S.D. Bill Would Require Citizens to Buy a Gun

Newsroom America ^ | Jan. 31, 2011 | Jon E. Dougherty

[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."

[dynachrome]

Sounds good to me.

[facedown]

They must be Ann Coulter fans.

[RC one]

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

[MrEdd]

Just to help finish off Obamacare.

[Wolfie]

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

[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?

[cowboyway]

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.

[mmichaels1970]

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.

[Tucsonican]

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.

[artificial intelligence]

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.

[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.

[nina0113]

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

[Mad Dawg]

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.

[FourPeas]

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

[DadOfFive]

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

[Raider Sam]

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

[from occupied ga]

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

[bert]

-——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

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Only one? :)