The legislation languished under retiring Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard, but Noem offered support for a so-called constitutional carry law during her campaign. Incoming GOP Sen. Lynne DiSanto, sponsor of a permitless concealed carry bill that Daugaard vetoed, said such legislation is likely in the upcoming session and she’s optimistic about its prospects.
“There are a lot of Republicans that are very excited to have a conservative governor,” said DiSanto, a state representative who is switching chambers. “I think under a new governor it’s very likely to pass.”
Daugaard has said the state’s current gun laws are reasonable. Right now, it’s a misdemeanor for someone to carry a concealed pistol or to have one concealed in a vehicle without a permit. At the end of October, there were nearly 108,000 pistol permits in South Dakota, according to the Secretary of State’s office [James Nord, “‘Constitutional Carry’ Supporters Await Noem Administration,” AP via Rapid City Journal, 2018.11.24].
Concealed pistols won’t raise any wages, fill any potholes, clean up any parks, or sell any soybeans. But they’ll make a bunch of ammosexuals feel less inadequate.
Get ready for four straight years of mis-prioritization in Pierre.
Well Jason, it would make it easier for the police to know who to shoot.
Debbo
2018-11-26 20:46
It’s just a little pointless pandering, while SD’s farmers continue to lose the farm at high rates. True, SDGOP didn’t cause the stupid tariff war, but you’d think looking for ways to help the state’s big, big industry would be something DiSanto and the rest of the SDGOP might have on their mind.
Oh wait. The SDGOP’s owners, Kochs, NRA, etc, don’t care at all about the farmers so neither does the SDGOP. I forgot.
RJ
2018-11-26 22:44
Can I drive my car without a license or insurance now?
Jason
2018-11-26 23:56
RJ,
What Article or Amendment in the Constitution does the right to drive show up at?
jerry
2018-11-27 00:04
Section 8, Article I
Jason
2018-11-27 00:08
When you lie Jerry, at least try to cite the Constitution the correct way.
Debbo
2018-11-27 02:13
Well Jerry, Jason is tight about one thing. He really knows lying. Maybe we should call him Manafort Junior. 😁
Debbo
2018-11-27 02:14
“Jason is tight?” Perhaps. “Right” in personal lying expertise, for sure.
Jason misuses the word “lie” here. When Supreme Court Justices write dissenting opinions, they do not say the majority is “lying”.
Now Al Novstrup—there’s a liar for you . ;-)
Jason
2018-11-27 07:26
Jerry is lying and has no legal authority backing up his claim.
Jason
2018-11-27 07:27
Study does not find population-level changes in firearm homicide or suicide rates in California 10 years after comprehensive background check and violent misdemeanor policies enacted
The Russian troll’s Russian Constitution is, Section 1, Article 9. In Roosskie, you go backwards in description. The Russian wanted to know and this is the only way to present it to him in as close to his native language as possible.
Jason
2018-11-27 07:33
I am so glad you represent Democrats and their intelligence in South Dakota Jerry.
Make your voice is heard for all of SD to hear. I suggest you go on the radio with Cory.
jerry
2018-11-27 08:06
I am delighted you represent Russia, where you get your paytroll check from.
Corey, you have a point as it relates to the state legislature’s priorities being backwards. Another way this initiative is backwards is that, as it relates to proposed gun laws, “constitutional carry” is one of the least popular, both in terms of the general population, and even among Republicans on the national level. Here’s a recent Pew Research poll on the subject:
I realize that this national poll doesn’t necessarily represent the average South Dakotans’ views fairly, but I’d argue that neither does our current Republican super-majority state legislature.
When only 8% of Dems and 27% of Republicans think constitutional carry is a good idea, maybe we can find a better use of our government’s time.
Jason
2018-11-27 12:46
North Dakota got rid of conceal permits and has had no problems.
Debbo
2018-11-27 13:48
I’m just so glad DiSanto and the SDGOP are focused on real SD problems like a $10 annual fee for a permit. Other issues are so petty. Farm bankruptcies, suicides, education deficiencies, high tuition costs, farm commodity prices, etc., absolutely pale in comparison. Really makes one appreciate the wisdom and compassion of the SDGOP.
