South Carolina People - Alcohol Carry discussion - Page 2

South Carolina People - Alcohol Carry discussion

This is a discussion on South Carolina People - Alcohol Carry discussion within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Actually I like Fatz much better than Applebee's. My days of hanging around bars is long past but Lester's Tiger Den did almost keep me ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 41
  1. #16
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    Actually I like Fatz much better than Applebee's. My days of hanging around bars is long past but Lester's Tiger Den did almost keep me from getting my degree from Clemson.


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by FN1910 View Post
    Actually I like Fatz much better than Applebee's. My days of hanging around bars is long past but Lester's Tiger Den did almost keep me from getting my degree from Clemson.
    See... you should have gone during the time frame that a bar called "the Library" was open!

  3. #18
    Senior Member Array jframe38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    620
    Actually I've heard two versions of this law:
    1. Can't carry in an establishment that serves
    2. Can carry if you don't actually drink an alcoholic beverage.
    I wouldn't trust SLED to give accurate info. They told me that I could purchase a used gun in NC w/o any paperwork. Thanks to Cphilip I got the straight scoop.

  4. #19
    New Member Array billc1972's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    5

    Official Opinion Requested From SC Attorney General

    At the end of January, I wrote the South Carolina Attorney General's office to ask for an official opinion on this subject. Two days ago I got a response from that office informing me that the AG's office only issues official opinions at the request of public officials. So I sent my original letter and the AG's response to my state senator. Today I received a copy of the letter that my state senator sent to the AG's office requesting an official opinion on the matter. When I get a response, I will post it here. Judging by how long it took for me to find out that I needed to get a public official to make the request, it may be a while.

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Is this Bill from the Grass Roots SC?

    Welcome either way Bill.

    I was told that they had asked way back in 2001 or so. And they never got a straight answer then either.

  6. #21
    New Member Array billc1972's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    5

    Letter To SC AG

    I'm not from Grass Roots SC--just a concerned SC CWP holder. If they asked and never got a response, I may be wasting my time too, but it's worth a shot.

  7. #22
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by billc1972 View Post
    I'm not from Grass Roots SC--just a concerned SC CWP holder. If they asked and never got a response, I may be wasting my time too, but it's worth a shot.
    They asked... and got ignored. According to them.

    I think they are pushing it again now that they have "heard" that something is not exactly right. But they read it and thought the same thing I am all along.

    But keep up the good work! Never hurts to ask. Keep us in the loop what you hear.

  8. #23
    Senior Member Array XD in SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    660
    We were 'taught' by the instructor that officially, "According SLED you cannot carry into an establishment that OFFERS alcohol for consumption on premises". Sales or otherwise is how he stated it.

    I read the laws when I was taking the class, and after this statement, and saw what you saw CPhillip. I don't drink, so I am not going to let it change the way I live anyway.

    Remember the unwritten rule......."Concealed means concealed". If they don't see it, then there is nothing to complain about.

    Although most CWP holders believe what they are taught, and do NOT read the law for themselves.

    We also were told that once we have a CWP, we can no longer carry in our glovebox or console. We all know that is wrong.

    Maybe we will see something from the AG this time? Or we will hear about a change coming to the laws.

    BTW, Fatz rocks! I hate to drive so far to eat there, but when I am in the area, I will be eating there.
    Sean
    XD 9SC | XD 45ACP Service | XD 45ACP Compact |Borealis
    "You may know where you are. God may know where you are. If you don't tell your dispatcher where you are, you'd better be on speaking terms with God!"

  9. #24
    New Member Array billc1972's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    5

    I got a response from the SC AG

    Well it didn't take long. I received a 6 page letter from the SC Attorney General's office in the mail today. I won't transcribe the entire letter, but here is the final paragraph:

    -----
    As the law of this state is currently written, a concealed weapons permit holder may not carry a firearm onto the premises of an establishment which serves alcohol. Any establishment which serves alcohol on the premises is included in the prohibition - bar and restaurant alike.

    Sincerely,
    David K. Avant
    Assistant Attorney General
    -----

    The rest of the letter just discussed various other cases in the history of SC where the General Assembly obviously intended to keep alcohol and firearms separated. They concluded that the law mentioning establishments that serve alcohol was meant to be a prohibition--not an additional penalty for unlawful carry.

    So this may not have been what everyone was wanting to hear, but this is straight from the horse's mouth. It looks like we need to continue pressuring our state representatives to change the law.

