Concealed carry bill: legilslature fails to override veto

Well it looks like I’ll need to go and get my concealed carry permit renewed. I was looking forward to not having the hassle of stopping in and getting a new permit. But Governor Daugaard and his staff had other ideas once they chose to veto the legislation. The House failed by a substantial margin to override the Governor’s veto.

I supported HB 1248 simply because the current law only penalizes law abiding citizens. How many people who break the conceal carry law care what the law is? Why do we always expect those who are honorable to pay in order to have the right to carry.

I have had a concealed carry permit since I purchased my first handgun. I’ve never taken a pistol across state lines or concealed it in public.

What Daugaard’s veto symbolizes is one more way the honest member of society must pay for their rights. As a responsible member of society, I will now pony up the money to the state in order to exercise a right criminals take advantage of.

11 Replies to “Concealed carry bill: legilslature fails to override veto”

  1. Arrowhead

    I was totally behind this bill and I don’t understand Daugaard not supporting it’s passage. It passed with 50 votes in the house initially.

    Count me in as stunned he doesn’t support this. I’m not upset but it’s very strange considering the fellons who carry aren’t going to follow the laws anyway he slices them.

  2. insomniac

    The only bill Daugaard had a right to veto was HB 1234. Otherwise I thought Olson, Brown, Lust and Rausch did a fine job in Pierre this session. In fact I give them substantially higher marks than the Governor.

  3. Anonymous

    THE NRA will be ready to go and kill those that do not support. Maybe we will get a 70% new membership. Then they will do what ordered to do.

  4. Clay Bill

    “What Daugaard?s veto symbolizes is one more way the honest member of society must pay for their rights. As a responsible member of society, I will now pony up the money to the state in order to exercise a right criminals take advantage of.”

    Bill, your comment could be interpreted to mean you favored this bill because it would allow you take advantage of the state just like a criminal. If you could demonstrate that stopping by your local sheriff’s office to obtain a conceal carry permit is too much of a burden for you and others, perhaps your argument might have merit.

    But I would imagine “criminals” probably like to go fishing without getting a license first. Just because law-abiding fishermen get a license each season doesn’t mean the state is taking advantage of them.

    The Gun Control Act passed by Congress in 1968 lists felons, illegal aliens, and other codified persons as prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms. During the application process for concealed carry states carry out thorough background checks to prevent these individuals from obtaining permits.

    That’s why this whole process is put in place. It’s not to make you “pay for your rights.” It’s to give law enforcement a process to keep the general public as safe as possible without putting an undue burden on members of the general population who desire to lawfully carry a weapon. The second amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. It doesn’t guarantee the right to break reasonable rules put in place related to various aspects of carrying weapons.

    1. scooby

      $10 is what I paid for my concealed weapon permit and I haven’t broken any laws.

      How much do you think a law breaking citizen pays to carry a concealed weapon?

  5. duggersd

    I have a conceal carry permit. It took me about 15 minutes of my time and a little cash to get it, much less than what it takes to get a drivers license. The law requiring you to get a permit does not interfere with your “right to carry”. You already have the right to carry. The only thing is you are not allowed to conceal it.

    1. scooby

      Unless it’s in your vehicle out shooting varmits and a coat falls over the top of it. Then it’s a concealed weapon.

    2. Anonymous

      duggersd,

      Don’t let your jacket fall over the top of your side arm or you are concealing that weapon.

      I would never be comfortable carrying a weapon in public. Maybe it’s that I live in SD and don’t fear getting mugged. But the legislature overwhelmingly passed the bill so I’m surprised Daugaard killed it.

    3. Les

      An important part of carrying, is carrying concealed. To allow others the knowledge of your weapon is opening the door to every type of individual who will put you at risk for carrying.

      That weapon can only be shown without recourse(knock on wood) if life is to be protected from a known(another knock on wood) mortal or serious harm threat.

      That being said on the open carry, I’ve had open carry come to my business to intimidate, which is the most basic reason to open carry. I will not tolerate open carry anywhere on my business property other than law enforcement as I don’t tolerate intimidation.

      Betty said our permit is good in 29 states and that is wrong. Our permit is hardly good anywhere because it doesn’t guarantee anything but a background check. The non recip states are more worried about us good guys shooting them up than the criminals that don’t permit.

      DD should have passed this bill and added language to provide class instruction for permitting, so we would have decent reciprocity. This is just another law targeting the honest citizens of SD and maybe 1 or 2 stupid felons.

      The ranks will be ready next year.

  6. Stace Nelson

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” The founding document of the United States of America?

    Our Constitution limits the government, not us! Our rights are explicitly supposed to be protected from the government:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Second Amendment, United States Constitution

    Militia, at the time of British occupation of the USA, and the drafting of the Constitution, meant anyone who literally could carry a gun to protect the community. The Americans who freed this country literally had to conceal their weapons from the British in order to retain them and avoid having them confiscated. By doing so, they were able to defeat the British.

    “On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” (Thomas Jefferson)

    “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied.” Article VI, Section 24 of the South Dakota Constitution

    I have walked the killing fields history witnessed in Germany, Cambodia, Vietnam, & China. Places where Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, & Ho Chi Minh wanted to make sure their victims did not have concealed weapons to defend themselves, their families, or their property.

    What is next? Permits for the most dangerous of our rights to government? Religion? Speech?