TAG
2018-11-27 14:01
And “no problems” means, what, exactly? your own anecdotal observance of no mass shootings? ND has only had that law for a little over a year. Great sample size. Try to find some actual research that backs up your claim, that is not from a reputable source (not Breitbart or InfoWars).
“The most comprehensive, and arguably most
rigorous, study on the effects of [Right-to-Carry] laws was
recently published by economists John Donohue
(Stanford), Abhay Aneja (University of California,
Berkeley), and Kyle Weber (Columbia). Donohue
and colleagues found that violent crime rates
increased with each additional year a RTC
law was in place, presumably as more people
were carrying guns on their person and in their
vehicles. By years 7 through 10 following the
adoption of a RTC law, violent crime rates were
11% to 14% higher than predicted had such laws
not been in place.”
o
2018-11-27 14:58
Debbo, therein lies the rub, how does one run for office (or once elected, govern), yet not grapple with the issues that meaningfully affect the day-to-day lives of so many? Around here the solution is stir up the culture war or talk guns. I think this is more insidious, I think it is a calculated, strategized approach to keep other issues off the agenda.
Jason
2018-11-27 17:42
Tag,
What does mass shootings have to do with conceal carry permits?
As for your study, it’s flawed.
The bottom line is pretty clear: Since permit holders commit virtually no crimes, right-to-carry laws can’t increase violent crime rates.
Your study just proves how uneducated the professors are in Universities these days.
There is no law or background check that will stop someone from shooting another person.
Jason
2018-11-27 17:43
Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]
A gun has not been of direct utility to me since I was 12. Even then, on the few occasions when my fire felled an edible creature, if I had not shot, I still would have gone to bed with a full belly.
Guns provide minimal utility to the vast majority of citizens in 21st-century America. Concealed guns provide even less utility.
mike from iowa
2018-11-27 18:14
94% of 11% of the total active shooter scenarios. Jason the Troll makes the numbers pregnant by omission. 33 of the 283 active shooter scenes had armed citizens. And some of the numbers are admittedly guess work because FBI stats aren’t complete for the first 10 – 13 years of the study.
And FYI, the Black man in Alabama mall shot and killed by cops was a military veteran with a concealed carry permit who had been trying to help people keep from getting shot. Cops opened fire on him, claiming he was waving a gun around and running from the scene. Witnesses claimed he never had his gun out. His legal permit didn’t save his Black hide from those cops.
grudznick
2018-11-27 18:15
They can be fun, Mr. H. You can practice an activity that requires skill and hones the brain by shooting pieces of paper and nobody gets hurt. You can teach discipline and safety. Plus, yes, you can shoot and eat squirrels and the like. Or rid yourself of unwanted rodents in your field Guns are fun.
But don’t put me in the insaner club with Ms. DiSanto, please.
mike from iowa
2018-11-27 18:25
As for your study, it’s flawed.
What’s flawed, genius?
Debbo
2018-11-27 20:19
Let’s add to the $10 permits some laws that will help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people while not being a problem for law-abiding citizens.
For instance, no guns for domestic abusers, felons convicted of violent crimes, people with severe mental illness, for example. No automatic weapons or guns that can be easily converted to automatic firing, no magazines bigger than 6 rounds. These laws wouldn’t apply to cops.
IOW, Noem, SDGOP and Pootiepublicans are going in the exact wrong direction, but their owners, the NRA/Pootie, gave them their orders so off they go, like good little marionettes.
Jason, OS and probably Grudz will argue against reasonable laws because they get the same orders. Don’t ya boys? 😁
Funny, Grudz: I don’t hear the ammosexuals making the “fun” argument. I certainly hope no one is seeking to carry hidden bang-bangs in the Capitol just for fun.
One might even make an argument that “fun” is the wrong mindset when you’re carrying a lethal weapon.
grudznick
2018-11-27 20:48
You don’t think shootin’ paper targets for competition or popping rodents in the pasture is fun?!? I’m not talking about concealing your long arm or pistol to do this.
Sticking a Saturday night special in your underwear, like Mr. Nelson is wont to do, is not for fun. That’s for paranoia.
