South Dakota's Lawmakers Push Individual Mandate

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

South Dakota Lawmakers Push for Mandatory Gun Ownership (VIDEO)

www.guns.com/south-dakota-lawmakers-push-for-mandatory-gun-ownership-video.html

In the tradition of A Modest Proposal, five South Dakota lawmakers are pushing for a piece of legislation that would require all citizens, 21 and older, to purchase a firearm for self-defense.

The name of the bill is the “Act to provide for an individual mandate to adult citizens to provide for the self-defense of themselves and others.”

The bill has three sections: they are:

Section 1. Not later than January 1, 2012, each citizen residing in the state of South Dakota who has attained the age of twenty-one years shall purchase or otherwise acquire a firearm suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and personal preference sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.

Section 2. After January 1, 2012, each citizen residing in the state of South Dakota shall comply with the provisions of this Act within six months of attaining the age of twenty-one years.

Section 3. The provisions of this Act do not apply to any person who is disqualified from possessing a firearm pursuant to §§ 22-14-15, 22-14-15.1, or 22-14-15.2.

Sounds pretty reasonable, right?

Well, when Rep. Hal Wick (R-Sioux Falls), one of the sponsors of the bill, was asked about the true intent of H.B. 1237 he fessed up to its facetious nature but also underscored the larger political point the sponsors were making.

“Do I or the other cosponsors believe that the State of South Dakota can require citizens to buy firearms? Of course not. But at the same time, we do not believe the federal government can order every citizen to buy health insurance,” he said.

[Deleted]

Sadly I would go along with the requirement of firearms. Not so much with Obamacare.

[Mkitty is pro kitty]

Before Obama: WAHHH!!!1! Free Riders!!!!!1!

After Obama: WAHHH!!!!1! Freedoms!!!1!

[Don Perignon]

In their eagernes to mock President Obama, they make a mockery of themselves...
with a minimum of effort and a maximum of time wasted.

[Deleted]

In their eagerness to mock President Obama, they make a mockery of themselves...with a minimum of effort and a maximum of time wasted.

I tend to agree (somewhat) although I can see their point. They are more or less saying that if you can ignore the constitution & force people to do things then there is no stopping point & you can force them to do anything.

Now I don't consider it bad to force someone to have a gun to protect themselves but I'm sure that some of you do. Much like you consider it's not bad to force someone to buy health insurance, which I consider a total government abuse. Oddly the big difference that I see between the 2 points is that one side feels that it's their right & obligation to force the other side to do what's best for them in their judgment.

Looking at it that way, requiring guns makes even more sense. That way those that disagree have the ability to protect their rights.

As for using the words mock & Obama in the same sentence. I find it ironic that they are used in a positive light about Obama.