South Carolina considers abolishing the CWP system

This is a discussion on South Carolina considers abolishing the CWP system within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I consider myself fairly politically aware, and especially so these last 4 months. Here recently, I have been pestering my state and federal politicians in ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 52
Like Tree44Likes

Thread: South Carolina considers abolishing the CWP system

  1. #1
    Member Array Sheepdogbubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    39

    South Carolina considers abolishing the CWP system

    I consider myself fairly politically aware, and especially so these last 4 months. Here recently, I have been pestering my state and federal politicians in order to remind them that I support the 2nd and they had better do so too if they wish to keep their job. Now is not the time to slack off and hope it all works out.

    Yet just today I heard about the proposed SC Senate Bill 115 or "The Constitutional Carry Act of 2013". There was a special public comment session in my local community tonight to discuss the bill with the Senators who are charged with reviewing and amending it. Unfortunately with such short notice, I was not able to go and check this session out, but I found news reports from other sessions around the state and the turnouts in support of the law seem to have been huge. The bill seeks to remove all restrictions on carry of weapons within the state (for residents), and change the code of laws to make "possession of a weapons with criminal intent" an illegal act, rather than just possession of a weapon (without a CWP). It would remove the entire CWP permit process. No licence needed, ever. So I guess SC would then become an open carry state as well, which we currently are not. SOUNDS GREAT RIGHT!? I mean I am all for removing any barrier to the 2nd.

    HOWEVER, in my searching I came across a commentary by a LGS owner who stated that he was obviously pro 2nd amendment, but that he did not support the bill. His argument was that training and minimal certification is paramount before wearing a gun out in the open or concealed. He said that he sees so many first time buyers who are clueless idiots, and that he worries what they will be like when they can just wear that new 1911 on their hip out of the store. I work in retail and I would concur that at least 50% of the people I come into contact with each day are abject morons who I would tremble at the thought of arming without training. With no manditory training, few poeple will be educated on the when and how they should (or should not) use their firearm. He further pointed out that the Police will now have a much harder time verifying if someone is carrying a weapon lawfully. Currently if a thug is printing, the officer can make inquires to see of that person can legally carry that firearm, but if this bill was enacted they would no longer have any ability to see if the person might perhaps be a felon. Unintended consequences. Do they sink this proposed legislation? It might be a long way off from becoming law, but it probably has never had a better chance than right now of passing in our state. I am just not sure if I should push for it, or seek better legislation such as expanded CWP rights? Sound off, please!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    MJK
    MJK is offline
    Senior Member Array MJK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    823
    The right of the people...shall not be infringed. This applies to so-called "morons" as well as you and me. When a fundamental right is subject to licensure in the name of safety then, to paraphrase Franklin, we deserve neither the right nor safety!

    I trust the people. Good riddance to SC's system of licensing!
    Crowman, phreddy, RickyD and 8 others like this.
    [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. ---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    ^ What he said.........
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,633
    Gee... shot a gun for years without "official training" ... how did I ever live and not kill someone. My grandfather taught me how to shoot, to be safe, etc. The PROBLEM with training is..... ya'alls generation didin't learn and / or aren't teaching your kids to handle guns and be safe with them. So now.... oh gee, we got to find some certified guy to teach us. Grandfathers, fathers, and mothers..... need to get back to teaching their kids, and quit all relying on some "class" somewhere, as if that is somehow magical. And I'm talking basic how to handle a gun, how to shoot a gun, and how to be safe with a gun.

    In the meantime, get the dads and the mothers trained, if they don't know. But.... I would have a real issue with the guy at the LGS .... because he's trying to get the state to make it mandatory so that he can make money off of it. If he has good training, he should be promoting it and telling everyone he sells a gun to about it ... and if he has decent prices.... they'll more than likely attend and go to it. But, if it's mandatory, he can charge twice as much and then say "well , you have to have it".

    OK ... so lets make all of you guys go to the Police Academy.... and how many Police officers have ND"s ? Well, then that must not be good enough either. Let's put everyone thru the miltary and then we know everyone's trained.

    Where do you start and where do you stop ? What makes anyone think "their training " is the do all be all of all the training out there ? And training for ?????? .... basic firearm safety ? self-defense ? laws of the state ? .... gee, you could earn a degree before you get done. Maybe we should give PELL grants and offer financing for it .

    I don't have a thing against training of any kind, and think any training anyone gets ... as long as it's not from a moron .... is good. But .. do you really want that put into the laws, because some gun shop owner wants to MAKE you take it from him.

