Grass Roots Gun Rights' Board of Directors LOSES Law Suit!


hp-hobo

New member
Stuffed Suits - Grass Roots Gun Rights' Board of Directors LOSES Law Suit!


GrassRoots Gun Rights' board of directors has lost a lawsuit filed by Ed Looney and Ed Lown to bring the organization back into compliance with South Carolina state law governing their incorporation. The current "board members for life" have already filed an intent to appeal but unless they can find a judge who will rule in a way diametrically opposed to the law, they don't have a chance. The judge has ordered the attempt to reincorporate (so as to avoid the lawsuit through a mail-in ballot sent to the membership) null and void. He has also ordered the board to turn over the requested information.

More information will be posted as it is made available.
This is an update to the following articles:

http://stuffedsuits.com/news/sc-politics/379-grassroots-gun-rights-the-full-story-

http://stuffedsuits.com/news/stating-the-obvious/42-stating-the-obvious/353-grassroots-in-court
 

First I've heard of it...

This is the first I've heard of this issue but, from what I've just read, it sounds like they should have lost just as they did because they were not following the law. If you're going to incorporate you have to follow the laws you are covered under.
 
From everything I have read and mostly it was from GRGR directors themselves I don't know of any other way the judge could have ruled. This is not to say that I was in favor of Mr. Looney's lawsuit but to me the directors got caught making up the rules as they went along and then tried to cover it up with more screwed up shenanigans. The quotation "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" very much applies here as these men, the directors, have done many good things for our cause and are to be commended for that. To me they lost sight of it being a "Grass Roots" effort and made it their own cause,

I absolutely hope that GRGR will survive and become stronger because of this but there are a lot of fences to mend and a lot of personal hard feelings to get over before that can happen. If you find out more please keep us informed.
 
So, if the organization was illegally operating as a nonprofit corporation, does the board of directors now owe back taxes?
 
I am not a lawyer, nor have I ever played one on TV. However, in my opinion they may be liable for a lot of things. Back taxes could certainly be one of them. Probably court costs. Maybe the cost of their last minute vote to cover their behinds as well, which by my estimation cost about $4-5k for materials, printing and mailing. I also wonder if criminal charges could be in their future. Only time will tell.

The ironic thing as I see it, is if they had just held elections as some of us have asked about for years, they'd probably still hold their positions, we wouldn't be having this conversation and GRGR would still be grinding along with minimal membership and dwindling relevance with the SC legislature.

Hopefully after this wake up call, GRGR can come back as a strong and vital organization. Unfortunately I think at this point the "brand" may be damaged beyond repair.
 
Does it strike anyone else that they almost seem to be like if they don't admit they are in a problem it will simply go away ?
 
Does it strike anyone else that they almost seem to be like if they don't admit they are in a problem it will simply go away ?
Yes. It's called denial. A subject I've personally brought up with "GRGR" leadership several times over the last few years. I just hate to see the organization suffer because of the ego and arrogance of a select few, aided by the members who are too blind to see that they've been lied to all this time.
 
In the meantime, this seems like a good place to organize and discuss issues to be individually followed up with our own representatives.

If we can just find away to get restaurant carry fixed.
 
There are a lot of "things" that need to be fixed regarding South Carolina firearms laws. According to people who are a lot smarter than I am, in other words almost everyone, South Carolina has the most restrictive gun laws in the Southeast and in some cases the most restrictive in the country (no OC and melting point laws for example). I think that getting these laws changed would be fairly easy if prioritized and worked one at at time. I also think we'd have better luck as a group (activist, concerned, freedom loving gun owners) if we had a less adversarial relationship with our lawmakers. I agree in no compromise, but we don't have to be nasty about things. Speaking of which.

Dr Robert Butler. I think he had the distinction of being GRGR's most valuable single asset. His legal mind when applied to gun laws (obviously not corporate laws) was clear thinking and possibly even brilliant. On the other side of that coin was his ability to piss off legislators and members alike with his "my way or the highway" mindset. Because of this he was also GRGR's greatest liability. If we could get him to tone down his rhetoric and work only legal issues instead of also running an organization, I know we could make headway at the statehouse.

But that's just me. I'd like to hear what others have to say on the subject. In my opinion we need to get something going before our cause loses any momentum it once had.

Please discuss. (I always wanted to say that.)
 
I think you are on the right track but I would like to make some comments. As far as restrictive gun laws other than OC "in public" SC has some of the most liberal laws in the nation. Now some base all their complaints on the OC restriction and it is a legitimate complaint but other than that and the resident permit issue I don't know of any state less restrictive. The melting point issue is almost a moot point as far as I can determine as any decent gun will pass that test.

About Mr. Butler. I totally agree that he was one of our greatest assets. However in my opinion he started to over-analyze every proposal to get it into his wording rather than even look at anything proposed by anyone else. I think you are absolutely correct that his MWOTHW mindset became an obsession with hm and his hatred and, in my opinion, jealousy of the NRA, being sure to try and get the last word in. Rather than working with anyone else he started to work against anyone who did not fall into lock step with him.

There is a difference in disagreeing with a legislaturer and turning them into an enemy, especially one with control and power. The "assination" of Rep. Viers was totally uncalled for in my opinion and killed any chance of the bill moving on or anyone else taking it up any time soon. I find in very telling how many legislatures were considered supporters at one time are now are the enemy and woring against gun-rights according to some people. As has been said that politics makes for strange bedfellows and if one is going to be successful in the long run of politics you will have to compromise along the way in the short term. MWOTHW will put you in the highway of politics leading away from the capital.
 
Say, HP:
You know there is no "GRGR".
The corporation is registered as "Grass Roots of South Carolina, Inc".
See Link Removed
So, if you wanted to incorporate as Grass Roots Gun Rights, you could for a couple of hundred bucks.
 
I guess grass and guns don't mix.

If anyone remembers the Jimmy Carter who ran the "businesses" at Pee Dee, SC you may remember how he was caught red handed in the middle of his marijuana field along with all kinds of other evidence but still managed to beat the rap. I saw him one night and asked where he had been. He said that he had just carried his lawn mower to his girlfriend's house. He said he might as well give it to her since they wouldn't let him grow grass anymore.
 
As far as restrictive gun laws other than OC "in public" SC has some of the most liberal laws in the nation.

I'm glad you pointed that out. I believe that we have had a few "big" gun bills to get off track and ultimately butchered to the point not worth passing. Frankly, I think we should focus on one issue each year...first being restaurant carry. Just tack some language as an amendment on some must pass legislation and its done. That is how most of are rights have been usurped in the past. Take one small step at a time and eventually we will get there-turn the tables on them.
SF
 
Wow! If you guys think we have liberal gun laws in South Carolina, you're either in denial or delusional. Here are some SC laws that infringe on our right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by both the United States and South Carolina Constitutions. The list includes but is not limited to;

- No open carry except in extremely limited circumstance, mostly on private property. SC is one of only 7 states (plus DC) without public OC.
- SC requires a government permission slip to lawfully conceal carry.
- And to get that CWP you have to submit to government mandated training.
- No carry at all for those under 21.
- No campus carry.
- No carry in establishments that serve alcohol.
- No carry in government buildings.
- No "parking lot" law.
- Vehicle carry only allowed in specific locations.
- Melting point laws that discriminate against lower income individuals.
- Regulations, licensing and equipment requirements above and beyond what is required by federal law.

Even our friends at the Brady Bunch seem to agree. While they call our gun laws lax (they call every state's gun laws lax), according to their 2010 state guns laws ratings, there are 30 states with less strict gun laws than South Carolina. That means there are only 19 states with more strict gun laws than SC. That puts us firmly in the top 50% of strictest state gun laws in the US.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare...0_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf

The gun owners of South Carolina have a lot of work to do. But just like any other problem, we first have to admit to ourselves that the problem exists. And I'm not sure some of us on this forum have gotten to that point yet. Think about it.
 
If OC and cc permits are your litmus test, I guess there really is no discussion. Not that I agree with the status quo, but look where we once were and where we are. What you hope for is what once was. Our rights were GRADUALLY usurped and we are on the path of GRADUALLY restoring them, with progress made. It will take continued strategy and perseverance.

