Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Aneristic Illusions => Topic started by: Cain on February 01, 2011, 05:09:38 PM

Title: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Cain on February 01, 2011, 05:09:38 PM
Apparently "not infringed" now means "mandatory"

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20110131/UPDATES/110131031/Bill-would-require-all-S-D-citizens-buy-gun?odyssey=mod|mostview

QuoteFive South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm "sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense."

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.

Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one "suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference."

The measure is known as an act "to provide for an individual mandate to adult citizens to provide for the self defense of themselves and others."

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.

I'm not sure this proves any kind of point whatsoever, except politicians in America are exceedingly stupid and partake in grandstanding with other people's money for shits and giggles.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Cramulus on February 01, 2011, 05:13:48 PM
South Dakota would be a good place to test the effects of mandatory gun ownership


Because pretty much nobody lives there.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 05:16:42 PM
FFS, just another peacock strutting his tail feathers. I wonder how much his stupid is costing the state?
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: hooplala on February 01, 2011, 05:22:14 PM
I guess we will all have to start shouting FIRE in crowded theaters.  I believe it is now mandatory, for preservation of Free Speech.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Faust on February 01, 2011, 05:44:39 PM
We call it the mutually assured destruction tactic.
We observed that on a global scale that while tense, the countries who held MAD over each other had little to no violent activity.
We want this to filter down through every level of society. With MAD in place on the streets we would see less purse snatching, less stabbings even less verbal disagreements.
No longer will you have to worry about someone bumping into you on the street when they are moody, they wouldn't dream of it when you can open fire on them in retaliation.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: AFK on February 01, 2011, 05:50:21 PM
Nevermind the fact that one is at the federal level and the other is at the State level.  You know, like that Health Care Reform thing they have going on in Massachussetts. 
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 05:54:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 05:16:42 PM
FFS, just another peacock strutting his tail feathers. I wonder how much his stupid is costing the state?

I fail to see a problem.  It's not like our states are insolvent, or anything.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 06:01:01 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 05:54:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 05:16:42 PM
FFS, just another peacock strutting his tail feathers. I wonder how much his stupid is costing the state?

I fail to see a problem.  It's not like our states are insolvent, or anything.

:lulz:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 06:07:30 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:01:01 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 05:54:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 05:16:42 PM
FFS, just another peacock strutting his tail feathers. I wonder how much his stupid is costing the state?

I fail to see a problem.  It's not like our states are insolvent, or anything.

:lulz:

See, that's why Arizona, which is laying off cops left and right, and had to sell it's capitol building, can afford to start immigration legislation that they know will lead to an incredibly expensive court case.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 06:13:27 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 06:07:30 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:01:01 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 05:54:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 05:16:42 PM
FFS, just another peacock strutting his tail feathers. I wonder how much his stupid is costing the state?

I fail to see a problem.  It's not like our states are insolvent, or anything.

:lulz:

See, that's why Arizona, which is laying off cops left and right, and had to sell it's capitol building, can afford to start immigration legislation that they know will lead to an incredibly expensive court case.

Things like this is why I doubt the U.S. has even 10 years left before full economic collapse.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 06:18:50 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:13:27 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 06:07:30 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:01:01 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 05:54:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 05:16:42 PM
FFS, just another peacock strutting his tail feathers. I wonder how much his stupid is costing the state?

I fail to see a problem.  It's not like our states are insolvent, or anything.

:lulz:

See, that's why Arizona, which is laying off cops left and right, and had to sell it's capitol building, can afford to start immigration legislation that they know will lead to an incredibly expensive court case.

Things like this is why I doubt the U.S. has even 10 years left before full economic collapse.

Optimist.  Rome was in the same boat in 50 BCE.  We have another couple of hundred years of flailing around like syphlitic idiots, I think, though life will get tougher within the next 20 years.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 06:23:02 PM
Well, personally Terri and I are officially insolvent now. Along with plentymillion of other Americans. I dunno where the states of the feds are going to get any more money.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 07:24:48 PM
You pull shit like this, the NRA gives you an A* rating and you get a nice block of retard single-issue fudds on your side.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:41:36 PM
Quote from: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 07:24:48 PM
You pull shit like this, the NRA gives you an A* rating and you get a nice block of retard single-issue fudds on your side.

The Fudds are feeling a mite confused, these days.

Michelle Bachmann's stated goal to slash the fuck out of the VA is causing po'bucker heads to explode all over America.  On one hand, she's openly fucking the troops.  On the other, she's on "their side", and they don't know what to do.

Expect even weirder behavior and/or legislation as the year grinds on.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:45:14 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:23:02 PM
Well, personally Terri and I are officially insolvent now. Along with plentymillion of other Americans. I dunno where the states of the feds are going to get any more money.

Charley, it's never to early to resort to cannibalism.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 07:54:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:45:14 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:23:02 PM
Well, personally Terri and I are officially insolvent now. Along with plentymillion of other Americans. I dunno where the states of the feds are going to get any more money.

Charley, it's never to early to resort to cannibalism.

I would have to breed my own organic models. Most Americans are too marbled from eating all that fat.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:55:06 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 07:54:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:45:14 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:23:02 PM
Well, personally Terri and I are officially insolvent now. Along with plentymillion of other Americans. I dunno where the states of the feds are going to get any more money.

Charley, it's never to early to resort to cannibalism.

I would have to breed my own organic models. Most Americans are too marbled from eating all that fat.

Useful for candles and soap.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 07:57:31 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:55:06 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 07:54:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:45:14 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:23:02 PM
Well, personally Terri and I are officially insolvent now. Along with plentymillion of other Americans. I dunno where the states of the feds are going to get any more money.

Charley, it's never to early to resort to cannibalism.

I would have to breed my own organic models. Most Americans are too marbled from eating all that fat.

Useful for candles and soap.

Project time.

1,001 uses for dead humans.

:lulz:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 10:04:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:41:36 PM
The Fudds are feeling a mite confused, these days.

Michelle Bachmann's stated goal to slash the fuck out of the VA is causing po'bucker heads to explode all over America.  On one hand, she's openly fucking the troops.  On the other, she's on "their side", and they don't know what to do.

Expect even weirder behavior and/or legislation as the year grinds on.

"Well, lady politicians was a nice experiment and all..."
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 10:14:08 PM
Quote from: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 10:04:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:41:36 PM
The Fudds are feeling a mite confused, these days.

Michelle Bachmann's stated goal to slash the fuck out of the VA is causing po'bucker heads to explode all over America.  On one hand, she's openly fucking the troops.  On the other, she's on "their side", and they don't know what to do.

Expect even weirder behavior and/or legislation as the year grinds on.

"Well, lady politicians was a nice experiment and all..."

Sarah Palin.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Cain on February 01, 2011, 10:21:33 PM
Ann Coulter has argued before that women, as emotional and thus untrustworthy voters for the Democrats, should not be allowed to vote.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 10:23:31 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 10:14:08 PM
Sarah Palin.

You think she'll come out of punditry?
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Adios on February 01, 2011, 10:29:20 PM
Quote from: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 10:23:31 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 10:14:08 PM
Sarah Palin.

You think she'll come out of punditry?

No, but it won't matter. She isn't preaching at intelligent people.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 02, 2011, 12:07:34 AM
a city did this before.
still on the books as far as i know.
ah. here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#Gun_law
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Phox on February 02, 2011, 12:12:26 AM
 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: East Coast Hustle on February 02, 2011, 06:07:31 AM
I'm actually in favor of this on a national level, though not for the same reasons as this yahoo from South Nowhere.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Remington on February 02, 2011, 06:52:03 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 07:57:31 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:55:06 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 07:54:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:45:14 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 01, 2011, 06:23:02 PM
Well, personally Terri and I are officially insolvent now. Along with plentymillion of other Americans. I dunno where the states of the feds are going to get any more money.

Charley, it's never to early to resort to cannibalism.

I would have to breed my own organic models. Most Americans are too marbled from eating all that fat.

Useful for candles and soap.

Project time.

1,001 uses for dead humans.

:lulz:

63. Novelty cup-holders

277. Modern Art

573. Scratching post for cats

668. Zombie bait

837. Ballast

954. Traditional Chinese cuisine ingredient

1001. Projectile
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Slyph on February 02, 2011, 07:34:47 AM
I want to put a rider on this ensuring that everyone living at the homeless shelters gets a gun for free. No Hand Left Unfilled!
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 02:23:23 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 06:07:31 AM
I'm actually in favor of this on a national level, though not for the same reasons as this yahoo from South Nowhere.

A nation of armed neurotics is a polite nation.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: East Coast Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Whatever on February 02, 2011, 05:40:38 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

I think they must be doing it wrong.....  :wink:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Reginald Ret on February 02, 2011, 07:29:14 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.
Correction:
People fuck faster when you shoot at them.
Those that survive anyway.
Also, shooting others makes people fuck faster too.
Basically people fuck faster when they're stressed.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Luna on February 02, 2011, 07:38:39 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

You've met my husband, I see.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 07:44:52 PM
Quote from: Luna on February 02, 2011, 07:38:39 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

You've met my husband, I see.

:lulz:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Whatever on February 02, 2011, 08:40:49 PM
I ummm, well, it's completely humiliating to admit, but I've never fucked while being shot at, while shooting at others, or while others were being shot at around me.....  :oops:

I did not realize this was something that happened on the regular...

:cry:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Cain on February 02, 2011, 08:44:05 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

Yeah, but at least you'll get a 16 year or so break.  Until they get their licences.

Unless, of course, in the meantime the GOP decide driving licences are a sign of liberal fascism and the creeping Sovietization of America.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Phox on February 02, 2011, 08:47:18 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 08:44:05 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

Yeah, but at least you'll get a 16 year or so break.  Until they get their licences.

Unless, of course, in the meantime the GOP decide driving licences are a sign of liberal fascism and the creeping Sovietization of America.
You mean they aren't? :?
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Jenne on February 03, 2011, 05:33:24 PM
Quote from: Slyph on February 01, 2011, 10:04:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 01, 2011, 07:41:36 PM
The Fudds are feeling a mite confused, these days.

Michelle Bachmann's stated goal to slash the fuck out of the VA is causing po'bucker heads to explode all over America.  On one hand, she's openly fucking the troops.  On the other, she's on "their side", and they don't know what to do.

Expect even weirder behavior and/or legislation as the year grinds on.

"Well, lady politicians was a nice experiment and all..."

\
  \
    :mullet:
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Luna on February 03, 2011, 06:09:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 08:44:05 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

Yeah, but at least you'll get a 16 year or so break.  Until they get their licences.

Unless, of course, in the meantime the GOP decide driving licences are a sign of liberal fascism and the creeping Sovietization of America.

Um...

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/01/5967950-georgia-rep-would-end-drivers-licenses

QuoteGeorgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin is sponsoring the Right to Travel Act, which includes this clause:   

   
QuoteFree people have a common law and constitutional right to travel on the roads and highways that are provided by their government for that purpose. Licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of an inalienable right. 

He can't be serious, right?

"One of your inalienable rights is the right to travel, the right to move about without needing your papers," Franklin told WSB in Atlanta. "You shouldn't have to have permission from the state to exercise a right that has been inalienably given to you from your creator."   

At least one of 'em is already on it.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on February 03, 2011, 09:36:32 PM
Quote from: Luna on February 03, 2011, 06:09:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 08:44:05 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

Yeah, but at least you'll get a 16 year or so break.  Until they get their licences.

Unless, of course, in the meantime the GOP decide driving licences are a sign of liberal fascism and the creeping Sovietization of America.

Um...

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/01/5967950-georgia-rep-would-end-drivers-licenses

QuoteGeorgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin is sponsoring the Right to Travel Act, which includes this clause:  

   
QuoteFree people have a common law and constitutional right to travel on the roads and highways that are provided by their government for that purpose. Licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of an inalienable right.  

He can't be serious, right?

"One of your inalienable rights is the right to travel, the right to move about without needing your papers," Franklin told WSB in Atlanta. "You shouldn't have to have permission from the state to exercise a right that has been inalienably given to you from your creator."  

At least one of 'em is already on it.

I wonder why that guy's voting record (http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=17584&type=category&category=40&go.x=17&go.y=7) shows him as being tough on illegal immigrants.

Also,
Quote
Georgia

Key Vote
(How all members voted)

Increasing Penalties for Driving Without a License

Key Votes:
SB 350 (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=19481)
...
Rep. Bobby Franklin (http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=17584)   Republican   Y
From here (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=18670&can_id=17584).

Flip-flopper.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Luna on February 03, 2011, 09:43:38 PM
Didn't you know?  Only Americans have God-given rights.

And those increased penalties?  Well, that was WAY back in 2008, didn't you know it's against conservative principles to actually look back more than a month at voting records to determine a politician's standing on any issue?
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on February 03, 2011, 09:46:40 PM
Quote from: Luna on February 03, 2011, 06:09:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 08:44:05 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:39:13 PM
Quote from: Rip City Hustle on February 02, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
I just figure it will eventually cause a serious reduction in my commute time.

This is unfortunately incorrect.  History has shown that people fuck faster than you can shoot them.

Yeah, but at least you'll get a 16 year or so break.  Until they get their licences.

Unless, of course, in the meantime the GOP decide driving licences are a sign of liberal fascism and the creeping Sovietization of America.

Um...

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/01/5967950-georgia-rep-would-end-drivers-licenses

QuoteGeorgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin is sponsoring the Right to Travel Act, which includes this clause:   

   
QuoteFree people have a common law and constitutional right to travel on the roads and highways that are provided by their government for that purpose. Licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of an inalienable right. 

He can't be serious, right?

"One of your inalienable rights is the right to travel, the right to move about without needing your papers," Franklin told WSB in Atlanta. "You shouldn't have to have permission from the state to exercise a right that has been inalienably given to you from your creator."   

At least one of 'em is already on it.

We already have the freedom to travel without papers... we simply don't have the freedom to operate a motor vehicle in public without a license.

If you never drive, you can get all around the country without 'papers'.

Stupid GOP.
Title: Re: Novel interpretations of the 2nd Amendment
Post by: navkat on February 06, 2011, 10:05:52 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 01, 2011, 05:09:38 PM
Apparently "not infringed" now means "mandatory"

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20110131/UPDATES/110131031/Bill-would-require-all-S-D-citizens-buy-gun?odyssey=mod|mostview

QuoteFive South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm "sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense."

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.

Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one "suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference."

The measure is known as an act "to provide for an individual mandate to adult citizens to provide for the self defense of themselves and others."

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.

I'm not sure this proves any kind of point whatsoever, except politicians in America are exceedingly stupid and partake in grandstanding with other people's money for shits and giggles.

The first thing that occurred to me was that there's probably a giant portion of supporters of this bill who don't get the troll and will therefore, be genuinely disappointed when it doesn't pass.