New South Carolina Bill Would Allow Guns On School Property

[Red Hat]

A new bill introduced in the South Carolina Senate is either a worrisome threat to children’s safety or a minor change to keep law-abiding citizens from inadvertently breaking the law, depending on your viewpoint. The bill would allow anyone with a concealed weapons permit to have his gun on a school campus, as long as the gun is locked in a vehicle.

Sen. Shane Martin, R-Spartanburg, introduced the bill Thursday because, as a concealed weapons permit holder, he’s run into a problem. “If my wife calls and says, ‘Shane, our daughter’s sick. I need you to come by school and pick her up,‘ well, what do I do? I’ve got my concealed weapon with me. I would have to come home or go somewhere. I wouldn’t be able to come on school grounds and pick up my child. And I just think that’s an inconvenience that law-abiding citizens don’t need.“ He says the current law prohibiting that is rarely enforced, but he’d rather make this change to keep it from being a problem.

Concealed weapons permit holders have to be at least 21 years old, have a clean record and pass a handgun safety training course. The bill says any gun would have to stay inside a locked vehicle. That’s the major difference between this bill and one that was introduced and defeated in 2007. That bill would have allowed someone with a concealed weapons permit to carry a gun with them into a school.

Waiting to pick up his daughter at a Columbia high school Friday, Ray Hoskins said the proposal doesn’t bother him. “If a person has gone through the training and has a license to carry a concealed weapon in his glove compartment of his car, then if he goes to a school to visit a school, as long as he doesn’t take the weapon inside the school but leaves it in his car, for which he’s legal and lawful and has a license to have it there, then I think that’s fine,“ he says.

But, perhaps in a foreshadowing of the Statehouse debate to come on the bill, parent Dottie Hanlin sees it much differently. “I don’t feel comfortable with having any kind of firearm on a school campus, except for those that belong to the resource officer. I teach in a public school and I just don’t think it’s something we need to be dealing with when we’re trying to educate our children,“ she says.

Source: Link Removed

 

[krazyk]

parent Dottie Hanlin sees it much differently. “I don’t feel comfortable with having any kind of firearm on a school campus, except for those that belong to the resource officer. I teach in a public school and I just don’t think it’s something we need to be dealing with when we’re trying to educate our children,“ she says.

ya don,t want those kids getting any ideals like columbine,V.T.LA.calf,do i need to say more? i hope i never have to put my kids in that type of environment,teachers and parents should be allowed to carry as long as they have a chl :big_boss:

 

[FN1910]

Link Removed

There are actually two parts to this bill. First is making it legal to carry in your car while on school grounds. A welcome change.

Second is that it defines that you cannot carry in the "bar" area of a restuarant rather than the entire restaurant. Another welcome change.

A BILL
TO AMEND SECTION 16-23-420, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CARRYING OR DISPLAYING FIREARMS ON PROPERTY OWNED, OPERATED, OR CONTROLLED BY A PRIVATE OR PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO A PERSON WHO IS AUTHORIZED TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON WHEN THE WEAPON IS INSIDE A MOTOR VEHICLE; TO AMEND SECTION 16-23-430, RELATING TO THE CARRYING OF WEAPONS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO A PERSON WHO IS AUTHORIZED TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON WHEN THE WEAPON IS INSIDE A MOTOR VEHICLE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 16-23-465, RELATING TO PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF A PISTOL OR FIREARM INTO A BUSINESS THAT SELLS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT REQUIRES THE REVOCATION OF THE CONCEALED WEAPON PERMIT OF A HOLDER WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO A PERSON WHO IS AUTHORIZED TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON WHEN THE WEAPON IS INSIDE A MOTOR VEHICLE.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Section 16-23-420 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding at the end:

"(G) This section does not apply to a person who is authorized to carry a concealed weapon pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23 when the weapon remains inside an attended or locked motor vehicle and is possessed in compliance with Section 16-23-20(9) or Section 16-23-20(12)."

SECTION 2. Section 16-23-430 of the 1976 code is amended by adding at the end:

"(3) This section does not apply to a person who is authorized to carry a concealed weapon pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23 when the weapon remains inside an attended or locked motor vehicle and is possessed in compliance with Section 16-23-20(9) or Section 16-23-20(12)."

SECTION 3. Section 16-23-465 of the 1976 code, as last amended by Act 274 if 2002, is further amended to read:

"Section 16-23-465. In addition to the penalties provided for by Sections 16-11-330 and 16-23-460 and by Article 1 of Chapter 23 of Title 16, a person convicted of carrying a pistol or firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

In addition to the penalties described above, a person who violates this section while carrying a concealable weapon pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23, must have his concealed weapon permit revoked. This section does not apply to a person who is authorized to carry a concealed weapon when carrying a concealable weapon pursuant to and in compliance with Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23 unless the person is present in the portion of the business primarily devoted to the dispensing of alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises."

SECTION 4. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

The part in italics is the part to be removed.

 

[Red Hat]

I'm glad you found the second part! That definitely sweetens the bill. We need to act on this one and make sure everyone in Columbia knows our stance.

 

[340mopar]

Iknew they were heading this way, I am surprised and pleased it made it this soon!

You can read the original bill on the statehouse website at:
Link Removed

 

[AllAmerican]

Were on the right track with this one for sure... I can support this.

Especially since I often have to drop off and pick up my son at his High School, and I like to go to a nice place to eat with the wife and dont want to have to disarm...

Day 53 of the wait for me.

 

[340mopar]

I on any given day would leave work, put on my gun, take it off do into daycare, put it on take it off go into daycare put it on go into a restaurant put it on go home...

I have handled my weapon way to may times, and left it in the car where it could be stolen way too long...

The more you doft and don one the more chances thwere are to screw up.

 

[Aggressive1]

I definately welcome that change as everymorning i drop my children off at school and eating out at night at restaurants is a vulnerable place to have your family withough a firearm.

Taking my CWP class tonight and would love to see the change by the time my permit is issued.....and that better be in 90 days!

 

[340mopar]

count on 90 WORKING days ... days the State are open for business.

Though this time of yoear you should be fine, took my class Groundhog day last year got it in 2 months.

 

[FN1910]

I was told to expect it to take the full 90 days and mine came in exactly 60. However I have heard that lately they are running the full 90, probably due to the increase in applications and decrease in state funding.

I doubt that this bill comes to the floor until late in the session but hopefully it will. Interestting that it was introduced in the Senate rather than the House. If it makes it through the Senate it should have little problem in the House. last year my Representative told me to sit tight on this that it would be introduced this session and had a good chance of making it through. As long as it doesn't get derailed by some overzealous parties on either side it will pass.

 

[Germanicus]

Its true that this bill provides much needed middle ground for those CCers who have to enter school property. But I'm always insecure about leaving guns in cars, I feel irresponsible when I do so. Then there's this sense of security with a resource officer... I've never seen a "resource officer" that wasn't old and over weight (which doesn't mean they can't kick @$$), they are usually armed with at best a Glock 22, and there is only one of them to protect hundreds of children and to patrol thousands of square feet. At least that is what I see around the Upstate. Not to knock those officers, but it is what I have noticed since they started posting LEO's at school. It seems to me that when people like Seung-Hui Cho or Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold show up for violence, a resource officer will not be sufficient without backup. Perhaps one day we can supplement what I call "the illusion of security" with actual security. Till then, I'll obey the law and be glad that the whole school premises carry issue isn't dead in the water. Thanks for providing the info on that legislation.

 

[FN1910]

I've never seen a "resource officer" that wasn't old and over weight

Then you haven't been around here. I know quite a few of them and the oldest one is around 40. All of them are Sheriff's Deputies and usually are the younger ones as the older ones don't want the job. The person in charge of them is a "Lady" Deputy and I will guarantee whup your butt up and down the street. :sarcastic:

 

[340mopar]

Its true that this bill provides much needed middle ground for those CCers who have to enter school property. But I'm always insecure about leaving guns in cars, I feel irresponsible when I do so. Then there's this sense of security with a resource officer... I've never seen a "resource officer" that wasn't old and over weight (which doesn't mean they can't kick @$$), they are usually armed with at best a Glock 22, and there is only one of them to protect hundreds of children and to patrol thousands of square feet. At least that is what I see around the Upstate. Not to knock those officers, but it is what I have noticed since they started posting LEO's at school. It seems to me that when people like Seung-Hui Cho or Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold show up for violence, a resource officer will not be sufficient without backup. Perhaps one day we can supplement what I call "the illusion of security" with actual security. Till then, I'll obey the law and be glad that the whole school premises carry issue isn't dead in the water. Thanks for providing the info on that legislation.

