Bill Requring Gun Ownership Introduced in South Dakota

One of the main arguments against the health care reform law is that it requires people to buy health care insurance no matter if they want or need it. Judge Vinson very ably used this argument to declare the law, also known as Obamacare, unconstitutional.

The practical argument is that if the government has the power to make someone buy one product or service, it would have the power to compel people to buy any product or service. Perhaps in the spirit of proving that point, five members of the South Dakota State Legislature have introduced a bill requiring all adult residents of the state to own a gun. People who by law are forbidden to own fire arms, say people with criminal records, are exempt from the law.

The bill is offered in a bit of whimsy, but also to make a point to people who might think that requiring people to have health insurance would be a good idea. One suspects that such people are disproportionately in favor of restrictions on hand gun ownership and would take it amiss if they were required to own a fire arm.

Mind, one could argue that a well-armed citizenry would be a deterrent to crime. Imagine if the South Dakota bill was to actually become law and it were combined with a concealed carry law. Anyone thinking of robbing a convenience store or car-jacking someone would have to factor in the possibility of being fired upon by customers and passersby.

Some people would consider the proposal of such a law, even made in jest, as somewhat in bad taste considering the Tucson shooting. But what if more people in that Safeway parking lot had been carrying heat and had been trained in the proper use thereof? Jared Loughner might have gotten off a shot or two before being drilled by the surrounding people. If someone had been alert, Loughner might have been dropped before he could put a bullet in Gabrielle Giffords' brain and the Congresswoman would have been spared a great deal of pain and suffering, not to mention the courts of Arizona a great deal of time and expense.

The bill requiring gun ownership is not going to pass, which is too bad. It would be interesting to have at least one state of the Union be used as an experiment in what would happen if everyone had a gun. High Noon on the freeways? Or an era of peace, tranquility, and good manners? One imagines it would be the latter more than the former.

Source: Bill would require all S.D. citizens to buy a gun, Jonathon Ellis, Argus Leader, January 31st, 2011