SC now has CWP reciprocity with DE


Red Hat

New member
Their AG is the determining factor for reciprocity. Regardless what their law says their AG has allowed states without an agreement to carry in DE including SC. He even states that the States listed to carry in DE doesn't recognize DE's permits. Delaware Department of Justice - Attorney Generals Office is DE's Reciprocity list and SC is on it. I'd have no problem carrying in DE. I'd just make a copy of their Reciprocity list and carry it with me while there.

However, as of today Delaware does not recognize the concealed deadly weapon licenses or permits issued by states other than those listed below, and these states do not recognize Delaware's concealed deadly weapons licenses as valid.
 

ForceTech

Instructor
Did you call and speak with SLED?

Yes, I did call, and have it in writing as well. As CWP instructors, it's our responsibility to be up-to-date on reciprocity so we can provide accurate information to our students. Unfortunately, SLED could make that easier by keeping their online resources current.
 

G50AE

Active member
Unfortunately, SLED could make that easier by keeping their online resources current.

Welcome to South Carolina. SLED has better things to do, like cite restaurants for serving alcohol to adults between 18 and 20. Even though the adult who purchases the beverage is also willfully breaking the law by atempting to purchase the beverage in question, they don't get prosecuted.
 

mrjam2jab

New member
I contacted Handgunlaw.us in regards to his pages...I figured he already has contacts in all the right offices...

His response:

About 2 months ago DE AG posted that they had signed an agreement with SC. In the past DE has listed other states as having agreements that they didn't. After contacting them When DE did this I called SLED and ask them if there was an agreement. I was told that they did nave an agreement.



This is what it states on the DE Reciprocity Page at Delaware Department of Justice - Attorney Generals Office
Start....Delawareans who have a Delaware concealed deadly weapons permit will be able to possess a concealed deadly weapon while visiting or traveling through the states listed above, and also in Idaho, Indiana and Vermont. However, Delawareans who possess a concealed deadly weapon in another state will be subject to and are responsible for knowing and obeying all of the laws and regulations in the other state that apply to the carrying and possession of concealed or openly-carried deadly weapons....End

When made aware of this thread I got an email asking me to respond.
Before I did that i decided to call SLED Again. So I called SLED again (This AM) and talked to 2 different people. Both said they DID NOT have an agreement with DE.

It was hard for me to keep from raising my voice. It was not the fault of the two people I talked to today but the person I talked to 2 months ago. I really believe that they don't know and that only one person knows and SLED doesn't give out email addresses and it is difficult to get info out of them. I won't put here how I feel about this issue right now. This is a family board. It is tough enough to stay within the law but when a State AG says they have a signed agreement and then the other says they don't how are we to stay within the law. DE and SC have been the biggest headaches I have had in the 15+ years I have been doing this.

I just sent the changes to Steve for the DE and SC page that says SC WILL NOT HONOR a DE Permit/License. It is tough enough to keep up with changing things and you try to double check and still get incorrect information.

I can not view this thread so if you want to respond to it or contact me email me at [email protected]

Stay safe,
Gary Slider
Handgunlaw.us
 

Gary Slider

New member
(I registered so I could post this.)

The DE AG Reciprocity Page at
Delaware Department of Justice - Attorney Generals Office
Does say something about other states not honoring their permit/License. It states This:
Start
The Attorney General is in the process of securing agreements with the appropriate officials in certain other states which when completed, permit persons who have a concealed deadly weapon license or permit issued by one of those states to lawfully possess a concealed deadly weapon while visiting or traveling through Delaware. Similarly, Delawareans will be able to possess a concealed deadly weapon while visiting or traveling through those states. However, as of today Delaware does not recognize the concealed deadly weapon licenses or permits issued by states other than those listed below, and these states do not recognize Delaware's concealed deadly weapons licenses as valid..........End

But they are talking about the states not listed and not those listed as not honoring their Permit/License.

