| Author | Post |
|---|
gsh341
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 8th, 2008 11:48 pm |
|
I can't believe this. Did the Board of Regents learn NOTHING from Virginia Tech?
http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/20...ls/HB1086P.pdf
HB-1086
Introduced by: The Committee on Education at the request of the Board of Regents
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to extend to postsecondary campuses certain protections relating to the possession of dangerous weapons.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. Any person, other than a law enforcement officer, who intentionally carries, has in the person's possession, stores, keeps, leaves, places, or puts into the possession of another person, any firearm, or air gun, whether or not the firearm or air gun is designed, adapted, used, or intended primarily for imitative or noisemaking purposes, or any dangerous weapon, on the premises of any postsecondary institution or any vehicle or building owned, used, or leased for postsecondary institution functions, is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Section 2. This Act does not apply to:
(1) Any starting gun while in use at an athletic event, and any firearm or air gun at a firing range, a gun show, or supervised school or session for training in the use of firearms;
(2) The ceremonial presence of any unloaded weapon at a color guard ceremony;
(3) Any weapon under the control of military personnel assigned to the South Dakota National Guard or to the Reserve Officers Training Corps; or
(4) Any weapon held in a weapon storage facility operated by the institution or any weapon being transported to or from such a storage facility. According to Article 6 (Bill of Rights) Section 24 of the SD Constitution:
According to Article 6 (Bill of Rights) Section 24 of the SD Constitution:
§ 24. Right to bear arms. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied.
This statement is CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS. I am a citizen of South Dakota and this bill would deny my right to be in a public place with my firearm, or even a knife, as a means of defense. I can't even have it in my car!!!
I'm writing my House Representatives about this worthless and unnecessary piece of crap. 
|
gsh341
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jan 8th, 2008 11:49 pm |
|
For those that would like all the pertinent info about SD Gun Laws and House Representatives, here they are.
House Reps can be found here:
http://legis.state.sd.us/index.aspx
SD Gun Laws are here:
http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/Di...tatute=0N-6-24
http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/Di...4&Type=Statute
http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/Di...e&Statute=23-7
http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/Di...tatute=13-32-7
The requirements for a Concealed Pistol Permit as per SDCL 23-7-7.1
23-7-7.1. Requirements for issuance of temporary permit--Time--Appeal of denial. A temporary permit to carry a concealed pistol shall be issued within five days of application to a person if the applicant:
(1) Is eighteen years of age or older;
(2) Has never pled guilty to, nolo contendere to, or been convicted of a felony or a crime of violence;
(3) Is not habitually in an intoxicated or drugged condition;
(4) Has no history of violence;
(5) Has not been found in the previous ten years to be a "danger to others" or a "danger to self" as defined in § 27A-1-1 or is not currently adjudged mentally incompetent;
(6) Has been a resident of the county or municipality where the application is being made for at least thirty days;
(7) Has had no violations of chapter 23-7, 22-14, or 22-42 constituting a felony or misdemeanor in the five years preceding the date of application or is not currently charged under indictment or information for such an offense;
( Is a citizen of the United States; and
(9) Is not a fugitive from justice.
A person denied a permit may appeal to the circuit court pursuant to chapter 1-26. Last edited on Tue Jan 8th, 2008 11:50 pm by gsh341
|
gsh341
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jan 9th, 2008 11:37 am |
|
Here is the letter I intend to send to my legislators. Please give me your input so I can improve it.
Mr. XXXX
I have recently learned that the current legislative session includes House Bill 1086, “An Act to extend to postsecondary campuses certain protections relating to the possession of dangerous weapons.” This bill has been introduced at the request of the South Dakota Board of regents and I wish to express my serious concerns about it.
The premise of the bill is to restrict the possession and carry of dangerous weapons on any postsecondary campus. The implied intent is to make our campuses safe from violent crime and I can assure you that this bill will accomplish the exact opposite. The massacre at Virginia tech and the shooting at the Westroads Mall in Omaha are two recent and tragic examples of what can happen in places declared by law as “Gun-Free Zones”. Laws prohibiting carry of weapons do not deter criminals intent on killing and violence. They encourage criminals because criminals are assured that their victims will be defenseless.
A recent example of legal possession of weapons working for the common good is the attempted killing spree at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, CO, where Jeanne Assam, a Sioux Falls native, stopped the killer with her own weapon.
Another area of concern is the constitutionality of this bill. Article 6, Section 24 of the South Dakota Constitution states, “Right to bear arms. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied.” A person is deemed to be a citizen of this state by Article 7, Section 2 of the South Dakota Constitution and able to carry a concealed pistol at the age of 18, barring disqualifying factors as listed in SDCL 23-7-7.1. Passing of this bill would violate the rights of citizens who are in a place they are legally allowed to be.
I urge you to defend the freedoms that all South Dakotans enjoy and work to prevent the passage of this bill.
I hope to hear from you on this matter.
|
computerguysd
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 18th, 2008 09:11 pm |
|
Thanks for the information, I hadn't heard about this before. I'll spread the word!
|
AmmoHouse
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 9th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 9th, 2008 09:30 pm |
|
I just heard about this, still reading all the fine print.
Even if they allow it...you'll never hear about it.
The only time it will come up is if something bad happens...never the good stuff!
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Mar 9th, 2008 10:10 pm |
|
gsh341 wrote: FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to extend to postsecondary campuses certain protections relating to the possession of dangerous weapons.
You might try asking them how rendering everybody defenseless is a "protection."
|
ScottRL63
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 10th, 2008 04:42 am |
|
Hey GSH how did it turn out? I was born in Sioux Falls. Adopted and lived in Aberdeen till i was 12. Been on the wet side of washington state ever since. Mom moved us out here after the divorce. last time i was home was in 91 for my dads funeral. Yes even though i have been out here most of my life i still call Aberdeen home. I just found out about this site on sunday after reading an artical in the local paper. I have noticed there isnt much traffic from South Dakotans on this site.
Scott
|
gsh341
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 29th, 2008 08:07 am |
|
HB-1086 was killed and never got voted on.
An opposing bill, HB-1261, that would have guaranteed the right to carry on campus passed the House by a HUGE margin, but was defeated in the Senate.
|
Current time is 10:48 am | |
|