I still say your "restrictive" analysis is incorrect. I've reviewed your list above and it is flawed.

Look at the quirks of neighboring states. I have.
 
My list above is exactly accurate. If it wasn't, you would have identified which items were incorrect.
 
I'm currently working with my State Senator on a proposal to amend State Law to include allowing OC and being able to CC in a restaurant the serves alcohol. Can't be pre-filed until December with a first reading in January but that's not really that far off. I'm also hitting up my State Rep, but he's on the Liberal side and haven't got a good read of his help yet.
I ask ALL in SC to contact your State Rep for the district you live in and see if they'll sign on to an amendment to current Law. Just by pinging off them with the idea, the message will spread. WE want change in SC Law, WE all have to work at it. Let me know via PM if you want or just add to the thread.
 
Lets see if we can take these one at a time

- No open carry except in extremely limited circumstance, mostly on private property. SC is one of only 7 states (plus DC) without public OC.

Mostly on private property - How about any privately owned property unless you are an employee of the business that owns the property. How about while hunting or fishing or traveling to and from. I don't know that I would call that extremely limited. Maybe limited but covers more than 50% of the state.

- SC requires a government permission slip to lawfully conceal carry.

Only in public which is much more than most states

- And to get that CWP you have to submit to government mandated training.

I am not so sure that I disagee with that totally.

- No carry at all for those under 21.

I am not sure where you come up with that completely false statement.

- No campus carry.

On this you are correct but SC is not in the minority on that

- No carry in establishments that serve alcohol

Remember it is for on premisis consumption only that is barred and some states are much worse. Bot again for the most part correct

- No carry in government buildings.

I think you are missing the real point here as it is not a restriction on government buildings but any publicly owned building which covers a lot that you would never think of. Definitely needs changing.

- No "parking lot" law.

If the parking lot law you are thinking of is what was in H3292 I am definitly against it 100%, A reasonable version would be OK but not that BS that was proposed.

- Vehicle carry only allowed in specific locations.

I suppose you are referring to the glove box carry but ay least you don't have to leave it on your dash if you leave it in your car.

- Melting point laws that discriminate against lower income individuals.

I didn't know that Hi-Points fell under the melting point law and that is about the cheapest gun I know of that is not more dangerous for the shooter than the shootee. (Hi-Points are very good, just ugly)


- Regulations, licensing and equipment requirements above and beyond what is required by federal law.

The only addition that I am aware of is the state firearms license for dealers which is just a tax and servers no real purpose or requirement other than the fee.


I would like to point out some that you forgot

In SC we don't get to go down to the sheriff's office for a piece of paper saying that it is OK for us to purchase, inherit, or receive a gun as a gift like our neighbors in NC.

In SC we don't get to take the CWP course and receive our permission slips before we can take a gun off of our property either OC, CC or in our car like our friends up in TN.

If we have a CWP we don't have to leave our guns at home to watch the Fourth of July parade like our buddies in NC.

YOu wanna walk around with an AR-15 or 12Ga on your back in public? No state law against that in SC.

Tired of the NICS when you buy a gun. With a SC CWP don't have to worry with it.

Oh, not buddies with the judge so he says I don't think your reason for a permit is good enough. Shall issue rather than may issue.
 
Lets see if we can take these one at a time

Yeah, let's do that Chief.


- No open carry except in extremely limited circumstance, mostly on private property. SC is one of only 7 states (plus DC) without public OC.

Mostly on private property - How about any privately owned property unless you are an employee of the business that owns the property. How about while hunting or fishing or traveling to and from. I don't know that I would call that extremely limited. Maybe limited but covers more than 50% of the state.

You just agreed with me. Limited circumstances. Thank you.


- SC requires a government permission slip to lawfully conceal carry.

Only in public which is much more than most states

Huh?


- And to get that CWP you have to submit to government mandated training.

I am not so sure that I disagee with that totally.

You can't disagree with it at all. It's a fact.


- No carry at all for those under 21.

I am not sure where you come up with that completely false statement.

I'm not sure where you came up with that completely ignorant statement. Maybe you should familiarize yourself with 16-23-30(3).


- No campus carry.

