South Carolinaaaaaaaa - Page 2

South Carolinaaaaaaaa

This is a discussion on South Carolinaaaaaaaa within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Just don't be the test case Rob. The agreement between VA and SC hasn't been signed yet. I'd wait until it's signed...Which is frustrating for ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 37
  1. #16
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,291
    Just don't be the test case Rob. The agreement between VA and SC hasn't been signed yet. I'd wait until it's signed...Which is frustrating for me since I plan on being down that way this weekend (Brunswick Co, NC - close enough to the border for midnight raids...er I mean slushy runs )
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Ok.... I don't think we have to wait for any such agreements by SLED to be done. In fact that is what was eliminated. We might do have to wait for SLED to update the list to be sure which ones are clearly reciprocal. However the very act of SLED determining what states were equal in requirements was exactly what was taken away from them. Before this, they were charged with determining states eligible for reciprocity and they dragged their feet on each one of them. Studying one at a time and taking years to do each one. This is exactly why the amendment was passed but did it really hit the mark? It is an amendment to the existing law which said they were supposed to reciprocate with states with same requirements already. But they were charged with "Determining that". Now they still have to make a list. Is that not a determination? How do you make a list without checking?


    Section N (the amended section) used to read like this:

    (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.


    Now it reads like this:

    (N) Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of a reciprocal state must be honored by this State, provided, that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety. A resident of a reciprocal state carrying a concealable weapon in South Carolina is subject to and must abide by the laws of South Carolina regarding concealable weapons. SLED shall maintain and publish a list of those states as the states with which South Carolina has reciprocity."


    So, in essence, the thing that changed was "SLED Determination" and so its just a matter of publishing the list. They are obviously going to have to make a determination but its unclear to me how much leeway they have now to determine. However, at no point, do I see that they ever had to "sigh agreements" of any kind in SC. They may have done so, but that was on their own methodology and not required by the law, before or after.

    And no... I am not going to come bail you out of Jail if I am wrong. At this point the SLED site makes no mention of this. And still reads as it did from a February update. I imagine they will take their sweet time and I also imagine it will take some time for it to trickle down to the LEO's,

  3. #18
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    Quote Originally Posted by cphilip View Post
    Ok.... I don't think we have to wait for any such agreements by SLED to be done. In fact that is what was eliminated. We might do have to wait for SLED to update the list to be sure which ones are clearly reciprocal. However the very act of SLED determining what states were equal in requirements was exactly what was taken away from them. Before this, they were charged with determining states eligible for reciprocity and they dragged their feet on each one of them. This is exactly why the amendment was passed. It is an amendment to the existing law which said they were supposed to reciprocate with states with same requirements.


    Section N (the amended section) used to read like this:

    (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.


    Now it reads like this:

    (N) Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of a reciprocal state must be honored by this State, provided, that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety. A resident of a reciprocal state carrying a concealable weapon in South Carolina is subject to and must abide by the laws of South Carolina regarding concealable weapons. SLED shall maintain and publish a list of those states as the states with which South Carolina has reciprocity."


    So, in essence, the thing that changed was "SLED Determination" and so its just a matter of publishing the list. They are obviously going to have to make a determination but its unclear to me how much leeway they have now to determine. However, at no point, do I see that they ever had to "sigh agreements" of any kind in SC. They may have done so, but that was on their own methodology and not required by the law, before or after.

    And no... I am not going to come bail you out of Jail if I am wrong. At this point the SLED site makes no mention of this. And still reads as it did from a February update. I imagine they will take their sweet time and I also imagine it will take some time for it to trickle down to the LEO's,
    I think you are exactly right on this as the law now just says SLED is to publish the list. What you have said is my interpretation and no I am not planning on trying to bail anyone out either.

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    I added a few more things on my edit that didn't get into your quote but the essence is the same. Most of the edit was my own frustrations on the vagueness of the amendment and how SLED might treat it. We also know that the AG has a tendency to reach completely out into la la land to interpret these things with no real facts to back them up. This concerns me as well. He and SLED might just determine that we don't got squat

  5. #20
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    I have thought about that same thing but hope that SLED and the AG looks at this as a test. If they still drag their feet then the House version will be waiting as I am sure it will be reintroduced next session. SLED will have a hard time defending their position if they play hardball.

  6. #21
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    I imagine they were behind the wording so they could fain ignorance and confusion.

    I hate to say that. But leaving them to "make a list" and putting in the "conducts background Checks and Training" put us just right back to square one. In that they have to somehow determine if a state has those things in place in order to "make a list". And no set time table was included for them to "make a list" of them. And, I would imagine they will now ask the AG what it means. And of course that will take time... and he will likely say they can take all the time they need.... It reeks... I hope I am completely wrong on that. Lets hope I am.