But below the list on the DE AG's Page it states this:

Start
Delawareans who have a Delaware concealed deadly weapons permit will be able to possess a concealed deadly weapon while visiting or traveling through the states listed above, and also in Idaho, Indiana and Vermont. However, Delawareans who possess a concealed deadly weapon in another state will be subject to and are responsible for knowing and obeying all of the laws and regulations in the other state that apply to the carrying and possession of concealed or openly-carried deadly weapons. Because of differences in the laws of the various states, it is possible that a person who is lawfully permitted to possess a deadly weapon pursuant to Delaware law may be prohibited from doing so in another state. Most other states require any person who is carrying a concealed deadly weapon pursuant to a license or permit to also be in possession of the license or permit. ....End

But again I called SLED over 2 months ago to confirm and was told they did have an agreement. After being informed of this thread I called again and was told NO.

SLED has been very slow in updating their site. I believe there is a good chance there is an agreement but at this time if SLED says no that is what most LEO's will go by. Many Reasons I say this. 1st SLED has taken up to 9 months in the past to post that they have signed an agreement. 2nd. There is one person in SLED who takes care of Agreements and He does it part time and was it is not a priority.

I had to straighten out DE over a year ago when they listed VA as a state they had signed with and VA said NO. In our discussions they finally told me they jumped the gun and didn't have an agreement and removed VA and didn't post it with a true agreement for over 6 months.

It is items like this that make people lose faith in their Government. Either DE or SC is wrong in one way or the other. Either an agreement exists or ir doesn't. Neither post their agreements on their website when they sign them like other states do.

The one thing good about this thread is it made me go back and look again. Thank you. The one thing I dislike most of all is having info that is incorrect. Though I go the extra to make sure sometimes even that is not enough.
 

Gary Slider

New member
(Edited) I apologize. I Tried posting and it didn't appear and I thought I lost it. Sorry for the extra post.

After thinking about this issue. I have a few other thoughts.

1st. SLED has given me wrong info in the past. There is only one person in charge of Reciprocity and they do it part time. The person who use to do it has moved on to another position and a new person is doing it. The previous person in this position didn't spend much time on it. In fact he told me it was low on his priority list and that he had more pressing matters to take care of.

2nd. Like I said before DE has posted on its Reciprocity Website in the past that they had agreements when they didn't. They posted in teh past they had an agreement with Virginia and when I talked to them and told them VA was saying there was no agreement they told me they jumped the gun and removed Virginia from their list. It was over 6 months later that they finally signed and agreement and added Virginia back on their list.

That is why when I saw it on the DE page I called SLED a few months ago. I wanted to make sure. I do know that SLED is very slow about updating their website. It took them 9 months to finally add a state that reported they had signed with them.

I would say that an agreement is either in the works or has actually been signed. I say this because DE posted it and SLED is so slow about getting the word out and I believe slow getting the word to the people who need to know. This is because it is a very low priority for them. But with SLED not posting that on their official website most LEO's in SC would believe that SC does not honor a DE Permit/License. We will just have to wait and see but we shouldn't have to wait and see.

Over the years I have to say that I have heard more complaints about SLED than any state and their Permit?license Division. Most of them were not very kind about SLED and almost all of them came from SC Residents. This episode reinforces all that I have heard about SLED.

It all boils down to one thing. Either the DE AG is posting something that is untrue and opening the residents of DE to being arrested in SC or SC doesn't know what is going on. One of them is dead wrong. The problem is we don't know which one!
 

Red Hat

New member
First welcome Gary! Thanks for chiming in on this. I know that DE has a law that says they must have a written agreement for reciprocity with a state but here is an example of an unwritten agreement between DE and AZ. Concealed Weapons Reciprocal and Recognition Agreements - Arizona Department of Public Safety

I feel like you that SLED may have made an agreement with DE but as usual they are taking their time on releasing the info. I've seen changes in gun laws take months and months to be updated on SLED's website so something like this is par for the course! As it is now we don't have a legal reciprocity with DE but SC CWP holders have permission from DE's AG to carry in DE. I don't know how you keep up with all the states...:wink:
 

ForceTech

Instructor
Gary,
Thank you for all of your research and efforts! I refer ALL of my students to your website as the best resource for traveling with firearms.