RJ
2018-11-28 21:32
Jason, I realize there isn’t a reasonable or logical way to respond to you as you are beyond hope..I brought up the car reference because every time I have alluded to the fact that guns kill people, people like you say “cars kill people to”. If you really want to get into a 2nd amendenment pissing contest, the 2nd amendment referred to literally having ammo in a shed far from the homestead. That’s it. In the meantime, if you can show me you have the maturity, wisdom and humanity to wield a weapon, fine. In the meantime, Sandy Hook happened. Hundreds of people innocent people are murdered on a daily basis and you are crying about having to have a permit about gun ownership
It’s also counterproductive for any gun owner who travels out of state. Other states can’t honor your permit if your state doesn’t issue them!
I just hope they refund the money current concealed carry owners spent to get their permit. Is there money in the budget for that??
Cory,
Would you rather have people open carry their guns which is legal?
Well Jason, it would make it easier for the police to know who to shoot.
It’s just a little pointless pandering, while SD’s farmers continue to lose the farm at high rates. True, SDGOP didn’t cause the stupid tariff war, but you’d think looking for ways to help the state’s big, big industry would be something DiSanto and the rest of the SDGOP might have on their mind.
Oh wait. The SDGOP’s owners, Kochs, NRA, etc, don’t care at all about the farmers so neither does the SDGOP. I forgot.
Can I drive my car without a license or insurance now?
RJ,
What Article or Amendment in the Constitution does the right to drive show up at?
Section 8, Article I
When you lie Jerry, at least try to cite the Constitution the correct way.
Well Jerry, Jason is tight about one thing. He really knows lying. Maybe we should call him Manafort Junior. 😁
“Jason is tight?” Perhaps. “Right” in personal lying expertise, for sure.
Jason misuses the word “lie” here. When Supreme Court Justices write dissenting opinions, they do not say the majority is “lying”.
Now Al Novstrup—there’s a liar for you . ;-)
Jerry is lying and has no legal authority backing up his claim.
Study does not find population-level changes in firearm homicide or suicide rates in California 10 years after comprehensive background check and violent misdemeanor policies enacted
https://health.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/13362
The Russian troll’s Russian Constitution is, Section 1, Article 9. In Roosskie, you go backwards in description. The Russian wanted to know and this is the only way to present it to him in as close to his native language as possible.
I am so glad you represent Democrats and their intelligence in South Dakota Jerry.
Make your voice is heard for all of SD to hear. I suggest you go on the radio with Cory.
I am delighted you represent Russia, where you get your paytroll check from.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/ Never trust a gun owner that has no idea what he’s talking about.
Corey, you have a point as it relates to the state legislature’s priorities being backwards. Another way this initiative is backwards is that, as it relates to proposed gun laws, “constitutional carry” is one of the least popular, both in terms of the general population, and even among Republicans on the national level. Here’s a recent Pew Research poll on the subject:
http://www.people-press.org/2018/10/18/gun-policy-remains-divisive-but-several-proposals-still-draw-bipartisan-support/
I realize that this national poll doesn’t necessarily represent the average South Dakotans’ views fairly, but I’d argue that neither does our current Republican super-majority state legislature.
When only 8% of Dems and 27% of Republicans think constitutional carry is a good idea, maybe we can find a better use of our government’s time.
North Dakota got rid of conceal permits and has had no problems.
I’m just so glad DiSanto and the SDGOP are focused on real SD problems like a $10 annual fee for a permit. Other issues are so petty. Farm bankruptcies, suicides, education deficiencies, high tuition costs, farm commodity prices, etc., absolutely pale in comparison. Really makes one appreciate the wisdom and compassion of the SDGOP.
And “no problems” means, what, exactly? your own anecdotal observance of no mass shootings? ND has only had that law for a little over a year. Great sample size. Try to find some actual research that backs up your claim, that is not from a reputable source (not Breitbart or InfoWars).
Here’s a good read from the Center for Gun Policy and Research at John’s Hopkins:
https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/publications/concealed-carry-of-firearms.pdf
“The most comprehensive, and arguably most
rigorous, study on the effects of [Right-to-Carry] laws was
recently published by economists John Donohue
(Stanford), Abhay Aneja (University of California,
Berkeley), and Kyle Weber (Columbia). Donohue
and colleagues found that violent crime rates
increased with each additional year a RTC
law was in place, presumably as more people
were carrying guns on their person and in their
vehicles. By years 7 through 10 following the
adoption of a RTC law, violent crime rates were
11% to 14% higher than predicted had such laws
not been in place.”