  7. #22
    Member Array Henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    79
    This still sucks for me. Indiana recognizes SC's permit, since they recognize everyone's. But Indiana does not require training, so SC won't recognize Indiana's permit. I have training, and a Florida permit, but since I'm not a Florida resident SC won't recognize my FL permit. I guess that SC is still a no-go for me!

  8. #23
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    Office of the West Virginia Attorney General - Darrell McGraw

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    Contact: Tom Smith
    Phone: (304) 558-2021


    Release Date: June 13, 2008
    Change in South Carolina Handgun Laws Could Lead to West Virginia CCW Permits Being Honored


    Attempts by West Virginia to enter into a concealed handgun reciprocity agreement with South Carolina have been unsuccessful. Inconsistencies between the two states’ laws precluded and agreement. As a consequence, West Virginia concealed handgun licenses are not honored in South
    Carolina. This would appear to have changed with the passage by the South Carolina General Assembly of H.B. 3212.

    H.B. 3212, which will become effective upon approval by Governor Mark Sanford, requires that all valid out-of-state concealed handguns be honored in South Carolina. The action by South Carolina does not effect the recognition of South Carolina licenses in West Virginia which can only be accomplished through a reciprocity agreement. The Attorney General’s Office will be contacting South Carolina immediately upon Governor Sanford’s approval about an agreement.

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array FlyboyLDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by cphilip View Post
    ....Section N (the amended section) used to read like this:

    (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.


    Now it reads like this:

    (N) Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of a reciprocal state must be honored by this State, provided, that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety. A resident of a reciprocal state carrying a concealable weapon in South Carolina is subject to and must abide by the laws of South Carolina regarding concealable weapons. SLED shall maintain and publish a list of those states as the states with which South Carolina has reciprocity."


    So, in essence, the thing that changed was "SLED Determination" and so its just a matter of publishing the list. They are obviously going to have to make a determination but its unclear to me how much leeway they have now to determine. However, at no point, do I see that they ever had to "sigh agreements" of any kind in SC. They may have done so, but that was on their own methodology and not required by the law, before or after.........
    So instead of "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"

    "that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety".

    Is this not stating the same? Were their standards not at least ""that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety" prior to the amended law? To me it says the same thing. If our state does not mandate firearms training AND background check - then SC will not honor that respective state's carry permits/license/ccw.

    I think it just spells out more clearly what is meant by "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"

    Since GA does not mandate firearms training/instruction - then SC will still deny GA - just the same as it will deny any other states that fall into this cateogory.

  10. #25
    Senior Member Array press1280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    750
    Excellent.......I'll have the east coast from VA to FL(minus GA though ) covered when this is final.
    "The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
    Nunn v. State GA 1848

  11. #26
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    Excellent.......I'll have the east coast from VA to FL(minus GA though ) covered when this is final.
    Get a NH permit to cover GA. $20 and fill out the form along with a copy of your other permit.

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyboyLDB View Post
    So instead of "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"

    "that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety".

    Is this not stating the same? Were their standards not at least ""that the reciprocal state requires an applicant to successfully pass a criminal background check and a course in firearm training and safety" prior to the amended law? To me it says the same thing. If our state does not mandate firearms training AND background check - then SC will not honor that respective state's carry permits/license/ccw.

    I think it just spells out more clearly what is meant by "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"

    Since GA does not mandate firearms training/instruction - then SC will still deny GA - just the same as it will deny any other states that fall into this cateogory.
    And so one wonders why SLED got behind that version?

    I think so. I hope not but I think so. It should be remembered that GOA fought it, and so did most CWP holders. We didn't want that version. We got ram rodded into it. Heck even NRA backed that slop. It was take it or leave it. But to me, it is very little progress.

    I am skeptical of its overall significance because I am fairly skeptical of SLED and our AG's commitment to the CWP program. Others keep telling me different. They claim SLED has no such bias. So... go ahead SLED, and prove me wrong.

  13. #28
    Member Array tabraha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    S.C.
    Posts
    222
    Perhaps we could submit a list of the other 49 states as a suggestion for this new "reciprocity list" to make it easier.
    ______________________
    Tad A.

  14. #29
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    I wish they would just let me help them get that list up! :D

  15. #30
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,768
    I have been waiting for this news. In the past, we have camped in Myrtle Beach, but I will not go back until Mr. Kimber has full privileges...I have to see it in writing...

    Stay armed...where ever you camp...stay safe!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

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 Fl help?
    By fernset in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2010, 08:49 AM
  2. going south
    By alien in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: June 15th, 2008, 08:23 PM
  3. Hey Y'all from the South!
    By Smoked in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: January 9th, 2007, 10:26 PM

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors