Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard on Friday vetoed a bill that would have allowed any resident 18 and older with a valid state drivers' license to carry a concealed handgun without having to obtain a permit.

South Dakota leads the nation in CC permits issued per capita with 7.4% of the population having a permit.

Guess I'll be heading down to the sherriff's office in June to renew my permit. I really don't have a problem doing this every four years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
If someone has had their right to carry revoked they shouldn't be in public. If we are going to allow them in public the state issued ID should contain info stating that they can't carry or vote. Then anyone with a state ID can buy or carry a gun no check needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
I don't know but we let pedophiles, rapists and other violent criminals out and let them have DLs so until that kind of thing changes I would have a hard time voting for it too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,348 Posts
That's too bad. South Dakota is generally a firearms friendly state. The gov even said so when he was encouraging Northeast gun manufacturers to move to South Dakota. Go figure....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
I have my ccw and carry whereever i can legaly (i work on ft. Campbell and can not carry on a militay base) and agreewith the govener. You should a training class and have to qualify to show you are safe to carry and hit what you aim at if you ever have to shoot. Just because you can drive does not mean you are safe to carry a loaded gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
I struggle with this since i'm wanting freedoms for the people but lets face it, there are people out there that shouldn't drive and yet they have a license.

To let them carry a firearm with out training and license seems like a bad idea to me too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I can't say I disagree with the veto. Not every person with a DL deserves to carry a gun. In Mississippi we don't have the hardest application process in the country but it does require much more than just having a DL. We have to fill out and notarize the correct forms, attach a photo, pay a hefty fee and be finger printed and pass a full background check. If you are clear the license arrives in your mailbox in 45-60 says.

I wouldn't have minded if they added a mandatory safety course to those requirements like other states. I take seriously the responsibility that comes with carrying a firearm. I want to be required to go through more than trip to the DMV .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,348 Posts
I totally agree with all of you guys. It is foolish to issue this permit without some kind of training required. A lot of states have mandatory training in a CCW class, and I think that's a good thing. Look at how much training we receive in the military with our firearms. How could we expect to make good choices and shoot well if we were never even shown how to do it? With great freedom comes great responsibility, and I do not believe the government is overstepping its bounds by requiring training for this license.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
I struggle with this since i'm wanting freedoms for the people but lets face it, there are people out there that shouldn't drive and yet they have a license.

To let them carry a firearm with out training and license seems like a bad idea to me too.
Well, that seems to run smack dab into that phrase "shall not be infringed".

Do you feel it is appropriate to abandon literal constitutional requirements in cases where you feel comfortable?

Do you care if any other rights are similarly curtailed in the interests of mental comfort?

I usually ask if you might have a suggestion as to how 2A should be amended to meet your concerns.

Take note that i am not saying your opinion is wrong - I simply do not wish to accommodate your willingness to sit on the fence and makes these principles arbitrary when you are personally comfortable. Nor do I mean to pick on you - there are other posters sharing your sentiments; they can help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,717 Posts
People who are not incarcerated should be allowed to carry firearms. No exceptions. If you are judged through due process to be a danger to society you should not be walking freely in the first place. Once your time is served you have paid your debt to society and all rights restored.

In my opinion the Governor wimped out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
I totally agree with all of you guys. It is foolish to issue this permit without some kind of training required. A lot of states have mandatory training in a CCW class, and I think that's a good thing. Look at how much training we receive in the military with our firearms. How could we expect to make good choices and shoot well if we were never even shown how to do it? With great freedom comes great responsibility, and I do not believe the government is overstepping its bounds by requiring training for this license.
Ive lived in this state for some years now and hold a CCW permit in SD, which doesn't require mandatory training.

Guess what, bullets aren't zinging around Sioux Falls from permit holders negligently mishandling their weapons. Its vastly different from my former home of Chicago, Illinois, where there's a training requirement just to OWN a handgun and yet 10 people die weekly in gunfights.

As far as the Governor's decision,Im pained to say it wasn't totally without merit. Unlike many other Constitutional Carry states like Vermont and others, South Dakota has something those states don't: Sturgis.

For those not in the know the Sturgis Bike Rally is held annually in the Black Hills of South Dakota. 250,000 souls cram into the sleepy hamlet of Sturgis, SD for about a week for some good old fashioned bike-related hedonism. The town becomes a miniature of Las Vegas , except the entire city is filled with bikers and tourists from all over the world. People drive from foreign countries to attend this rally. The week before the rally the entire westbound side of I90 is filled to the breakdown lanes with black Harleys and custom choppers, and the week after the eastbound lanes get clogged with bikes.

This rally doubles the population of the entire state for a week, and easily overtaxes the LE resources of South Dakota. Ive been to Sturgis, and there's enough shady activity and people around to justify an ID for CCW. When you have 1/4 of a million bikers in close proximity for 7+ days having a CCW card to show LE that you're not some biker club thug or 1% er with a warrant cuts down on a lot of problems.Sturgis rally isn't the place you go unarmed, and yet police in that area are quite naturally on edge having to keep order against that kind of crowd. Life is easier for citizen and constable alike when everyone has ID to prove they're one of the good guys.

On top of that , Rapid City has an active tourism market on account of both Sturgis and MT. Rushmore. People from all over the nation drive into that city , some of whom are from places where even touching a handgun is illegal without a state issued permit.I remember the shocked reaction of a New Jersey couple when they came into the First Stop gun shop.

They had their jaws on the floor at the number of guns up for sale. Of course to yours truly its just another gun store, but places like First Stop don't exist in Camden NJ. At the statement by the clerk that nearly every man at the counter had a concealed weapon, the husband of the NJ couple hustled out the door in indignation. I mention this tale because if South Dakota passed constitutional CC, there's little doubt they'd be kind of the people who would call 911 on me and others minding our own business.