On this you are correct but SC is not in the minority on that

I'm correct on all of them. But you already know that.


- No carry in establishments that serve alcohol

Remember it is for on premisis consumption only that is barred and some states are much worse. Bot again for the most part correct

No, once again it's exactly correct. I said "serve" not sell.


- No carry in government buildings.

I think you are missing the real point here as it is not a restriction on government buildings but any publicly owned building which covers a lot that you would never think of. Definitely needs changing.

Semantics. But once again I was correct.


- No "parking lot" law.

If the parking lot law you are thinking of is what was in H3292 I am definitly against it 100%, A reasonable version would be OK but not that BS that was proposed.

I don't agree with parking lot laws at all because they infringe upon property owner's rights. I was speaking strictly from an activist's point of view. But I was still correct.


- Vehicle carry only allowed in specific locations.

I suppose you are referring to the glove box carry but ay least you don't have to leave it on your dash if you leave it in your car.

In other words, once again I'm correct.


- Melting point laws that discriminate against lower income individuals.

I didn't know that Hi-Points fell under the melting point law and that is about the cheapest gun I know of that is not more dangerous for the shooter than the shootee. (Hi-Points are very good, just ugly)

Hi-Points are not affected by the melting point law for reasons you're probably unable or unwilling to comprehend. More to the point, who are you to decide what kind of gun is dangerous and at what income level people should be able to provide for their defense? You speak on the melting point law like a true gun snob. And once again I'm exactly correct.


- Regulations, licensing and equipment requirements above and beyond what is required by federal law.

The only addition that I am aware of is the state firearms license for dealers which is just a tax and servers no real purpose or requirement other than the fee.

Then you obviously need to become more aware. But that might take effort on your part.


I would like to point out some that you forgot

In SC we don't get to go down to the sheriff's office for a piece of paper saying that it is OK for us to purchase, inherit, or receive a gun as a gift like our neighbors in NC.

In SC we don't get to take the CWP course and receive our permission slips before we can take a gun off of our property either OC, CC or in our car like our friends up in TN.

If we have a CWP we don't have to leave our guns at home to watch the Fourth of July parade like our buddies in NC.

YOu wanna walk around with an AR-15 or 12Ga on your back in public? No state law against that in SC.

Tired of the NICS when you buy a gun. With a SC CWP don't have to worry with it.

Oh, not buddies with the judge so he says I don't think your reason for a permit is good enough. Shall issue rather than may issue.

Blah, blah, blah. I don't really care about Tennesee or North Carolina (which according to the Bradys has sticter gun laws than us), but nice try on the redirect. The fact remains that South Carolina has fairly restrictive gun laws. More restrictive than 30 other states. Maybe you should explain why you think an un-Constitutional law is alright as long as it doesn't directly affect you. If you're confused about the law I'm speaking of, just look at your response twice in this thread concerning melting point. Or maybe you're just happy being an anti-rights statist. You should be proud of yourself.
 
SC Code of Laws 16-23-30

(3) a person under the age of eighteen, but this shall not apply to the issue of handguns to members of the Armed Forces of the United States, active or reserve, National Guard, State Militia, or R. O. T. C., when on duty or training or the temporary loan of handguns for instructions under the immediate supervision of a parent or adult instructor; or


On the requirement for training for getting a CWP I was not disagreeing with the fact that one has to have training. I think it is a good idea to require training in some way before one is allowed to carry either OC or CC. Only the method of requiring the training is in question and needs to be changed.

The reason I brought up NC et. al. was that you were comparing the gun laws of SC to other states. I will admit that for carry in public SC laws are more strict than many other states but otherwise SC laws are very lax for the acquisition of guns and use on private property.

One can compare the laws of SC to other states or to what we would like them to be or what the Brady Bunch wants but other than those involving carrying on public property, primarily OC there is very little that I want changed.

The argument about the melting point law is a joke. The law needs to be repealed but if it is I doubt that anyone will even notice it.

From an activists point of view there may be many changes needed but there are a lot of activist that I don't agree with. Like that fellow in San Francisco that wants to make circumcision completely illegal but is all in favor of abortion.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,255
Members
74,961
Latest member
Shodan
Back
Top