Bob Mercer is right: the freshman legislators who slapped together Senate Bill 97 are cruising for a Constitutional bruising. Led by rookie Senator Jeff Monroe (R-24/Pierre), a group of gun-happy legislators want to prioritize the Second Amendment over the First by making it a Class 1 misdemeanor (Class 1—that's the harder one, year in jail, $2000 fine) for you to mention to anyone else that someone you know owns a gun.
Specifically, SB 97 makes it illegal for anyone to make public in any way the "name, address, location, telephone number, e-mail address, or other electronic contact information of the person who owns or possesses a firearm." As Mr. Mercer sagely notes, that language thus makes it a crime to do any of the following:
- tell people you gave your son a nice shotgun as a present;
- publish or broadcast an advertisement for a gun shop or gun show (if First Stop Guns wants to advertise here on the blog, I'd have to say no, because an ad would have to include some kind of contact information; heck, that link just got me a year in jail under SB 97);
- report to police that an armed individual is approaching your local school (that gunman, like some recent mass shooters, may own that gun perfectly legally, and SB 97 says that if Person X owns that gun legally, you can't say, "Person X has a gun").
Mercer chalks up SB 97 as a rookie mistake... a harmful and reckless rookie mistake:
I realize Sen. Monroe and his supporters on his bill, SB 97, in the Legislature won’t enjoy reading this. But click on this link SB97P to read the Monroe bill, and consider what the legislation says from a common-sense perspective. I understand why the legislators backing the Monroe bill want to protect the identities of owners of firearms. But I don’t know what problem they are trying to cure through a new state law, because South Dakota doesn’t have gun registration, and concealed-carry permits already are protected as confidential information under state law. My guess is the legislators behind this bill — Monroe, Begalka, Ewing, Jensen, E. Otten, Hoffman, Ecklund, Greenfield, D. Haggar, L. Heinemann, Hickey, May, Miller, Nelson. B. Olson, Rounds, Russell and Stalzer – signed up as Second Amendment advocates but have no idea what their legislation really would do. Some of these lawmakers are in their first year, and some are very experienced. There’s a valuable lesson we learn at a young age when we learn to shoot: Be absolutely sure, before you pull the trigger, where your bullet will wind up. That rule applies in lawmaking too [Bob Mercer, "The Monroe Doctrine," Pure Pierre Politics, 2013.01.20].
Senate Bill 97 is what you get when lawmakers make decisions based on knee-jerk Second Amendment absolutism and not thoughtful consideration of the actual language and impacts of the legislation to which they affix their names. As Mercer notes, there is no problem requiring a legislative fix here. Some lazy legislators are just trying to boost their NRA scores, with little thought to the needless harm they would do to the First Amendment.
Eager readers have noted to me that Rachel Maddow talked to Planned Parenthood MN-ND-SD's Sarah Stoesz Friday night. Stoesz talked about how the folks who work at the Sioux Falls Planned Parenthood clinic live in constant fear because their names are on the Internet. They face real bullying and threats, even though all they are doing is providing perfectly medical services and advice.
If there's no reason to protect the identities of my friends at Planned Parenthood, there's no reason to make it a crime to mention that Jeff or Bob or Leslie has a gun. Let's kill Senate Bill 97 quickly and get back to legislation that might solve some problems.
Under dog the people rule.
goodby first amendment
The astonishing thing to me was not so much the fact that a rookie legislator penned such a bill, but rather the number of [supposedly] seasoned legislators who should know better... especially Begalka, Hoffman, Nelson, Russell and Hickey.
What the heck were you guys thinking?
Or maybe I should I ask WERE you EVEN thinking?
No excuses for anyone: you want to serve in Pierre, you'd better be up that learning curve right away, because your bad ideas can do harm right away. SB 97 does no good for gun owners and clear harm to journalists and regular citizens, harm that simply reading the bill makes clear.
What they were thinking was that some newspaper in New York published a map showing where concealed weapons permit holders live. And that's just nawt right darn it!!
Unlike the state of New York, SD's list of concealed weapon permit holders is not a public record. So posting an online interactive map with their names and addresses can't happen here. Thus, even if you agree with the premise that publishing a map with names and addresses is an invasion of privacy, this bill is completely unnecessary in this state.
Maybe you're giving your freshman legislators too much credit. This sounds like an ALEC and NRA brain child bill, and I bet similar - or identical - bills pop up in other states if they haven't already.
It seems to be a response to the New York newspaper that printed gun permit holders names and addresses. Has any media in South Dak even considered printing these names?
I'm sure the first amendment will be well taken care of. Everyone will have have freedom of speech as long as each clause ends with the phrase "with guns."
You know the first clause could read "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof with guns."
On a less snarky note, I wish people would realize that emphasizing the second amendment over the first, fourth, or fifth will damage all of our ability to preserve the rights enshrined in all of them.
How do these fools get elected over more sensible alternatives?
Stuff like this belongs on the front pages of daily newspapers to expose just how profoundly vain and thoughtless South Dakota's legislatures have become. A playground for morons.
If someone did a poll at the end of the week, I doubt 4 percent would recall hearing about this. Newspapers need to get into the act of reporting news. This outrage is news. The dopes who sponsored and co-sponsored this will lose no sleep over being harrangued on a blog.
I guess if I was a reporter I'd go and find the names and publish them before this becomes law.
I'm guessing this would end up in court. Alot depends if this is classified as Public Records. If it is this law is invalid
Just fyi, Sen. Monroe isn't a rookie legislator. This is his ninth year as a legislator. He previously served eight years in the House (1995-2002) and was recruited in 2012 to challenge Rep. Tad Perry for the Pierre district's Senate Republican nomination.
underdog the people, rule.
face-palm-slap! Let's take a trip back on memory lane, only to August of last year. Remember when employees of the Spearfish Walmart decided that their creepy co-worker, talking about all of the guns he owns and how he'd like to shoot people, should be something that they shouldn't keep to themselves??? Thank goodness they reported it!
http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/local/communities/spearfish/man-arrested-for-allegedly-threatening-to-shoot-people/article_e91b43b8-d5ab-581e-9250-490cae9affba.html
Oops, Bob! My bad. I need to learn more legislative history. So tell us: did Monroe sponsor any legislation this bad during his first eight years in the Capitol?
"all they [Planned Parenthood] are doing is providing perfectly medical services and advice."
Not true, they are the enforcement arm of the New Age Theocrats.
And good luck liberals enforcing your First Amendment right after you have completely destroyed the Second Amendment. Or is the plan to just take away the First Amendment of Christians? It does sound like something New Age Theocrats would do.
There once was a sodak named sibson,
His words rarely clear, never glib, son.
Mumbling he seethes awaiting the queefs
Even Fleming won't spoon feed him dim sum.
I imagine that buying a hunting license would have some serious implications under this lunatic legislation.
If we can't have a unicameral, at least one of the bicameral houses should have membership determined by proportional representation. That way something besides Republican goons and Democratic wimps might get elected in South Dakota.