To be fair, there's been at least one victory for gun owners as well, with South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden signing SB 81 into law on Tuesday. That legislation prohibits the use of gun-store specific merchant category codes, which will keep the current privacy protections in place for gun owners who use banks or credit card companies when making their purchases at a gun shop. 

“I am proud to protect our Second Amendment rights with the signing of this bill,” said Rhoden. “South Dakota has seen strong growth of our firearm industry, and this bill will help that continue. I am grateful that both the bankers and the firearm industry came together on this issue.”

A private signing ceremony was held Monday (Feb. 24, 2025) and included representatives from South Dakota’s growing firearms industry, South Dakota’s banking industry, the National Rifle Association, and prime sponsors of the bill.

As welcome as SB 81 is, there are bills making their way through the North Dakota legislature that should concern and alarm Second Amendment advocates. 

Seven bills were taken up consecutively over firearms and dangerous weapons to start the House session Tuesday. The only one to pass was House Bill 1588, allowing local government entities to prohibit the possession of a weapon in public areas of a publicly owned or operated building.

“It’s your building, and if you want guns in there, don’t put a sticker on the door. If you don’t want guns in there, you need to now put a sticker on the door,” said Rep. Todd Porter, R-Mandan.The bill also makes it a felony to use a binary trigger in the commission of a crime, a move made after a binary trigger was used in the deadly shooting in Fargo two years ago. 

“If nothing else, recognize that we lost a really good young man, and this is a small thing to recognize that,” said Rep. Liz Conmy, D-Fargo.

Most of the other bills failed because they are similar to those passed in House Bill 1588. House Bill 1352 was killed in a 53-to-39 vote, which would have allowed the possession of firearms in churches.

“There wasn’t a single church that came to us and said change this law,” said Porter.

We're talking about government buildings, very few of which could accurately be described as "sensitive places". Yes, it's true that HB 1588 doesn't mandate that these buildings become "gun-free zones", but the measure still allows city, township, and county governments to declare virtually every publicly accessible portion of a government-owned building off-limits to lawful carry. That's a big step in the wrong direction, and we're almost certain to see the few Democrat-controlled locales in North Dakota take advantage of the ability to restrict lawful carry if HB 1588 becomes law. 

The only bright spot in the legislation is that there is a requirement that those entities wishing to prohibit the possession of a weapon must ensure that access to those spaces "is not permitted unless an individual passes through equipment that detects weapons or is staffed by armed security personnel." In other words, if Fargo's City Council wants to ban guns in City Hall, they first have to set up magnetometers or provide armed guards at every entrance. 

That will hopefully curb some of the most egregious "gun-free zones" that would otherwise be enacted, but it still opens the door for gun owners to be barred from exercising their right to cary in non-sensitive locations, so long as the governmental body in question wants to spring for the additional security mandated by the bill. 

The House passage of HB 1588 is alarming, but I'm less concerned about the defeat of HB 1352. I am not in favor of any law that prohibits houses of worship from allowing concealed carry, but North Dakota law already allows for the "primary religious leader or the governing body of the church or other place of worship" to welcome concealed carry holders into their sanctuary. HB 1352 would have required that every house of worship be open to lawful carry, and there's a strong argument to be made that such a mandate would intrude on the property rights of those religious institutions. 

I don't think North Dakota is in any danger of becoming East California anytime soon with respect to its gun laws, but the fact that at least one chamber of the legislature has opened the door to more "gun-free zones" in the state is still troubling, and the lawmakers who voted in favor of letting local and county governments prohibit lawful carry in public settings should get an earful from their constituents and a reminder that the Second Amendment doesn't come with any asterisks attached.