The South Dakota House of Representatives has given its stamp of approval to a major pro-2A reform, but now the question is whether Gov. Larry Rhoden will sign the bill once it gets to his desk.
Even if the governor turns down SB 100 (which, honestly, seems unlikely), the lopsided support in favor of the legislation in both the House and Senate should give backers the numbers they need to override any veto. The campus carry measure authored by Sen. Mykala Voita was approved on a 33-2 vote in the Senate and a 55-14 vote late last week, despite continued objections from higher education officials.
As it stands, both the South Dakota Board of Regents and Board of Technical Education have policies prohibiting the possession of firearms or other dangerous weapons on their campuses unless authorized by the institutional CEO, but SB 100 would change that.
SB 100 states that the BOR and BOTE can’t limit peoples’ ability to carry their concealed pistol and compatible ammunition, a stun gun, mace, pepper spray or other chemical irritant on campus, except in certain circumstances or spaces like rooms with MRI equipment or with flammable liquid, for example. When individuals aren’t carrying those items, they must store them in a locked case or safe.
When we spoke to Sen. Voita on Bearing Arms Cam & Co a couple of weeks ago, she noted that the bill had been amended to address some of the concerns brought forward by the Board of Regents. But Voita was also adamant that the legislation contain as few exceptions as possible, and if SB 100 becomes law it will arguably be the strongest campus carry provision in all 50 states.
… the BOR on Wednesday night still opposed SB 100 in the House State Affairs committee. [BOR director Nathan] Lukkes thanked the sponsor and stakeholders who came to a compromise on the bill’s current amended form, but said safety in dorms was still a concern, as individuals aged 18-20 can receive a temporary restricted enhanced permit.
“At the end of the day, our primary concern is the safety and wellbeing of our campus communities, our students and employees,” Lukkes said. “I can’t sit here today and say passing this bill is going to result in something horrific happening, and I also can’t say not passing this bill is going to prevent something horrific from happening.”
He also repeated a point that a majority of BOR stakeholders haven’t “come to the table and said they want this changed,” but said that if a majority of the Legislature said they thought it was the right thing to do, “you are one of the chief stakeholders,” adding that “we will do our part to implement it in the safest, most responsible way possible.”
Let’s address Lukkes’ concern about adults under the age of 21 being able to carry on campus, including in dorms. The state of South Dakota already allows these individuals to lawfully carry off campus, and to the best of my knowledge there hasn’t been a rash of revocations of existing permits among this group of young adults. Why, then, does Lukkes believe that these responsible gun owners will suddenly become irresponsible and dangerous if they’re allowed to carry and keep their pistol in their living quarters?
I expect that the boards will be lobbying Rhoden to veto the legislation, but based on Lukke’s remarks about doing their part to implement SB 100 it seems that even he recognizes that, one way or another, SB 100 is almost certain to soon be the law of the land in South Dakota. Still, residents who welcome this change should also be contacting the governor’s office and urging him to swiftly sign SB 100. The few anti-gunners in the state will certainly be making as much noise as they can about the bill, and 2A advocates need to make sure they’re heard as well.
Read the full article here