As a CWP instructor, you can imagine how frustrating it is to try to keep students informed on the current law. For instance, several significant laws have changed over the past two years, including allowing CWP holders to have a gun in their vehicle on school grounds, but the "official" written test we are required to give our students doesn't reflect that change (or others).

I realize that SLED has lost a significant amount of their budget and staff, so prioritizing is important; however, it's irresponsible of them not to properly educate their armed citizens and provide an accurate resource for travelers from reciprocal states.

I guess until someone is arrested for unwittingly breaking the law and sues SLED for not publishing the current law as required by statute, it will continue to be a low priority.

Thanks again for all of your hard work and dedication to the armed citizen.
 
Sled claiming budget problems as why they can't fix their CWP section, updating the website and test is just a smoke screen. Do the numbers.... figure out how much money they (the state) is making off of permits, both new applications and renewals and they are actually making money on this and could easily afford to keep the system updated.
I think the last time I did this...I figured out something like a million a year.
 

Gary Slider

New member
First, There is no law that mandates SLED has to post anything on the law. They don't have to. They should but they don't have to. I would bet if you look closely at the SLED sight there is a disclaimer somewhere that says they try to be correct with everything they post but it is up to the reader to confirm everything. Handgunlaw.us has the same disclaimer as I know it is impossible to know everything about any subject. Any website that tries to supply info especially about the law has such a disclaimer.

I have an email into the DE AG's office about the SC/DE Agreement. I got an email back from them saying my email was passed on to the proper person to answer my question in the AG's office thanking me for my email etc etc. It will be about a week and I will get something back. It will say yes they do or not they don't have a signed agreement. I also ask for a copy of the signed agreement giving them both my email and home address. If they have one I will most likely get a copy. We will just have to wait and see.

DE has jumped the gun in the past and listed states when they were just in the discussion state of the agreement and had to remove those states when I contacted them about it. They may have done that again. Like I said previously DE and SC are the two states that have been the most difficult to work with and get good info from. Again we will just have to wait and see.

But I believe there is an agreement already signed or will be in in the next several weeks. We will just have to wait and see.
 

Islander

New member
Just for the readers' FYI, SLED does not make law in SC, and who we have reciprocity with is determined by very clear language of law. Even though SLED is tasked with determining which states qualify for reciprocity, they have very little wiggle room on requirements. By law, we cannot have reciprocity with any state that does not have permit issuance standards which are less than ours. Another state honoring a SC permit does not automatically qualify that state to have full reciprocity with SC.

The one sticking point SLED may have with DE is that SC requires a CWP training course that is a minimum of 8 hours. DE has no minimum training time requirement. With that exception, the requirements of DE are pretty stringent, requiring more live fire and covering essentially all the same training topics, and then some. Hopefully SLED will weigh all this and give DE carriers a thumbs up! :biggrin:

Link Removed
SC Gun Laws, SECTION 23-31-215. Issuance of permits.

(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.
 

FN1910

New member
SLED shall maintain and publish a list of those states as the states with which South Carolina has reciprocity.

The problem is that the law does not state how to publish the list and I don't know where list is actually published.

Just like this section has been ignored by SLED and is in clear violation of this law. It has been in effect long enough to have been required.

(T) During the first quarter of each calendar year, SLED must publish a report of the following information regarding the previous calendar year:

(1) the number of permits;

(2) the number of permits that were issued;

(3) the number of permit applications that were denied;

(4) the number of permits that were renewed;

(5) the number of permit renewals that were denied;

(6) the number of permits that were suspended or revoked; and

(7) the name, address, and county of a person whose permit was revoked, including the reason for the revocation under Section 23-31-215(J)(1).

The report must include a breakdown of such information by county.
 