Debbo, therein lies the rub, how does one run for office (or once elected, govern), yet not grapple with the issues that meaningfully affect the day-to-day lives of so many? Around here the solution is stir up the culture war or talk guns. I think this is more insidious, I think it is a calculated, strategized approach to keep other issues off the agenda.
Tag,
What does mass shootings have to do with conceal carry permits?
As for your study, it’s flawed.
The bottom line is pretty clear: Since permit holders commit virtually no crimes, right-to-carry laws can’t increase violent crime rates.
Your study just proves how uneducated the professors are in Universities these days.
There is no law or background check that will stop someone from shooting another person.
Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]
https://www.concealedcarry.com/news/armed-citizens-are-successful-95-of-the-time-at-active-shooter-events-fbi/?fbclid=IwAR3yhYBYhuvgzk_XdB-qo33UyASUsaXJttvK94JDPNZfjglEbuJDLcJPkl0
Jason asserts: “. . . permit holders commit virtually no crimes. . . .”
I don’t know if this is true, but if it is, wouldn’t that constitute strong evidence that the permit system is working and thus should be retained?
A gun has not been of direct utility to me since I was 12. Even then, on the few occasions when my fire felled an edible creature, if I had not shot, I still would have gone to bed with a full belly.
Guns provide minimal utility to the vast majority of citizens in 21st-century America. Concealed guns provide even less utility.
94% of 11% of the total active shooter scenarios. Jason the Troll makes the numbers pregnant by omission. 33 of the 283 active shooter scenes had armed citizens. And some of the numbers are admittedly guess work because FBI stats aren’t complete for the first 10 – 13 years of the study.
And FYI, the Black man in Alabama mall shot and killed by cops was a military veteran with a concealed carry permit who had been trying to help people keep from getting shot. Cops opened fire on him, claiming he was waving a gun around and running from the scene. Witnesses claimed he never had his gun out. His legal permit didn’t save his Black hide from those cops.
They can be fun, Mr. H. You can practice an activity that requires skill and hones the brain by shooting pieces of paper and nobody gets hurt. You can teach discipline and safety. Plus, yes, you can shoot and eat squirrels and the like. Or rid yourself of unwanted rodents in your field Guns are fun.
But don’t put me in the insaner club with Ms. DiSanto, please.
As for your study, it’s flawed.
What’s flawed, genius?
Let’s add to the $10 permits some laws that will help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people while not being a problem for law-abiding citizens.
For instance, no guns for domestic abusers, felons convicted of violent crimes, people with severe mental illness, for example. No automatic weapons or guns that can be easily converted to automatic firing, no magazines bigger than 6 rounds. These laws wouldn’t apply to cops.
IOW, Noem, SDGOP and Pootiepublicans are going in the exact wrong direction, but their owners, the NRA/Pootie, gave them their orders so off they go, like good little marionettes.
Jason, OS and probably Grudz will argue against reasonable laws because they get the same orders. Don’t ya boys? 😁
Funny, Grudz: I don’t hear the ammosexuals making the “fun” argument. I certainly hope no one is seeking to carry hidden bang-bangs in the Capitol just for fun.
One might even make an argument that “fun” is the wrong mindset when you’re carrying a lethal weapon.
You don’t think shootin’ paper targets for competition or popping rodents in the pasture is fun?!? I’m not talking about concealing your long arm or pistol to do this.
Sticking a Saturday night special in your underwear, like Mr. Nelson is wont to do, is not for fun. That’s for paranoia.
Jason, I realize there isn’t a reasonable or logical way to respond to you as you are beyond hope..I brought up the car reference because every time I have alluded to the fact that guns kill people, people like you say “cars kill people to”. If you really want to get into a 2nd amendenment pissing contest, the 2nd amendment referred to literally having ammo in a shed far from the homestead. That’s it. In the meantime, if you can show me you have the maturity, wisdom and humanity to wield a weapon, fine. In the meantime, Sandy Hook happened. Hundreds of people innocent people are murdered on a daily basis and you are crying about having to have a permit about gun ownership