New Mandate
By laglen
@laglen (19759)
United States
February 1, 2011 12:37pm CST
South Dakota lawmakers are proposing mandating all citizens over 21 must purchase a gun. At least this is an issue actually covered in the Constitution. Do you agree with this mandate? Why or why not?
http://www.argusleader.com/article/20110131/UPDATES/110131031/Bill-would-require-all-S-D-citizens-buy-gun
please note -
[i]Rep. Hal Wick, R-Sioux Falls, is sponsoring the bill and knows it will be killed. But he said he is introducing it to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year is unconstitutional.
“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.[/i]
2 people like this
3 responses
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
1 Feb 11
Well, they would actually have more justification for this, since it is the state legislature (which has significantly more authority and power than the federal government) doing this. they could cite that since it is not forbidden to that states nor enumerated to the federal government, it falls with in their authority.
They could also cite authority under article 15, subsection 2 of the South Dakota state constitution which states:
"Legislative provisions for militia."
"The Legislature shall provide by law for the enrollment, uniforming, equipment and discipline of the militia and the establishment of volunteer and such other organizations or both, as may be deemed necessary for the protection of the state, the preservation of order and the efficiency and good of the service."
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
1 Feb 11
I agree, it isn't a good idea. But I thought it was a good opportunity to point out the separation of powers built in to our system as well as the importance of not only the U.S. constitution, but the various states' constitutions that define in each state what their respective powers are with in those states.
I will also point out that if the interstate commerce clause can be stretched to allow congress to mandate the purchase of health insurance, then the "common defense" clause can be equally stretched to allow congress itself to mandate that every U.S. citizen purchase a fire arm.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
1 Feb 11
It's a good way to point out the idiocy of the mandate. I personally would have went with mandating a printing press, but that's just me. The only scary thing is that such a law is constitutional at the state level so if they actually pass it, there could be trouble.
1 person likes this
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
1 Feb 11
Having been born and raised in SD...way to go SD. I think they made the point about health insurance in a way most, but still not all, American citizens should be able to understand. Should my government be able to require me to buy anything...NOPE. And I don't want my government taking my money in taxes and then turning around and "giving" me something I wouldn't have bought on my own.
1 person likes this
