Confused on CCW Reform bill - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Confused on CCW Reform bill

This is a discussion on Confused on CCW Reform bill within the South Carolina Discussion and Firearm News forums, part of the Firearms Discussion by State category; Originally Posted by blume357@ the problem with the bill as it is proposed with amendments is that it would make ...

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester State Forest, SC
    Posts
    362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blume357@ View Post
    the problem with the bill as it is proposed with amendments is that it would make it illegal for anyone from out of state to have a handgun in S.C. unless they have a permit from their home state that is recognized by S.C.
    Carry the way it is written in S.C. law also means to transport... which means folks with out a recognized permit from their home state will not be able to have a handgun in S.C. anywhere.... not in their glove box or even in their trunk unloaded.

    Grassroots found this unacceptable... it is a clear violation of the 2nd amendment and it a big step backwards for gun rights. They, of which I belong, don't think we should throw out the rights of others to get a something else.
    Stop confusing him, I mean some people, with the facts...
    "I believe we should achieve a national standard on gun control, and that standard should be none whatsoever."

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blume357@ View Post
    the problem with the bill as it is proposed with amendments is that it would make it illegal for anyone from out of state to have a handgun in S.C. unless they have a permit from their home state that is recognized by S.C.
    Carry the way it is written in S.C. law also means to transport... which means folks with out a recognized permit from their home state will not be able to have a handgun in S.C. anywhere.... not in their glove box or even in their trunk unloaded.

    Grassroots found this unacceptable... it is a clear violation of the 2nd amendment and it a big step backwards for gun rights. They, of which I belong, don't think we should throw out the rights of others to get a something else.
    AGREED....
    i have family members come into the state all the time some have permits that are reciprocal some don't.....my father has a Va permit my mother doesn't have any permit....if they come to visit me and my father leave a gun in the glove box and my mom runs to the store and happens to get stopped...she would be looking at a 10 year firearm violation according to this version of this bill.....or if say she borrowed one of my vehicles since i keep handguns in the consoles of some of them........again if stopped she would be in violation of the law......
    ** also under "possession laws" if she was in the passenger seat of my car she would be in "possession" of the gun in the glove box and even if i were driving...technically she could be charged......this is UNACCEPTABLE

    if for no other reason this would be reason enough to vote this bill down as it now stands....

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Unfortunately, this Viers guy royally screwed up the amendment he wrote to the original bill. I hope that he didn't do it intentionally, but it looks like he will not even admit to what he has done. I sure hope we get something positive out of this, but it is looking less likely by the day.
    I am not a member of Grassroots, but I keep up with what they are doing through their Yahoo group. I appreciate what they do. The NRA does some good things nationally. They seem to endorse too many anti-gun candidates for my liking. They are less than worthless on a state level. I am still a member of the NRA. I like the magazines. I know that is not a very good reason.
    I am still hoping for restaurant carry and I hope we get it this year. That and the parking lot bill are the top 2 on my wish list right now.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Greenville
    Posts
    341

    Default

    I agree Big Boom... I think the problem was the original bill had too much stuff in it... then Viers put his amendment in and I assume he did not realize what it would do.... I think they were trying to stop illegal aliens from carrying in S.C.... which is kind of stupid anyway since they by nature are illegal.

    From where I sit... the real problem was Viers, as you stated, would not admit his amd. was flawed and wants to blame others for his mistake.

    It sure would be nice to get the Restaurant carry thing in there...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,836

    Default

    I would like the restaurant bill but unless the parking lot bill is changed I am 100% against it and from some of the comments at the committee hearing on H.3292 it has no chance without those changes.

    H.3292 is dead and I doubt that we see anything close to it for some time. At one time I thought it had a good chance but now I give it less than 5% of making it through the House and less than 1% through the Senate. After what has happened to Viers no one is going to touch it.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •