Legislative Watch -- Outlook 2004

More Pistol Permit Restrictions

It has become the perennial habit of several of the most anti-gun politicians in the South Dakota Legislature to devote part of their efforts to devising new restrictions for the concealed pistol permit.

Every few years, they come up with yet another bill discouraging South Dakota citizens from carrying firearms for self-defense. In the past they have tried restricting the age limit, disqualifying certain categories of people, creating a central registry to harass permit holders, and adding new requirements to make the permit more expensive and harder to obtain.

This year, anti-gun Rep Burt Elliot (D-Aberdeen) teamed up with notorious anti-gunners Rep. Tom Hennies (R-Rapid City), Sen. Gene Abdallah (R-Sioux Falls) and Sen. J.P. Duniphan (R-Rapid City) to unveil their latest scheme.

The bill was entitled “an Act to require photographs on concealed pistol permits and to increase certain related fees.” If it had passed, however, this legislation would have done far more than the title indicated.

Aside from pointlessly driving up the cost of the permit, it would have allowed any future Secretary of State to add new “requirements” which must be met before obtaining a pistol permit.

Restrictions such as fingerprinting, government mandated training, proficiency testing, or any number of other infringements already imposed on other states could have been bureaucratically imposed here with little or no accountability to the people of South Dakota.

Thankfully, the bill was defeated, due largely to the firestorm created by SDGO members from across the state.

Its sponsors took so much heat that Rep. Elliot actually asked his colleagues to kill the bill, at the same time hoping to “reach a mutually agreeable solution” by the 2004 Legislative session. In other words, a backroom deal to bring the bill back next year.

Considering the gun grabbing tendencies of Hennies, Abdallah and Duniphan, and their past animosity toward the right to bear arms, another such attack is more than likely in the upcoming Legislative session.

Governor Rounds’ Emergency Gun Grab

In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attack, the new Emergency Gun Grab law was quietly rammed through the Legislature during the 2002 session.

Supporters of this new law claimed that its seizure powers were necessary and would not be abused, dismissing all concerns as “over-reaction.”

During the 2003 session, concerned citizens and legislators offered a bill to remedy this dangerous situation. Their bill simply stated that no private property could be taken without the consent of the owner.

However, power hungry politicians decried this straightforward bill as “a major step backwards,” suggesting that the people cannot be trusted to help in an emergency. By voting the bill down, they removed all doubt that the Emergency Gun Grab was in fact intended to be a forcible seizure power.

Subsequently, Governor Rounds confirmed in a letter mailed earlier this year that the Emergency Gun Grab does indeed allow state officials to confiscate firearms when he suggested that seizing firearms from law-abiding citizens would serve the “greater good."

The Emergency Gun Grab is a dangerous threat to property rights and the right to arms. There is no longer any question that it would allow corrupt or over-zealous state officials to unjustly seize private property and even disarm the law-abiding when they most need to protect themselves.

SDGO is actively calling for legislation to effectively repeal the Emergency Gun Grab law without hampering the government’s ability to respond to emergencies.

Now is the time for gun owners to hold their lawmakers accountable, urging them not to accept any compromises that would allow the Emergency Gun Grab to continue endangering the peace and safety of South Dakota.

It is likely that the same power hungry politicians and state officials who opposed the Property Rights Act will attempt to silence gun owners by offering a weak exception for firearms in the place of a complete repeal of the Emergency Gun Grab. This would allow them to maintain the basic power to forcibly seize private property.

That is why gun owners must stand firm, refusing to compromise on this fundamental principle of liberty.

Recognizing the Right to Carry

The laws of South Dakota do not require you to obtain a permit before you carry a pistol, as long as you carry it in full view. Whether or not you are a citizen of this state, you can exercise your right to bear arms in this limited manner.

However, by state law, if you step into a vehicle with your pistol strapped to your hip, you are now guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

This is an outrageous denial of the right to arms. It does nothing to prevent crime, but actually encourages criminals by hindering and discouraging law-abiding citizens from bearing arms.

In states like Colorado, anyone can legally carry a handgun in their car without a permit. Because of the preemption law which Colorado passed this spring, this is now the case even in large cities like Denver.

Contrary to the anti-gun myths spouted by state and federal gun grabbers, there has been no increase in crime. In fact studies done in other places have proven that the crime rate drops whenever citizens are encouraged to carry firearms outside their homes and businesses.

SDGO is working on similar legislation in South Dakota.

Repeal State Registration and Waiting Period

South Dakota law currently requires you to register yourself at the time of a handgun purchase and then wait two days before taking possession of your new pistol.

Unless you have a concealed pistol permit in your possession, you must obtain the government’s permission to purchase a pistol by filling out an application that will be retained by local law enforcement.

The application must be complete with your name, address, occupation, place and date of birth, physical description, the date and hour of application, and several legal statements. You must then wait two days before you can begin to exercise your “right” to keep and bear arms.

The state waiting period is a holdover from the national 7-day waiting period imposed by the Brady Bill. This Clinton-era baloney has now become the so-called “Instant Check,” which in reality can sometimes take days to complete and which has become the perfect tool for federal firearms registration, allowing the BATF to keep records of every gun you purchase from a dealer.

It is intolerable that South Dakotans must not only undergo the Brady Instant Registration and complete the federal yellow sheet, they must also complete another application and register with local government and on top of that, wait two days before they can take possession of a handgun.

These requirements directly contradict the South Dakota constitution, which plainly states:

The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied. (Art. 6, sec. 24)

It is a well known maxim that “a right delayed is a right denied.” By this test, the waiting period is an obvious denial of the right to arms.

South Dakota Gun Owners is pursuing legislation to repeal the archaic state waiting period and the unconstitutional application for purchasing a pistol.

Return to News and Updates