Third, the CCW law is one of the best in America. Pass the same NICS check you'd need to own a gun to start with, pay $10 at the Sheriffs office, and you walk out with a valid pistol permit *on the spot*.

Not 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, or 365 days later. Immediately.

Quite frankly waiting 10 minutes and paying $10 for an on the spot state CCW permit after a nominal BG check isn't what i'd consider infringement of my civil rights. I had harder time getting a South Dakota drivers license than getting a permit to carry, and that's the way it should be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wino

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,717 Posts
As far as the Governor's decision,Im pained to say it wasn't totally without merit. Unlike many other Constitutional Carry states like Vermont and others, South Dakota has something those states don't: Sturgis.

For those not in the know the Sturgis Bike Rally is held annually in the Black Hills of South Dakota. 250,000 souls cram into the sleepy hamlet of Sturgis, SD for about a week for some good old fashioned bike-related hedonism. The town becomes a miniature of Las Vegas , except the entire city is filled with bikers and tourists from all over the world. People drive from foreign countries to attend this rally. The week before the rally the entire westbound side of I90 is filled to the breakdown lanes with black Harleys and custom choppers, and the week after the eastbound lanes get clogged with bikes.

This rally doubles the population of the entire state for a week, and easily overtaxes the LE resources of South Dakota. Ive been to Sturgis, and there's enough shady activity and people around to justify an ID for CCW. When you have 1/4 of a million bikers in close proximity for 7+ days having a CCW card to show LE that you're not some biker club thug or 1% er with a warrant cuts down on a lot of problems.Sturgis rally isn't the place you go unarmed, and yet police in that area are quite naturally on edge having to keep order against that kind of crowd. Life is easier for citizen and constable alike when everyone has ID to prove they're one of the good guys.

On top of that , Rapid City has an active tourism market on account of both Sturgis and MT. Rushmore. People from all over the nation drive into that city , some of whom are from places where even touching a handgun is illegal without a state issued permit.I remember the shocked reaction of a New Jersey couple when they came into the First Stop gun shop.
My response to both is so what. So what if out of towners are shocked. Thats their problem. They don't have a right not to be shocked, you do have a right to protect yourself and use a firearm to do it.

And to Sturgis. If it does tax the man power of law enforcement wouldn't it be best to make it as easy as possible for the citizens to carry? Or is it better to have only the bad guys carrying? I have a suspicion that if there is a crowd up to no good they are going to be carrying anyway. The only ones not carrying are going to be the law abiding people. To me the argument posed by Sturgis is a reason to have no qualifications rather than to have any at all.

I am glad to hear you don;t have any training requirement though. I never understood training requirements I always thought they were dumb personally. After all who sets the requirements? The government... And they do so well as everything else! :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
My mandatory training class and mandatory shooting test to get my license in KY, I was glad to have it. It was good to know all the laws of CCW. I will def feel better carrying knowing the laws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,002 Posts
Hey Foxbat, are you sure that governor isn't a democrat in disguise? Just asking! :D

But of course, people should have some kind of training, before being issued a carry license.
And just because a person has a valid driving license, that doesn't mean they are competent enough
to carry, license or not. Just saying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
I have a different take on the subject of rights. Any impediment you put in the way of my exercising my God (or nature, for you athiest's out there) given right to keep and bear arms, is an infringement on that right. Our founding fathers said that is an absolute no no. Two words actually prohibit the government from unconstitutionally imposing these "training requirements". The words SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED are sacrosanct. I am a literalist. The Constitution means what it says and is to be taken literally. We just have to live with the chance some idiot will want to carry and does it poorly. Hopefully he is the only one who is injured when Murphy comes calling. BUT, you cannot infringe on the rights of all because of the few who are incompetent. They will eventually eliminate themselves through attrition.

Bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
My response to both is so what. So what if out of towners are shocked. Thats their problem. They don't have a right not to be shocked, you do have a right to protect yourself and use a firearm to do it.
Agreed. Catch is, the out of towners waste police and citizens' time alike with their panicked 'MAN WITH A GUN!!!' phone calls to 911. The police can't exactly tell them to bugger off without some form of contact-and that contact goes a lot better if a citizen shows ID and goes on their way with a minimum of fuss. I don't support unjust infringements, but sometimes the laws of practical reality mandate compromise. Id rather flash a mandatory $10 CCW card and be on my merry than have to sit on a curb while a cop runs my name and DL through some slow Law Enforcement ID computer terminal that's still running Windows 95.
And to Sturgis. If it does tax the man power of law enforcement wouldn't it be best to make it as easy as possible for the citizens to carry? Or is it better to have only the bad guys carrying? I have a suspicion that if there is a crowd up to no good they are going to be carrying anyway. The only ones not carrying are going to be the law abiding people. To me the argument posed by Sturgis is a reason to have no qualifications rather than to have any at all.
O but it IS easy to carry. $10 and an instant check is one of the most painless CCW permit issuance processes in the nation. A citizen visiting Sturgis can pop into the Sheriff's station with $10 , and walk out 10 minutes later with a valid CCW permit. Its not Constitutional Carry, but its a lot closer than nearly every other state in the union. Looking at the practical merits, id rather flash an easy to acquire CCW card and be on my merry than end up detained while a suspicious cop runs my background on the side of the block.


I am glad to hear you don;t have any training requirement though. I never understood training requirements I always thought they were dumb personally. After all who sets the requirements? The government... And they do so well as everything else! :rolleyes:
In my time in the Air Force, ive seen people with "training" do things with weapons that made me want to run into a missile silo and shut the hatch behind me. State mandated training won't stop an idiot intent on doing idiot things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TexasAviator
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top