Bill would require all SD citizens to buy a gun

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by M14 Shooter, Feb 1, 2011.

  1. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    20,096
    Thanks Received:
    1,747
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Ratings:
    +4,479
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  2. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Clapping for a new form of taxation?
    Just as long as you are not required to buy govt mandated health ins.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  3. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Well not really.

    Maybe SD wants to get rid of police..and their national guard.

    Having an armed citizenry that is responsible for defense was original intent.

    So I am sure they will be forming militias and receiving training and supervision from the Congress.
     
  4. Sarah G
    Offline

    Sarah G When Nothing Goes Right, Go Left Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    47,637
    Thanks Received:
    11,826
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    NW Ohio
    Ratings:
    +23,981
    What kind of extremist, gun happy bill is that?

    Taking time travel back to the wild wild West? :cuckoo:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Dr.Traveler
    Offline

    Dr.Traveler Mathematician

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,925
    Thanks Received:
    650
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    In a Non-Euclidean Manifold
    Ratings:
    +1,047
    So its a good thing it turned out to be Constitutional to require people to buy into healthcare....

    Wait a minute....
     
  6. xotoxi
    Offline

    xotoxi Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    30,322
    Thanks Received:
    5,203
    Trophy Points:
    1,110
    Location:
    your mother
    Ratings:
    +5,492
    I was wondering the same thing.

    Pretty soon, we'll be seeing a bill that ensures that every citizen shop at Walmart once each quarter.
     
  7. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Close already since Wal Mart sells guns.
     
  8. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Naw..it's not that unusual..

    That's the real reason for the second amendment..by the way.:eusa_whistle:
     
  9. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,153
    I understand that this is difficult for some of you on the left to understand. But States have much broader power than the Federal Government.

    You see the Federal Government is a government of limited jurisdiction. It can only act in areas where they are given explicit power. Mandating anyone purchase something is not within their powers.

    A state government, on the other hand, is given extremely broad powers. Any power not given to the Federal Government is reserved for the States. Thus, unless their state constitution prohibits requiring people to purchase something, the state can pass such a law according to the desires of the people.

    Personally, I think requiring anyone to buy something is wrong, regardless of what level of government is requiring it. But simply because I think it's wrong doesn't mean it's unconstitutional.

    It's clearly unconstitutional at the Federal Level. I'm not familiar with South Dakota's Constitution, but if they have nothing prohibitting it, then it's clearly constitutional even if it's stupid.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2011
  10. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Not at all true.

    The Federal government doesn't have explicit enumerated powers.
     

Share This Page