  10. #25
    Senior Member Array XD in SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    660
    Atleast we have an "Official" response to this.

    no more gray area
    Sean
    XD 9SC | XD 45ACP Service | XD 45ACP Compact |Borealis
    "You may know where you are. God may know where you are. If you don't tell your dispatcher where you are, you'd better be on speaking terms with God!"

  11. #26
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by billc1972 View Post
    Well it didn't take long. I received a 6 page letter from the SC Attorney General's office in the mail today. I won't transcribe the entire letter, but here is the final paragraph:

    -----
    As the law of this state is currently written, a concealed weapons permit holder may not carry a firearm onto the premises of an establishment which serves alcohol. Any establishment which serves alcohol on the premises is included in the prohibition - bar and restaurant alike.
    Sincerely,
    David K. Avant
    Assistant Attorney General
    -----

    The rest of the letter just discussed various other cases in the history of SC where the General Assembly obviously intended to keep alcohol and firearms separated. They concluded that the law mentioning establishments that serve alcohol was meant to be a prohibition--not an additional penalty for unlawful carry.

    So this may not have been what everyone was wanting to hear, but this is straight from the horse's mouth. It looks like we need to continue pressuring our state representatives to change the law.


    Interestingly enough... he is wrong.

    It is NOT included in the prohibitions. Not at all. Its simply NOT there. As you can clearly see for yourself. That is simply a complete lie. That was and still is my point. Its not included in the prohibitions. Never has been and to date still has not been added.

    I know what their intent was. Everyone knows. However they failed to meet the mark. And they know it. He seems to be admitting it there... almost... Which is why they are teaching the Law Enforcement Officers that it is NOT the law and to not charge people with that offense. Without seeing the whole letter it almost sounds to me like he is arguing that the "additional penalty" inclusion was a mistake. Which was one of my assumptions. However it surprises me that he wishes to hang his legal hat on that in court he can enforce their mistake! I would think they would change it if it was a mistake? Wondered about that all along.

    Again... your on your own here. It is still a Gray area. Because its an opinion and its based upon a false statement of fact. And an argument of their position which has always been their position. That really surprises me that he would simply not point to the law as it stands. He says it is were it is not. Amazing. There you have it. It iss, according to him, a mistake in the way the law was written? And so its law anyway? Nope... it don't work that way. It would be fairly simple for them to have fixed this so why not do it? I think they are reaching here. Far reaching. But... again... be careful with any of this. But I simply don't buy what he is trying to claim. Of course we all know thats been their stance all along. But why teach otherwise to the LEO's if they really believe it will hold up? But I am not going to test it in court. I don't really have much reason too. But if they intended it to be a prohibition they completely missed the right place to put it.... IN THE PROHIBITIONS! LOL!

    Bill, if you don't mind, could you scan that letter and post it up? Would be a valuable resource.

    I think this tells us they intend to stick to this position and not publicly change their stance on it though. Which implies they are not willing to tell us different. Everyone I have talked to recently says that, officially, they are not going to change that position. This confirms that.

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Ok now that I can... I will give you a little more background into why I even brought this up in the first place. Because I had no reason to do so until I was told that LEO's were being taught differently than we were. But at the time I first started researching this I couldn't tell you everything exactly as I wanted to. The reason for that was that my Kid was in SC Justice Academy and I didn't want something to interfere with his completing academy. But his teachings where the source of my being alerted to the fact that LEO's are being taught not to arrest for this charge alone. He had not graduated at that time but now has... and so it is clear now that it will not affect that.

    But he came home one week from Academy telling me this fact. I asked him to go back and discuss it with the instructors and make sure. He did and he confirmed it. And he was told by them, and I quote... "... all CWP holders will THINK its against the law but do not arrest them for this alone..."

    Now... at that point and after researching it a while (trying to prove them wrong) I ended up not being able to. And so I reported what I found. What does this mean? Well some thought it might mean that SLED and the AG had changed their stance on this. It appears not.

    So why tell LEO's not to enforce it if they really believe it was law?

    I have a few theories. I think I alluded to them earlier in this thread.

    1) that they would rather not us know that the legislature missed the mark on the writing of the legislation. And they clearly did. No matter their intent they flat out wrote it wrong. Or did they? What was their exact intent? to prohibit all carry in a Restaraunt that happens to serve Alcohol no matter if your drinking or not? Who knows. I would guess bars for certain. But every case and instance? I dunno... because they put it in the WRONG place. Odd because they were CREATING a list of prohibitions and just failed to even put it there? Why?

    2) By not enforcing it they never have to prove it is as they want to interpret it. Nor have to change it. So, it does appear to me that it will never BE proven in court. Because the charge will be something precluding it and it be only an Additional Penalty. So if your not going to arrest for simply concealed carry in a establishment that serves alcohol then you will never know will you? Every case I know of it was applied has some other circumstance before it. No one I know of has ever been charged for this and this alone. And it appears they are not going to charge you for it and it alone

    Where does that leave us? Right back where we started. We got nothing! We got an unclear law that is going to be "defined" by "intent" rather than law. And one that may very well never be enforced because they just don't want to upset the apple cart of it.

    I feared this was the case. And I don't know that it helps to even know any of this. Because, the whole thing is a mess.

    What really bothers me is, as a Resident of SC, what legislation do you push for? Do you push for a relief of this so you can go into Appleby's and have a meal? Or do you leave it alone for fear the results will be worse? I mean, if you own legal system is going to "fool you and lie to you" then what do you do?

    This is why I repeated my warnings all along that this whole thing will never be clear. Even with an AG opinion it will be only evidence that the Charade is being foisted upon us but may never be clear. I think we take this to Grass Roots and see what they can do with it all. They got a smart lawyer. Let him work on it some more.

    Buy I am going to tell you this much. I for one, as a law abiding citizen of this state, do not take kindly to being "hoodwinked" by SLED, AG's office or anyone else. I simply want to know the law so I can follow the law. And this situation is intolerable and an outrage to me. I am pretty mad about it.

    In the mean time we assume they are going to interpret it as law. Even when we cannot find it to be. I seriously doubt they will want to find out in court, from what I am seeing here.... nor will we!

  13. #28
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    One thing to remember is that an AG opinion is just that, an opinion and has no legal bearing. Under normal circumstances the LEO will make arrests or not based on AG opinions but then in a court of law the charges can be overturned. I have said many times that if a Supreme Court, who is supposed to be the most knowledgeable of our laws of anyone, cannot decide on what a law means, usually a 5-4 decision, then how is the average man to know what the law is.

    Looks like it will take a popular vote of the SC Supreme Court to decide this but I don't plan to be the test case. I nominate XD in SC to do it and I will donate $10 to the defense fund.

  14. #29
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    I am told that there is no case law on this in SC. In fact there is NO case law involving specifically a Concealed Weapons Permit holder at all in SC. Which is good sort of. But not for this particular question because there is never a real answer until case law decides it.


    And it appears to me that the way its being handled avoids settling it once and for all. I mean if you don't even arrest anyone for it, and it alone, how would it ever get determined?

    I am going to try and get anything I can get now that I am free to pursue this. I think there may be some correspondence that is FOI that uncovers what I want to see.

    Like I say... I don't mind what it is as long as I know it is. I can work from there. But I don't like being lied too. I, and any other SC resident deserves to know the truth. And be able to comply with the law. And if that resident doesn't like the law he needs to know what it is before he can work to change the law.

  15. #30
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by FN1910 View Post
    Looks like it will take a popular vote of the SC Supreme Court to decide this but I don't plan to be the test case. I nominate XD in SC to do it and I will donate $10 to the defense fund.
    All true it appears.


    Me too! I'll even go $20!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. South Carolina carry laws
    By bubbahoundog in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 12th, 2010, 10:35 AM
  2. South Carolina Gun Show Carry
    By REVMAN in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: December 16th, 2009, 12:11 PM
  3. South Carolina Open Carry?
    By kelcarry in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: December 7th, 2009, 01:51 PM
  4. South Carolina - Concealed Carry in Restaruants where Alcohol is Served
    By GizmoHD in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 8th, 2009, 07:31 PM
  5. South Carolina open carry
    By snip in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: January 19th, 2009, 10:24 PM

Search tags for this page

can a weapon be carried in a resturant that serves beer and wine in sc. if the person has a cwp

,

carrying alcohol from south carolina to ga

,

concealed carry laws sc alcohol

,

is it against the law to drink and drive with a concealed weapon in south carolina ?

,

lester's tiger den

,

lesters tiger den

,

lesters tiger den clemson

,

s.c.carry laws

,

south carolina alcohol carry laws

,

south carolina cwp and alcohol consumption

,

south carolina law carrying alcohol on persons

,

state of south carolina court cases where conviction of carrying a pistol into a business which sells alcohol

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors