New South Carolina Bill Would Allow Guns On School Property


FN1910

New member
The badge issue has been beaten to death on many other forums and threads and almost universally considered a bad idea. Forget about them. The SC CWP covers a handgun less than 12" along its maximun measurement and nothing else. Pepper spray, tasers are legal and require no permit. Other devices such as knives and batons are covered under other laws.
 

As mentioned the badge is a bad idea if for no other reason a REAL policeman or woman is not going to like it.

In the concealed carry world I've finally realized it's a lot more 'fun' to practice being a free citizen than a government employee.
 

Danno

New member
I for one would really like to see this bill go through - I sometimes take / pickup my kids from school.
 

Aggressive1

New member
I still don't see where I can keep up with the updates on when they will vote on it, etc. I have the link for the bill saved so I can check it but I can't tell from that whether it'll be a year or what until we know the result.

I hate waiting....on day 2 since CWP received by SLED....argh.
 

FN1910

New member
It is Senate bill S-347

This first link shows the present status of the bill. :hang3:

Bill Information - South Carolina Legislature Online

From that link you can see that it has been referred to a Senate Subcommittee chaired by Sen. Jake Knotts who is not a big gun supporter.:fie:

02/02/09 Senate Referred to Subcommittee: Knotts (ch), Massey, Coleman

You can follow the status of that subcommittee here on the meetings schedule for the Senate and look for a subcommittee on S-347. :yu:

Link Removed

As you can tell it has not been even scheduled for a subcommittee session yet. Once it gets out of subcommittee they can either send it to the full Judiciary committee or to the Senate floor with the OK of the full committee. Once that happens it will be placed on the Senate calendar. :pleasantry:

Link Removed

After it is placed on the calendar it is anyone's guess when they will actually discuss it and may be sent back to committee or whatever.:man_in_love:

Once it passes thre Senate the whole thing starts over in the House.:angry:

South Carolina Legislature Online

Since the legislative session is two years they have until June 2010 to actually act on this so don't get too excited. :mad:
 

AllAmerican

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

Which is why I stated that when they cash your check, the time starts. You know they have received it. I agree the jodge is probably not gonna bust sled for it being 92 days. However, the law says 90 days. They have to issue the permit.

Again, in the past few months, everyone I know has gotten their permit. ALL of them within 90 days from the time the check was cashed. Not to mention I got people. LOL
 

CUProf

New member
The restaurant section is long over due, and FN1910 - I got my SC CWP right after 9/11 and got mine back inside the 90 days. I cant imagine that SLED and the FBI are more busy now than back then.

The school grounds carry part however... the only part of that worries me some, is if SC gains more reciprocal states such as MS, there is no training program required. So they may have a clean background but as long as they pay their money they can carry unsafe and improperly without "knowing" it. School kids aren't unobservant, and for "fun" may cause the carrier troubles. This would be a very rare case, but something to think about.
 

FN1910

New member
The restaurant section is long over due, and FN1910 - I got my SC CWP right after 9/11 and got mine back inside the 90 days. I cant imagine that SLED and the FBI are more busy now than back then.

The school grounds carry part however... the only part of that worries me some, is if SC gains more reciprocal states such as MS, there is no training program required. So they may have a clean background but as long as they pay their money they can carry unsafe and improperly without "knowing" it. School kids aren't unobservant, and for "fun" may cause the carrier troubles. This would be a very rare case, but something to think about.

Actually from what I hear CWP classes anbd gun sales are at an all time high. I checked out Bud's Gus Shop listing the other day and they are out of everything seems like.

You bring up the point about getting a CWP without any training and with that comment you can really open a can of worms so I am not going to comment on it.
 

CUProf

New member
Good to know, I had not heard about the increase in CWP classes and applicants. Glad to hear that there will be more out there now.
 

GeneralSumter

New member
Resurrecting the thread... i just emailed my state senator, Paul Campbell, regarding his intent to support or reject this bill. Here's what I wrote (in case any of you other SC-ians want to use it):

Subject: S.347 - I SUPPORT Concealed Weapon Permit Holder Rights

Senator Campbell,

As your constituent, I’m writing you regarding senate bill 347; regarding the right of concealed weapon permit (CWP) holders to keep a weapon inside the vehicle on school grounds and the right to carry the weapon inside a restaurant (not at the bar) where alcohol is served.

First, I support this bill and as my representation in the state senate, I would like you to support its passage as well, when the time comes to vote.

The denial of this bill will not serve to dissuade non-law-abiding citizens, since they are law-breakers anyway. Rather, passage of this bill would reduce the inconvenience imposed on lawful CWP holders by allowing them to pick-up their children from school while in possession of a legal weapon, without having to either 1) break the law, or 2) travel home to drop off the weapon before picking up the child.

Additionally, the right to carry a weapon into a restaurant with a bar (though not permitted at the bar) would also benefit the lawful citizen both defensively and by not leaving a weapon unattended in a vehicle for extended periods of time (one hour or more).

Please contact me regarding your intent to support or reject this bill. Thank you.
 

FN1910

New member
S.347 is dead but has been replace with S.593. S.593 is the same bil except without the restaurant part and was passed by the full judiciary committee yesterday and set to the Senate to be placed on the calendar. Now if we can get them to actually bring it up for a vote and pass the full Senate it will be a big hurdle. If it makes it through the Senate it should pass the House with much less problem.

Sen. Shane Martin introduced S.593 when he realized that S.347 was going to die in committee with the restaurant attachment.

For the latest on S.593 check here.

2009-2010 Bill 593: Weapons - South Carolina Legislature Online
 

bigspurr

New member
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.

Like the BG not going to bring a gun because it’s against the law. When will they learn? :wacko:
 

Red Hat

New member
S.347 is dead but has been replace with S.593. S.593 is the same bil except without the restaurant part and was passed by the full judiciary committee yesterday and set to the Senate to be placed on the calendar.

2009-2010 Bill 593: Weapons - South Carolina Legislature Online


Time to fire off some emails! The only part of the bill that I really was interested in was the Restaurant Carry. We need both not just the School part!
 

FN1910

New member
2009-2010 Bill 593: Weapons - South Carolina Legislature Online

Good and bad news. S.593 has been read for the second time in the Senate is to m0ove on to third reading and a vote. This could possibly happen tomorrow.

SENATE JOURNAL - South Carolina Legislature Online

Now the bad news. It was amended on the floor to say that you can have a gun in your car as long as you hae a CWP but the gun must be in your console, glove box, trunk etc.

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 secured in a closed glove compartment, closed console, closed trunk, or in a closed container secured by an integral fastener and transported in the luggage compartment of the vehicle.

This means that when you drive onto the school grounds you will have to put it in the console rather than keeping it in your holster. I expect it to pass the Senate now and also the House. This is not what we wanted but it is a start.

I am afraid that the resturant carry bill is either dead or on life support with someone waiting to pull the plug.
 

CUProf

New member
I agree with Red Hat, the school part is nice, but the restaurant aspect was what got me excited about the bill. Has anyone heard back from your rep? I have emailed mine twice now with no reply. Just curious.
 

hpj3

New member
2009-2010 Bill 593: Weapons - South Carolina Legislature Online

<snipped>
Now the bad news. It was amended on the floor to say that you can have a gun in your car as long as you hae a CWP but the gun must be in your console, glove box, trunk etc.

This means that when you drive onto the school grounds you will have to put it in the console rather than keeping it in your holster. I expect it to pass the Senate now and also the House. This is not what we wanted but it is a start.
<snipped>
--------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this was the sequence of events...

S. 593 passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with a unanimous vote of approval with the amendment that GrassRoots asked to have approved. But, at least one member - Brad Hutto - of the Judiciary Committee did not attend the Judiciary Committee meeting. Sen. Hutto - sometime after the finish of the Judiciary Committee meeting - added a "minority report" to the bill. The minority report serves to put S.593 on the contested calendar. Being on the contested calendar is usually a kiss of death for a bill (although, every bill that GrassRoots has pushed has ended up on the contested calendar before getting enacted into law or killed).

There are three ways to get a bill off of the contested calendar:

1. The senator who put the minority report on the bill can ask to have it removed by unanimous consent of the Senate.
2. The Senate can vote by a 2/3 majority to put the bill on the special order calendar (only two bills can ever be on the special order calendar at any one time, which makes those two spots very valuable).
3. The Senate Rules Committee can vote by a 2/3 majority to put the bill on the special order calendar.

Sen. Hutto informed Senators Larry Martin (chair of the Rules Committee and member of the Judiciary Committee) and Shane Martin (sponsor of S. 593) that he would be willing to remove his minority
report if he could have the bill amended to require that the concealed weapon only be allowed on school property if carried according to Section 16-23-20(9) (i.e., glove box, console, trunk, luggage area).

So, the question became whether to allow Hutto's amendment - as stupid as it is - and get S. 593 over to the House before the May 1 deadline (unless given special treatment, bills must go from one chamber to the
other before May 1 to be eligible for enactment into law that year) OR wait until next year and see if we could first get the bill onto the special order calendar and then passed by the Senate. The decision
was made to allow Hutto's amendment and send the bill to the House ASAP. It appears we will be able to get S. 593 enacted into law this year as long as there are no intervening current events to mess things
up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please note that Hutto did not attend the committee meeting where the bill passed unanimously, but waited until after to place a minority report... a ploy to avoid confrontation, as I'm sure he knew of the support for it. Perhaps he's due a flurry of e-mails/calls expressing outrage?

Howard
 
Last edited:

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,571
Messages
625,600
Members
74,555
Latest member
JonasEichmann
Top