ForceTech

Instructor
Just for the readers' FYI, SLED does not make law in SC, and who we have reciprocity with is determined by very clear language of law. Even though SLED is tasked with determining which states qualify for reciprocity, they have very little wiggle room on requirements. By law, we cannot have reciprocity with any state that does not have permit issuance standards which are less than ours. Another state honoring a SC permit does not automatically qualify that state to have full reciprocity with SC.

The one sticking point SLED may have with DE is that SC requires a CWP training course that is a minimum of 8 hours. DE has no minimum training time requirement. With that exception, the requirements of DE are pretty stringent, requiring more live fire and covering essentially all the same training topics, and then some. Hopefully SLED will weigh all this and give DE carriers a thumbs up! :biggrin:

Link Removed
SC Gun Laws, SECTION 23-31-215. Issuance of permits.

(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.



You have just made my point: The statute you quote and linked from the SLED website is out of date by more than two years. In the summer of 2008, the law was changed so that states only have to require a background check and a course in firearms training and safety to eligible for a reciprocity agreement. The "meets or exceeds our standards" was removed.

To see the current law, go to this link: Link Removed Look for: 23-31-215 (N)

My point is that for CWP holders and travelers from reciprocal states would logically go to the SLED website for updates.
 

jdjon

New member
Gary,

I appreciate the good work you and your team do at handgunlaw. Luke also works very hard on this site. I also think it is very apparent that the South Carolina CWP Instructors are very informed. Thank You to all.
 

G50AE

Active member
Sled

Gary,

I appreciate the good work you and your team do at handgunlaw. Luke also works very hard on this site. I also think it is very apparent that the South Carolina CWP Instructors are very informed. Thank You to all.

It's also very apparent that as far as law enforcement agentcies go, SLED realy scrapes the bottom of the barrel.
 

Islander

New member
You have just made my point: The statute you quote and linked from the SLED website is out of date by more than two years. In the summer of 2008, the law was changed so that states only have to require a background check and a course in firearms training and safety to eligible for a reciprocity agreement. The "meets or exceeds our standards" was removed.

To see the current law, go to this link: Link Removed Look for: 23-31-215 (N)

My point is that for CWP holders and travelers from reciprocal states would logically go to the SLED website for updates.

Glad to be of service. :biggrin:

You are right, SLED is tasked by law to list and publish reciprocal states. Who is charged with deciding which state is reciprocal? Based on reading the law, it looks like it is simply defined in that paragraph. If a state requires a background check and safety and firearms training, they are a reciprocal state. But of course I'd need something in writing to recommend anyone who is not on SLED's list to carry here, even if their state covers all the bases.

SLED has the following reciprocity list published here: Link Removed

Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Residents of reciprocal states who hold permits issued by their states of residence may carry concealed firearms in South Carolina, but must abide by the restrictions in the South Carolina CWP law. For that reason, out of state residents of reciprocal states should familiarize themselves with restricted carry locations and other provisions of South Carolina law posted on this website. South Carolina permittees who carry firearms in reciprocal states are likewise responsible for familiarizing themselves with the applicable laws and regulations of the reciprocal state. Web sites of those states may be accessed by selecting the desired state name listed above.
 

FN1910

New member
You are right, SLED is tasked by law to list and publish reciprocal states. Who is charged with deciding which state is reciprocal? Based on reading the law, it looks like it is simply defined in that paragraph. If a state requires a background check and safety and firearms training, they are a reciprocal state. But of course I'd need something in writing to recommend anyone who is not on SLED's list to carry here, even if their state covers all the bases.

I agree with you that SLED does not determine who has reciprocity or grants it. That is defined in law and SLED only publishes it. However I am not ready to be the test case but SLED is definitely in violation of the law on their requirements of the CWP codes. I think that the Chief of SLED should either be relieved of his duties (fired) or jailed until they have fullfilled the requirements of the laws.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,392
Messages
623,130
Members
74,216
Latest member
medialodge
Top