Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: South Dakota HB 1248 Needs Governor's Signature by March 19

  1. #1
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    South Dakota HB 1248 Needs Governor's Signature by March 19

    South Dakota HB 1248 is on Gov. Daugaard’s desk awaiting his signature. He has until March 19 to either sign or veto it.

    Gun Owners of America (GOA) strongly support this bill. I have been in touch with one of the co-sponsors of HB 1015, which was killed in committee. Rep. Betty Olson, SD District 28B told me that she took the original bill and added the requirement that residents must be 18 and hold a SD drivers license to carry a firearm without a state issued permit, because it was the only way to get the Bill out of committee.

    Rep Olson said she added that provision to address the concerns of law enforcement who were worried about motorcycle gangs coming into Sturgis, SD for the annual bike rally. Concealed carry permits from 29 states are honored in South Dakota at this time.

    Rep. Olson make it clear to me that she doesn’t believe it is Constitutional to require citizens to obtain a concealed weapons permit from the State in order to be keep and bear firearms. Rep. Olson concedes that HB 1248 is not perfect, but believes it’s a step in the right direction. It’s the best Bill that could get passed after HB 1015 (Constitutional Carry for all citizens) was killed in committee.

    On March 7, GOA sent out an alert to South Dakota members concerning SD HB 1248:

    A bill to allow all South Dakotans to carry a handgun without getting government permission is awaiting Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s signature.

    HB 1248 would allow all law-abiding citizens in the state to carry handguns as a matter of right — without having to submit to any obnoxious background checks or waiting periods. But while HB 1248 is a terrific bill, the Governor is not sure what he will do.

    “It is uncertain whether the Governor will sign the bill,” reports Bonzer Wolf, a Second Amendment activist who covers freedom issues. “Gov. Daugaard said Wednesday (February 29) that he has yet to examine it closely. The governor is required by law to sign or veto the law two weeks after he receives it.”

    ACTION: Please contact Gov. Daugaard and urge him to sign HB 1248.

    Click here http://sd.gov/governor/contact.aspx
    to access the Governor’s official web page , where you can write and make your views known.

    I urge all residents of South Dakota and law abiding citizens who support the inalienable right to keep and bear arms, to contact Governor Daugaard. Here’s an example of an email from GOA.

    Dear Gov. Daugaard:

    I would urge you to sign HB 1248.

    This is an important piece of legislation that allows all law-abiding citizens in the state to carry handguns as a matter of right — without having to submit to any obnoxious background checks or waiting periods.

    Criminals don’t wait in lines to get permits. They are always able to get their hands on firearms — even to the point of smuggling them into prisons.

    So please reaffirm my Second Amendment right to bear arms by signing this important bill, HB 1248. Gun Owners of America will keep me updated as to what happens. Thank you.

    http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?p=3757091
    Last edited by ccwinstructor; 03-15-2012 at 11:45 AM. Reason: I added the link to the article

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    residents must be 18 and hold a SD drivers license to carry a firearm without a state issued permit
    and that's what makes this not TRUE constitutional carry....same mistake WY made.


    “It is uncertain whether the Governor will sign the bill,” reports Bonzer Wolf, a Second Amendment activist who covers freedom issues. “Gov. Daugaard said Wednesday (February 29) that he has yet to examine it closely. The governor is required by law to sign or veto the law two weeks after he receives it.”
    I don't see SD having pocket veto option...so even if Gov doesn't sign, doesn't it become law by default?
    States don’t have rights. People do.

  3. #3
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    If Governor Daugaard does not veto it by 19 March, it becomes law

    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    and that's what makes this not TRUE constitutional carry....same mistake WY made.




    I don't see SD having pocket veto option...so even if Gov doesn't sign, doesn't it become law by default?
    I have done a bit of research. If it is not vetoed, it will become law. I suspect that the drivers license requirement will be challenged in court and rendered void.

  4. #4
    Regular Member XDSTEEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    216
    South Dakota did pass the firearms freedom bill so I think that if he doesn't sign it then he can at least say to the anti-gunners that he 'officially" signed it . Who knows, i am pretty confident though.
    Patrick Henry didn't say "Give me safety , or give me death". Liberty is what America is about.

  5. #5
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Only a couple of days to go.

    In the last two years it looked as though both Montana and New Hampshire were going to have Constitutional carry. Both were stopped at the last minute. Let us hope and work to add South Dakota to the list of Constitutional carry states.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    I have done a bit of research. If it is not vetoed, it will become law. I suspect that the drivers license requirement will be challenged in court and rendered void.
    My point to the drivers license requirement is that a non-resident will still need a permit even when this law passes....so it's not true ConCarry.
    States don’t have rights. People do.

  7. #7
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Your are correct, but it is a big step forward

    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    My point to the drivers license requirement is that a non-resident will still need a permit even when this law passes....so it's not true ConCarry.
    The court precedent is such that the drivers license requirement is unlikely to stand. If it is not challenged, we can work on it later.
    Last edited by ccwinstructor; 03-16-2012 at 03:00 PM. Reason: add wording for clarity

  8. #8
    Regular Member XDSTEEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    216
    I guess it is a No GO
    Patrick Henry didn't say "Give me safety , or give me death". Liberty is what America is about.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •