Right-to-Carry Reform Bill Introduced

[Red Hat]

Hopefully we won't. Reciprocity requires both states to enter into an agreement to accept the other states permit. Some states currently won't accept our CWP only because we won't accept theirs, normally because their training does meet South Carolina's standards. Reciprocity can be cancelled at any time.

If you read the bill you'll see that they want to do away with Reciprocity. Under this bill SC must honor all states permits regardless of their training or requirements. It will be up to the other states to add SC to their list without an agreement.

 

[Hubs]

Thanks

for the clarification. I like "recognition" better!

Hopefully we won't. Reciprocity requires both states to enter into an agreement to accept the other states permit. Some states currently won't accept our CWP only because we won't accept theirs, normally because their training does meet South Carolina's standards. Reciprocity can be cancelled at any time.

What we want is recognition. This is how drivers licenses work. If you're licensed to drive in one state, you can legally drive in any other state as long as you follow their laws. Much easier and much more encompassing.



Gov Haley will sign any pro-gun bill that comes across her desk. We just need to ensure the right bills get to her. H.3292, with a few tweaks, just might be that bill. Unfortunately, she has her hands full with more pressing matters so I doubt she'll be leading the way in the gun rights arena.

 

[hp-hobo]

If you read the bill you'll see that they want to do away with Reciprocity. Under this bill SC must honor all states permits regardless of their training or requirements. It will be up to the other states to add SC to their list without an agreement.

If you read my post in context to the quoted post, you'd know I'm not the one who brought up reciprocity. You're correcting the wrong guy.

I've read the bill and know exactly what it says, and at least for the most part exactly what's wrong with it. I'm also taking an active part in improving it and getting it passed. Where are you expending your time, energy and money?

 

[wingman883]

I called my Representative today to ask for his support of this Bill. He was not availible but returned my call in about fifteen minutes He informed me that he reviewed the Bill last night and will be signing on to it today.

I agree that this Bill is not perfect and needs some tweaks but it is far Superior to what we have now.

 

[Red Hat]

If you read my post in context to the quoted post, you'd know I'm not the one who brought up reciprocity. You're correcting the wrong guy.

I've read the bill and know exactly what it says, and at least for the most part exactly what's wrong with it. I'm also taking an active part in improving it and getting it passed. Where are you expending your time, energy and money?

I stand corrected. I did misread your post. As far as my time, energy and money...I do my share!

 

[Red Hat]

Link Removed

South Carolina: Right-to-Carry Reform to be Heard on Thursday, February 3! Friday, January 28, 2011

Link Removed, the comprehensive Right-to-Carry reform bill introduced by state Representative Mike Pitts (R-14) has been scheduled to be heard on Thursday, February 3, in the House Judiciary Committee’s General Laws Subcommittee. The meeting is scheduled at 9:00 AM, and will be held in room 515-A of the Blatt Building in Columbia.

H. 3292 seeks to reform current law to remove certain restrictions on where one may lawfully carry a concealed firearm, establish that property owners may not set policies or rules that would prohibit the transportation or storage of legally-possessed firearms or ammunition if it is locked, out of sight, within a privately-owned motor vehicle, and create a straight recognition standard for valid permits issued by other states.

Please take a moment to contact members of that subcommittee and urge them to support H 3292. For a listing of subcommittee members, go to Link Removed, then click on the “Subcommittee Assignments” link. Once you have the list of Subcommittee members, you can go to Link Removed to find contact information for each member.

 

[mappow]

I would contact my House Rep Joe Jefferson, District 102. But he's got a big "D" after his name and would probably be an obstructionist verses helpful. If it gets out of the House I will follow up with Paul Campbell in my District for his support.

 

[Red Hat]

mappow, contact him anyway. Let them know you are a voter and won't vote for anyone that votes against this bill. Can't hurt!

 

[CDWilliams05]

I'm hoping for this bill to pass. However, I'm sure this will get hacked away to nothing substantial, while Bill H.3405 will probably pass untouched. But we will see.

 

[hp-hobo]

I'm hoping for this bill to pass. However, I'm sure this will get hacked away to nothing substantial, while Bill H.3405 will probably pass untouched. But we will see.

I guess we will...

Wait a minute. H.3405 already died in the sub-committee two days ago. And H.3292 needs some work before it passes, or it needs to die too. GRGR analysis and recommended amendments will be available Monday.



ETA: Contacting any legislators at this time who are not on the sub-committee is a waste of time at best and counter productive at worst. Just because someone is an elected official doesn't mean that their input will be helpful. And telling them you want their support for a poorly written bill will confuse them when amendments are offered.

Sometimes the best thing you can say is nothing at all. This is one of those times. Wait until we know where this bill needs to go.

 

[CDWilliams05]

I guess we will...

Wait a minute. H.3405 already died in the sub-committee two days ago. And H.3292 needs some work before it passes, or it needs to die too. GRGR analysis and recommended amendments will be available Monday.
elected official doesn't mean that their input will be helpful. And telling them you want their support for a poorly written bill will confuse them when amendments are offered.

Yeah I saw that after you replied to correct me HP. Read up on that bill after I posted this. Thanks for keeping me straight.

 

[tcox4freedom]

If you read my post in context to the quoted post, you'd know I'm not the one who brought up reciprocity. You're correcting the wrong guy.

I've read the bill and know exactly what it says, and at least for the most part exactly what's wrong with it. I'm also taking an active part in improving it and getting it passed. Where are you expending your time, energy and money?

Since you're placing yourself as a "expert" on this bill hp, what are the "exact" changes you are wanting to see?

I like this bill for the most part. However, I would like to see more "reciprocity" and OC language written into it.

What else do you see that (in your eyes) is wrong? Please be specific!

Thanks

 

[hp-hobo]

Since you're placing yourself as a "expert" on this bill hp, what are the "exact" changes you are wanting to see?

I like this bill for the most part. However, I would like to see more "reciprocity" and OC language written into it.

What else do you see that (in your eyes) is wrong? Please be specific!

Thanks

Just for the record, I'm not placing myself as an expert on anything. All I'm doing is offering my opinion and/or correcting mis-information based on info available to the general public at GrassRoots South Carolina - Our Goal: Citizens carrying arms whenever and wherever they choose. .



Reciprocity. We do not want reciprocity. Reciprocity requires two states to enter into a formal agreement to accept each other's CWP. It is a time consuming process. It also opens the door to agreements being made and rescinded without notice, which can turn a good citizen into a criminal because he "didn't get the memo".

What we want is recognition. Recognition means that CWP's would be treated like dirvers licenses. If you got one from your home state, you're good to go nationwide. Keep in mind that while SC may recocognize permits from other states, we can't make other states recognize or even reciprocate ours. However, right now there are states that won't recognize ours be cause we won't recognize (reciprocate) theirs. Simply by becoming a recognition state we'd pick up several new states. Recognition is very specifically covered in H.3292;

This is where I cut and pasted the change. However forum software won't allow the text stike outs so you'll have to check the change to 23-31-215(N) here; 2011-2012 Bill 3292: Handguns - South Carolina Legislature Online



Open carry. This is more than an open carry bill, this is a Constitutional Carry bill. I don't know of any state with language that specifically states open carry is legal. It's what the bill changes and doesn't say that povides for Constitutional Carry. Remember, laws by their nature take away freedoms, they do not bestow them.

If you want open carry/Constitutional Carry in South Carolina, this bill with a few changes is what you're looking for. Expect to see the full analysis and recommended amendments by Dr Butler on the GRGR website in the next 36 hours. It was going to be posted today, but since the sub-commitee meeting was postponed one week (till next Thursday) he has a little more time to get it right. Then it'll be time for Action Alerts. Get ready to burn up the e-mail, phone lines and snail mail.


As for the changes, I'm not an expert and I'm not a liberty to talk about anything that may or may not currently be being discussed. I promise you that I'll let you know as soon as I can.

 

[tcox4freedom]

Thanks for the link hp!

I agree with the need for recognition. (I personally, really need GA & AL to recognize SC.) But, I not sure that is up to SC.

Wouldn't legislation have to be passed or ammended in the respective "state" houses for us to get recognition from that particular state; or is out of state permit acceptance done by a commitee vote?

ETA;
Thanks again hp. (Nevermind; I clearer on recognition after re-reading your post.)

I just read your version link. Good Stuff!!!

 

[hp-hobo]

Thanks for the link hp!

I agree with the need for recognition. (I personally, really need GA & AL to recognize SC.) But, I not sure that is up to SC.

Wouldn't legislation have to be passed or ammended in the respective "state" houses for us to get recognition from that particular state; or is out of state permit acceptance done by a commitee vote?

I don't know the process in states other then South Carolina. Sometimes I'm not even sure how it works here.

In South Carolina legislation would have to be passed (such as H.3292) to create a CWP recognition law. I believe it would be the same in other states.

Last year there was a national right to carry bill introduced which would force all states to recognize all other states permits, although much the same as driving, you'd be bound by their laws. This sounds good on the surface but there is one major downside.

It would let the fed dictate gun law to the states. I mean more than they already do. But this time we'd have asked for it. How long would it be before it was turned around on us so federal law dictated no large capacity mags for example. Yeah, yeah, I know they're trying that now. But if we say it's okay for a law we like, it must be okay for laws they like to.

Slippery slope, camel's nose under the tent, yada, yada.

 

[mrjam2jab]

I don't know the process in states other then South Carolina. Sometimes I'm not even sure how it works here.

In South Carolina legislation would have to be passed (such as H.3292) to create a CWP recognition law. I believe it would be the same in other states.

My take also. SC would have to modify

SECTION 23-31-215
(N) Valid out of state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of a reciprocal state must be honored by this State. SLED shall make a determination as to those states which have permit issuance standards equal to or greater than the standards contained in this article and shall maintain and publish a list of those states as the states with which South Carolina has reciprocity.

 

[hp-hobo]

My take also. SC would have to modify

SECTION 23-31-215
(N) Valid out of state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of a reciprocal state must be honored by this State. SLED shall make a determination as to those states which have permit issuance standards equal to or greater than the standards contained in this article and shall maintain and publish a list of those states as the states with which South Carolina has reciprocity.

What? Why?

The proposed verbiage for 23-31-215(N) already states;

"Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons must be honored by this State."

That means that SC will recognize all state's permits whether they recognize ours or not. Your wording would leave visitors to SC in the same place they are now... Potentially unable to carry because their permitting process doesn't meet our "high standards".

How does this benefit anyone except the lawyer who has to defend the poor schmuck who inadvertently broke the law? Please do explain.

 

[mrjam2jab]

What? Why?

The proposed verbiage for 23-31-215(N) already states;

"Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons must be honored by this State."

That means that SC will recognize all state's permits whether they recognize ours or not. Your wording would leave visitors to SC in the same place they are now... Potentially unable to carry because their permitting process doesn't meet our "high standards".

How does this benefit anyone except the lawyer who has to defend the poor schmuck who inadvertently broke the law? Please do explain.

That's not my wording...that is the law as it is written. My point was they neeed to change the current law to read as you suggested... "Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons must be honored by this State."

 

[hp-hobo]

That's not my wording...that is the law as it is written. My point was they neeed to change the current law to read as you suggested... "Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons must be honored by this State."

Okay. Good. I thought you were suggesting that.

The way H.3292 is worded would make it pretty easy for out of staters to carry here. And since we'd be Constitutional Carry, CWP's would only be important in school zones anyway.

Unfortunately, we can't do anything to make other states recognize us. The one good thing though is that the more states that relax their laws, the more chance that others will follow suit.

Didn't Wyoming just get a pro-ConCarry bill through their house something like 20-10? Hopefully that'll be us soon.

 

[Red Hat]

I hope this didn't just die in committee like so many others have. They canceled the hearing for tomorrow!

Link Removed

South Carolina: Hearing for Right-to-Carry Reform Bill Cancelled!

Wednesday, February 02, 2011

The House Judiciary Committee’s General Laws Subcommittee hearing scheduled for Tomorrow, February 3, has been cancelled. House Bill 3292, the Right-to-Carry reform bill introduced by state Representative Mike Pitts (R-14), had been on the agenda. A new hearing date has not been set at this time, but the NRA will continue to keep you up to date on the bill’s status, so please continue to check your e-mail and www.NRAILA.org.

H. 3292 seeks to reform current law to remove certain restrictions on where one may lawfully carry a concealed firearm, establish that property owners may not set policies or rules that would prohibit the transportation or storage of legally-possessed firearms or ammunition if it is locked, out of sight, within a privately-owned motor vehicle, and create a straight recognition standard for valid permits issued by other states.

Please continue to contact members of this subcommittee and urge them to support H. 3292. Their contact information can be found below.

House Judiciary Committee’s General Laws Subcommittee:

Rep. Thad Viers (R-68), Chairman
(803) 734-3064
[email protected]

Rep. Dan Hamilton (R-20)
(803) 212-6795
[email protected]

Rep. J. David Weeks (D-51)
(803) 734-3102
[email protected]

Rep. Laurie Slade Funderburk (D-52)
(803) 734-3044
[email protected]

Rep. George Hearn (R-105)
(803) 212-6796
[email protected]