Does a 3-day waiting period violate your rights?

[M14 Shooter]

M14shooter opposes background checks to prevent felons convicted of gun crimes from buying guns;

given that information I made an educated guess that he opposes waiting periods as well.

Not surprisingly, you STLL haven't answred the question.

A waiting period that serves no other purpose than to expose the pregnant woman to propaganda is neither necessary nor appropriate.

Note that you STLL havent answered the question as to if it violates your rights.
And then, what of a waiting period that serves another purpose, such as this one?

 

[Article 15]

Your continued avoidance of the question says it all. Thank you.

Actually, it is you who is doing the avoiding. I bet you thought you had a slam dunk when you made this OP too

Look -- it violates your rights, or it doesn't
One you decide, let us know.
Until then, you're simply trying to avoid answering a question you don't want to answer - if all that's you want to do here, you should not have bothered to respond at all.
:shrug:

You trying to put two things on par with each other in order to make a point. You have yet to prove they are on par. Until you do your question is bullshit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Lets have a 3 day waiting period for all operations. Then it's fair.

Like an abscessed tooth. Give the dentist 3 days to talk you into that big money crown. lol

 

[M14 Shooter]

Actually, it is you who is doing the avoiding. I bet you thought you had a slam dunk when you made this OP too

Look -- it violates your rights, or it doesn't
One you decide, let us know.
Until then, you're simply trying to avoid answering a question you don't want to answer - if all that's you want to do here, you should not have bothered to respond at all.
:shrug:

You trying to put two things on par with each other in order to make a point. You have yet to prove they are on par. Until you do your question is bullshit.

Your avoidance of a simple question is duly noted.

 

[Article 15]

Look -- it violates your rights, or it doesn't
One you decide, let us know.
Until then, you're simply trying to avoid answering a question you don't want to answer - if all that's you want to do here, you should not have bothered to respond at all.
:shrug:

You trying to put two things on par with each other in order to make a point. You have yet to prove they are on par. Until you do your question is bullshit.

Your avoidance of a simple question is duly noted.

Your inability to prove parity between the two is duly noted.

I like this game.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not surprisingly, you STLL haven't answred the question.

A waiting period that serves no other purpose than to expose the pregnant woman to propaganda is neither necessary nor appropriate.

Note that you STLL havent answered the question as to if it violates your rights.
And then, what of a waiting period that serves another purpose, such as this one?

It would violate the rights established in Roe v. Wade because there is no overriding compelling interest that justifies the infringement of those rights.

 

[Article 15]

M14, if it were JUST a three day wait you would have something. You don't.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A waiting period that serves no other purpose than to expose the pregnant woman to propaganda is neither necessary nor appropriate.

Note that you STLL havent answered the question as to if it violates your rights.
And then, what of a waiting period that serves another purpose, such as this one?

It would violate the rights established in Roe v. Wade because there is no overriding compelling interest that justifies the infringement of those rights.

Wow. Big words. How do you know?

 

[M14 Shooter]

M14, if it were JUST a three day wait you would have something. You don't.

Your avoidance of a simple question is duly noted.

 

[Article 15]

M14, if it were JUST a three day wait you would have something. You don't.

Your avoidance of a simple question is duly noted.

Whenever you show parity I am prepared to answer.

The onus is on you.

 

[M14 Shooter]

M14, if it were JUST a three day wait you would have something. You don't.

Your avoidance of a simple question is duly noted.

Whenever you show parity I am prepared to answer.

You need no such illustration to answer.
You're simply avoiding the issue.
:shrug:

 

[Article 15]

Your avoidance of a simple question is duly noted.

Whenever you show parity I am prepared to answer.

You need no such illustration to answer.
You're simply avoiding the issue.
:shrug:

Sure I do. You want to compare the legislation in the OP with a three day wait to purchase a firearm. The problem is this legislation goes beyond that. You know it. I know it. And I'm not foolish enough to buy what you are selling.

 

[BlindBoo]

I thought the South Dakotans repealed the last 2 laws overwhemly-- all they are doing is making lawyers money-- I don't know why they vote in SD because the repubs and roger always bypass what the people voted for.

Read more: South Dakota Abortion Law Requires 3-Day Wait - (SD) - City-Data Forum

 

[NYcarbineer]

Note that you STLL havent answered the question as to if it violates your rights.
And then, what of a waiting period that serves another purpose, such as this one?

It would violate the rights established in Roe v. Wade because there is no overriding compelling interest that justifies the infringement of those rights.

Wow. Big words. How do you know?

Because no case has been made.

 

[VaYank5150]

Who does this 'counseling' and what guidelines do they use?

Three days of religious propaganda and an opportunity to pile on more guilt? Leave it to the 'Religious' Right to come up with this crap!

And anything about counseling being 'religious' or 'propaganda' was stated in the bill where???

You sure as fuck don't seem to be one that would mind piling on guilt when a maniacal murderer is given the death penalty

So, is South Dakota footing the bill for this counseling?

 

[M14 Shooter]

It would violate the rights established in Roe v. Wade because there is no overriding compelling interest that justifies the infringement of those rights.

Wow. Big words. How do you know?

Because no case has been made.

So...the state has no compelling interest in protecting the lives of the innocent by requiring someone to wait three days before they exercise a right that may very well affect said innocent lives?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Whenever you show parity I am prepared to answer.

You need no such illustration to answer.
You're simply avoiding the issue.
:shrug:

Sure I do. You want to compare the legislation in the OP with a three day wait to purchase a firearm. The problem is this legislation goes beyond that. You know it. I know it. And I'm not foolish enough to buy what you are selling.

Your continued avoidance is noted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wow. Big words. How do you know?

Because no case has been made.

So...the state has no compelling interest in protecting the lives of the innocent by requiring someone to wait three days before they exercise a right that may very well affect said innocent lives?

Constitutional law has determined that the fetus is not an 'innocent life' in the context you're using it, at least in the case of a 1st trimester abortion. The state can probably do this constitutionally with later term abortion.

 

[Article 15]

You need no such illustration to answer.
You're simply avoiding the issue.
:shrug:

Sure I do. You want to compare the legislation in the OP with a three day wait to purchase a firearm. The problem is this legislation goes beyond that. You know it. I know it. And I'm not foolish enough to buy what you are selling.

Your continued avoidance is noted.

I'm ready to answer when you prove that whenever I purchase a firearm, as part of the three day waiting period, I am required to meet with a counselor whose job it is to try and talk me out of buying said firearm.

 

[Nosmo King]

Who does this 'counseling' and what guidelines do they use?

Three days of religious propaganda and an opportunity to pile on more guilt? Leave it to the 'Religious' Right to come up with this crap!

Not surprisingly, you didn't answer the question.

I was asking questions. When in doubt, always refer to the punctuation marks at the end of the sentences. When you see something like this:? it always means that the writer is posing the question. Should you see a mark like this: . or this: ! the indication is the question is being answered.

That's what 12 years of public education and a further four years of study at a state university taught me.