Explain a situation in which you think a state should be able to make a law without ANY interference from the federal government. Do not reply to others & DO NOT duplicate others ideas!
I do not think that the federal government has the right to instate building regulations. Every region of the United States has a different climate. The types of buildings reflect that. If the federal government ordered that every house in the U.S. have air conditioning, it would be a huge waste of money for people in Alaska where it's cold most of the time. Maybe in Kansas it is necessary to have a cellar in case of a tornado, where as it would make no sense to order that Rhode Islanders have a tornado cellar. There is some talk about making every new building in Rhode Island LEED(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified. It would be awesome if that was passed and would show great progress for our state. The federal government should NOT be allowed to over-rule this act or have any say in it whatsoever.
States should have the right to mandate the taxes of its residents. this is not the business of the federal government. the money from the state taxes goes toward funding things within the state. it goes toward everything from schools to roads. these are things that the federal government shouldn't be involved in because it doesn't concern them that the roads in wakefield are getting repaved and how much money that will cost.
The federal government should not have the right to interfere with any domestic issues within an individual state. If a specific child has the option of living with a family as a temporary situation, each state should decide if the child has the option of living with said family instead of being removed to a temporary shelter with other such children. Each child is an individual; however, there are hundreds of thousands of children without a home or a family. When faced with this huge problem, the federal government would not see each child's situation; they would see a mass of children who need homes. By having each separate state make their own laws regarding this issue, they could better protect the natural rights of the child.
The federal government does not need to make fishing laws for the country. Most of the country is land-locked first of all. If a law cannot be applied to every state then it is not the federal government's business. There are different fish species off the coast of each individual state. There are too many details that are specific to one state. It is much easier for the state governments to decide on the fishing laws because they do not have to worry about the different circumstances across the country.
Under no circumstances should the federal government interfere with a state's choice of whether or not they want to allow its people to own guns. Gun control should be entirely up to the states because every state has a different dynamic.
Say you live in a state like Texas where owning guns has become a way of life. If the government just decided to take that life away, those Texans would be outraged.
Take any farmer, shepherd or other man of the land. If they needed a gun to protect themselves or the animals that give them their lively hood, they should be able to use a gun regardless of whether or not some politicans think that they shouldn't.
On the oposite side of the spectrum, you have small towns in suburban areas. This is not a place where a gun is necessary and would probably make people feel less safe.
Then you have cities, where guns are owned for unlawful reasons. This is where a local government should be allowed to regulate gun ownership.
The broad span of opinion, location, and population, makes it impossible to impliment one, national law about the ownership of guns.
The federal government should have no choice on the issue of gay marriage from state to state. A particular state should make the decision based on the votes of it's citizens. The state of California recently voted that all marriages in the state that were performed are now not legal, and this was decided based on votes not the federal government. A state should be able to decided on there laws and citizen rights based on there own well being from it.
6 comments:
I do not think that the federal government has the right to instate building regulations. Every region of the United States has a different climate. The types of buildings reflect that. If the federal government ordered that every house in the U.S. have air conditioning, it would be a huge waste of money for people in Alaska where it's cold most of the time. Maybe in Kansas it is necessary to have a cellar in case of a tornado, where as it would make no sense to order that Rhode Islanders have a tornado cellar. There is some talk about making every new building in Rhode Island LEED(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified. It would be awesome if that was passed and would show great progress for our state. The federal government should NOT be allowed to over-rule this act or have any say in it whatsoever.
States should have the right to mandate the taxes of its residents. this is not the business of the federal government. the money from the state taxes goes toward funding things within the state. it goes toward everything from schools to roads. these are things that the federal government shouldn't be involved in because it doesn't concern them that the roads in wakefield are getting repaved and how much money that will cost.
The federal government should not have the right to interfere with any domestic issues within an individual state. If a specific child has the option of living with a family as a temporary situation, each state should decide if the child has the option of living with said family instead of being removed to a temporary shelter with other such children. Each child is an individual; however, there are hundreds of thousands of children without a home or a family. When faced with this huge problem, the federal government would not see each child's situation; they would see a mass of children who need homes. By having each separate state make their own laws regarding this issue, they could better protect the natural rights of the child.
The federal government does not need to make fishing laws for the country. Most of the country is land-locked first of all. If a law cannot be applied to every state then it is not the federal government's business. There are different fish species off the coast of each individual state. There are too many details that are specific to one state. It is much easier for the state governments to decide on the fishing laws because they do not have to worry about the different circumstances across the country.
Under no circumstances should the federal government interfere with a state's choice of whether or not they want to allow its people to own guns. Gun control should be entirely up to the states because every state has a different dynamic.
Say you live in a state like Texas where owning guns has become a way of life. If the government just decided to take that life away, those Texans would be outraged.
Take any farmer, shepherd or other man of the land. If they needed a gun to protect themselves or the animals that give them their lively hood, they should be able to use a gun regardless of whether or not some politicans think that they shouldn't.
On the oposite side of the spectrum, you have small towns in suburban areas. This is not a place where a gun is necessary and would probably make people feel less safe.
Then you have cities, where guns are owned for unlawful reasons. This is where a local government should be allowed to regulate gun ownership.
The broad span of opinion, location, and population, makes it impossible to impliment one, national law about the ownership of guns.
The federal government should have no choice on the issue of gay marriage from state to state. A particular state should make the decision based on the votes of it's citizens. The state of California recently voted that all marriages in the state that were performed are now not legal, and this was decided based on votes not the federal government. A state should be able to decided on there laws and citizen rights based on there own well being from it.
Post a Comment