South Dakota has become the latest state to remove permit requirements for gun owners to carry and conceal their weapons.

The state’s new Republican governor, Kristi Noem, signed SB 47 into law Thursday. The legislation permits residents to legally carry a firearm concealed on their person so long as they are allowed to possess one.

The bill passed the state Senate by a 23-11 vote and the state House by a vote of 47-23, reports said. In a tweet, Noem said the new law reflects the vision of the Founding Fathers and protects Second Amendment gun rights.

HEY LIBERALS, OWNING A GUN IS THE RESPONSIBLE THING TO DO

"Our Founding Fathers believed so firmly in our right to bear arms that they enshrined it into the Constitution," the governor tweeted. "This constitutional carry legislation will further protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding South Dakotans."

Democrats and law enforcement officials opposed the new law, calling for it to be limited to South Dakota residents, according to the Hill.

GUN-RIGHTS ADVOCATES SUE TO BLOCK NEW GUN-CONTROL LAW IN WASHINGTON STATE

Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun-control group, called the legislation dangerous and said it would have devastating effects, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

The National Rifle Association applauded the measure, calling it a “common sense measure that allows law-abiding South Dakotans to exercise their fundamental right to self-protection in the manner that best suits their needs."

South Dakota is the 14th state to remove the concealed carry permit requirement. Twenty-eight other states and the District of Columbia have a "shall-issue" system, which grants permits to those who pass background checks and other requirements.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

One place in South Dakota where gun owners will not be able to carry their firearms is the Statehouse in Pierre. State senators voted 22-10 this week against a bill that would have let permit holders carry guns in the Statehouse and other state buildings.

Republican Sen. Stace Nelson, the bill’s sponsor, argued that Statehouse employees and lawmakers are at risk and that the Statehouse is not a secure facility.