Senator Al Novstrup doesn’t want to follow the rules to protect the public from coronavirus; but at least he’s willing to make a small rule change to increase our protection from gun violence.
Senator Novstrup (R-3/Aberdeen) is a co-sponsor to Representative Rocky Blare (R-21/Ideal)’s House Bill 1112, which would expand the safety zone over which landowners can control or prohibit the discharge of firearms from 660 feet to 900 feet out from their occupied buildings.
660 feet is probably plenty of distance to keep stray shotgun pellets from doing much harm. But there are plenty of hunting rifles that can kill out to 900 feet and further. Besides, why be hunting in sight of any occupied buildings? Hunting is about getting out into the outdoors, into the wilderness, if you can find it.
But let’s see what science Blare brings to House Ag and Natural Resources when HB 1112 gets its first hearing… and let’s see if the NRA or other gun nuts show up to attack this safety measure as a gun-rights scorecard killer.
One argument I would make is there’s a lot of public access hunting ground that adjoins ag and residential ground where that extra 80 yards would remove considerable and productive small game hunting ground. At 220 yards, #4 and #5 shot is expended; I’ve been peppered at that range and it’s annoying but not dangerous. Anybody exercising a modicum of consideration and safety protocol isn’t shooting towards livestock or homes anyway.
It’ll be interesting to hear about why the perceived need for the change.
All things considered, 41-9-1.1 is terribly written to be as convoluted as possible. Even with pre-law education, I’m having trouble interpreting where it does / does not apply.
Well let us see what minions the Governor sends to stomp upon the papers this law bill is written on.
As a South Dakota home owner in Marshall County, I have several uninvited hunter experiences in my domicile proximity. Not safe or plesant.keeping them at bay is smart legislation.
The present 660-feet law is far enough. There is no tremendous technological increase in the range or lethality of shotguns and small game rifles since the enactment of the 660-feet law.
One must consider the terrain. In the Black Hills and some areas 300 yards puts one 1 to 2 terrain features away from an occupied building. Also look at the unintended consequences. It’s likely that a 900-foot law yields the consequence of illegal baiting of game.
HB1112 appears as a bill in search of a problem. The ‘problem’ is even more remote given the long-term decline in hunters (even with the momentary increase due to the pandemic).
I would favor this bill. Living on the farm for the last 65 years, I have always dreaded the first day of hunting season, though I hold no philosophic qualms about shotgun ownership or small game hunting. It’s like what I imagine a war zone is like out there, I kept my kids in when they were small. But with today’s long gun culture, there are an awful lot of yayhoos out there who need some enhanced judgment rather than more and bigger ammo.
Predictably; “The courts can not find [out-of-state17 year old BLM AR15 shooter] #Kyle Rittenhouse. Prosecutors now want his [$2mn] bond for charges in two homicides….@WISN12News”
Long gun yahoos.
But Wayne’s “been peppered at that range and it’s annoying but not dangerous. Anybody [except Dick Cheney] exercising a modicum of consideration and safety protocol isn’t shooting towards livestock or homes anyway.”
Common sense in the field doesn’t always exist. That’s the point of “well regulated.”
I shot a neighbor across a large lake and the pellet welted his face just below his right eye. He was more than annoyed.