can’t afford one, they will give me one;
THEN if the constitution says I am entitled to a gun and can’t afford one, they should give me a gun.


45 posted on 02/01/2011 10:03:23 AM PST by zopilote (...circling, circling...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2

That is the point these lawmakers are trying to make. They have plainly said as much.


46 posted on 02/01/2011 10:04:40 AM PST by Clump (the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: paul51

Uhm, now you get the joke. That’s exactly why they did this.

But the difference is, states can impose mandates on their citizens - look at Romneycare.


47 posted on 02/01/2011 10:04:58 AM PST by Buckeye Battle Cry (At DiDi's Used Guns, if we can't kill it, it's immortal - DiDi Snavely, Proprietor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Can you read?
The law said "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."
Shall. Not may.

48 posted on 02/01/2011 10:06:01 AM PST by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

If this is mandatory...is it tax deductable....?


49 posted on 02/01/2011 10:06:48 AM PST by spokeshave (WTF....the only thing 0bambi's investments will get us is a bullet train to bankruptcy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CSM

I’m surprised at the number of FReepers who can’t seem to determine the difference between a State Government’s powers and those granted to the Federal Government.

That people who are known conservatives cannot make that distinction does not bode well for our Republic.


50 posted on 02/01/2011 10:07:06 AM PST by paladin1_dcs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-131 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