If you already have state preemption and a straightforward constitutional amendment why would you seek another piece of legislation instead of enforcing what you already have? If you need a firearm protection statute when you already have a firearm protection statute (preemption) that local governments are ignoring what good would another law do? Seems to me the local government needs to be sued to have their illegal ordinances removed since you already have the preemption that says they can't regulate the carrying of firearms. I'm not familiar with SD preemption or your constitutional amendment but it would be nice if you posted links to these two documents so everyone could take a look at them.