This would allow me/us to NOT leave a gun in a car MORE than we are forced to now.

 

[AllAmerican]

90 days is 90 days guys. It is not business days it is within 90 days of cashing the check. I have asked and this is the correct answer. If in fact it runs longer than SLED has broken the law. Looks at the statutes. It does not say 90 working days but rather 90 days total.

Correct me if Im wrong but I have it from a relieble source that 90 days is 90 days.

 

[FN1910]

(C) SLED shall issue a written statement to an unqualified applicant specifying its reasons for denying the application within ninety days from the date the application was received; otherwise, SLED shall issue a concealable weapon permit.

A very strict reading of the law says that they must notify you that they are denying it wiithin 90 days but it doesn't actually say that they have to issue it in the 90 days. It just says that if they don't notify you within 90 days they have to go ahead and issue it sometime later. I know it is splitting hairs but........:jester: Notice that is says from the time it was received, not from the time you mailed it or took the course. :neo: There is some grey area here and I dount that a judge is going to find SLED in violation for taking 92 days or that the mailman takes his sweet time getting it to your mailbox. :dirol:

If a permit is granted by operation of law because an applicant was not notified of a denial within the ninety-day notification period, the permit may be revoked upon written notification from SLED that sufficient grounds exist for revocation or initial denial.

If they fail to notify you and issue a permit but later find out that you were a mass murderer then they can reposses it.

 

[jonsthaman]

i have a question

i currently live in michigan and have a cpl (concealed pistol license). me and my wife are planning to move to south carolina next year in june. does south carolina have a ccw or cpl license? and what would i do about transferring my cpl in michigan to south carolina's carry or ccw/ccp?

any info on this would be great

 

[Red Hat]

jonsthaman, after you get settled in you will have to take a class and submit an application to SLED for your CWP. Classes run from $80 to $100 on average and the permit cost $50 unless you are a disabled veteran or retired law enforcement officers then it's free for the permit. I don't know of any state that will allow someone to transfer their permit. If you click on the thread at the top of the SC main page, 'South Carolina Open and Concealed Carry Laws and Information ' you will see all the requirements and laws.

 

[jonsthaman]

thanks very much

thanks for the quick response.

i have another question if you're up to it.

every time i look up south carolina i'm always directed to a page with s.c. permit badges. are these a big thing starting up everywhere? i was talking with my dad about possibly getting one to have on just incase an accidental slip up and you accidentally brandish your gun from the waistband, but by having your badge near it, most people would think, ha, probably a cop or detective. as long as you don't try to impersonate that your'e a leo or anything.

also. in south carolina it's a cwp. is that a concealed weapons permit? because in michigan they got rid of their ccw permit, where you could carry any kind of weapon whatsoever. now we have a cpl just for pistols. or is south carolina cwp just limited to a pistol?

thanks again everyone

 

[wolfhunter]

thanks for the quick response.

i have another question if you're up to it.

every time i look up south carolina i'm always directed to a page with s.c. permit badges. are these a big thing starting up everywhere? i was talking with my dad about possibly getting one to have on just incase an accidental slip up and you accidentally brandish your gun from the waistband, but by having your badge near it, most people would think, ha, probably a cop or detective. as long as you don't try to impersonate that your'e a leo or anything.
also. in south carolina it's a cwp. is that a concealed weapons permit? because in michigan they got rid of their ccw permit, where you could carry any kind of weapon whatsoever. or is it just limited to a pistol?

thanks again everyone

Just my opinion, but if you are doing/wearing something so that someone might think you are "a cop or detective", you ARE impersonating a LEO. Bad move. Being made by printing or having your cover garment blow open is an accident. It may get you a warning from a police officer, check SC law for details.

 

[jonsthaman]

not that

i'm not talkiing about doing anything associated or impersonating with a leo. i'm strictly talking about an accidental brandish whatever the circumstance.

i'm wondering if anyone out there has a badge for their permit and if they thought it was a good idea