    >>> sarcasim off <<<<

    I'll give you an example. Something if you look it up you'll find it true,.... but your VET won't likley tell you. Get a 2 shot rabies sequence for your puppy, and 7 yrs later, he'll still test good for his antibodies for rabies. Drug companies quit testing after 3 & 4 yrs, because it's expensive to keep up their study , they don't want to do that.... they want you to buy their product anyway.. more often. Then we get to the VETS themselves.... who keep teling the Cities, etc..... a dog needs rabies shot EVERY YEAR .... you know why ? ..... because they want you to come in and get a shot, pay them for an exam, and any other tests and shots they can throw in every year. But, is ONLY ONE vaccine out there for rabies that is only good for 1 yr..... they are ALL 3-4 yrs . But the Vets don't want to lose the money.

    Are all those yearly shots good for a dog ? NOPE.... would you give your kid 6-7 vaccines every year ? You are your dog, since some are 2-4 combined vaccines in one shot. The result, lower life spans, and all the ailments, etc. increasing in dogs that are a result of over-vaccination. Studies being done since about 1990 have been showing.... ya'all are literally killing off your dogs and shortening their lives with over- vaccinations they don't need, as the vaccines are effective way beyond what they'll tell you they are.

    So.... if 1 training course is good..... 10 must be even better. Wow... let's just make it 1000 hours of training. I wouldn't give the anti-gun folks one "inch" ... of something they can use to restrict and prohibit gun ownership. Do gang bangers go thru training ? We need to put that in the laws too. Yep, that's the ticket.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,599
    Any gun reg you can rid yourself of do so and thank your lucky stars. Police have no business randomly checking printing carriers with no probably cause. They cannot do it in ky and we are not the wild west everyone fears.

    Mandatory training or anything else is infringement of 2A. Push it support it learn it live it and love it if you can get that done in your state.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,331
    Most of the mandatory training is simply the anatomy of a firearm and basic "keep your finger off the trigger and don't point the muzzle at anything you don't want shot" stuff. I've never seen a class that offered "when you could or should shoot, legal ramifications, justified vs. unjustified, etc." types of stuff. While "training" sounds good, most of the truly valuable information is either found in training that you seek out and pay for yourself or have the inclination to research yourself. Basic concealed carry classes rarely go into that type of depth.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  8. #7
    Member Array flphotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Clearwater,FL
    Posts
    305
    The only problem I see would be with reciprocity. If you don't have a permit from you state there may be problems there. I believe that is the reason Vermont residents can't carry in FL. No permit, no reciprocity. Not saying I agree with this just that that's the way it is.
    revldm likes this.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    The permit system will stay in place as an option. It will not be required for carry in state. I do not see more states accepting our permit as a result of this. So rights for SC citizens out of state should not change for the better or worse.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    Since Vermont was mentioned, it would seem that all the problems with not requiring training in order to carry would be taking place there. Anybody heard of any major problems with police being able to identify criminals or untrained morons not knowing whether to shoot or not? Do these problems take place with any greater frequency in Vermont than they do in states that require training and permits?
    RickyD, Pistology and Bmoliv66 like this.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

  11. #10
    Member Array Vermontgunowner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Westminster, Vermont
    Posts
    96
    I think your worries are unfonded. In vermont we have never had permits and there has never been a problem. As near as anyone can tell 70% of all homes here have a firearm and its the safest state in the country. If any of your legislaters need info on this have them contact me at 802-463-9026. I'm always happy to help on 2nd amendment issues.
    Ed Cutler
    Legislative Director
    Gun Owers of Vermont
    goldshellback likes this.

  12. #11
    Distinguished Member Array bigmacque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,770
    Eagleks, you actually did have training, and probably excellent training: your grandfather.

    I know that when it comes time to teach my grandson, my efforts will be over the top diligent simply because he's my flesh and blood.

    I agree with some form of training, I think there are a lot of people that don't have the common sense necessary to just walk into the LGS, pick one of the shelf, load it up and shove it in their pants and go about their business.
    I'm in favor of gun control -- I think every citizen should have control of a gun.
    1 Thess. 5:16-18

  13. #12
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,142
    "Pro Second Amendment" is a subjective concept. Biden and Obama assure us they both believe in it. As with duck hunting, muskets, and double-barrel shotguns, the Second Amendment makes no mention of Concealed Handgun Permit courses.
    The idea that a two, four, or eight-hour basic program genuinely prepares a "moron" to carry is one to which I do not adhere. I take absolutely no comfort in knowing that a CHL holder has taken a course in which he learned about the four components of a cartridge, the nomenclature of a single-action revolver, and how to shout "I have a gun and I'm calling the police" prior to taking an open-book, fifty-question test.
    "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."
    Tuco

  14. #13
    Member Array Vermontgunowner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Westminster, Vermont
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by Gene83 View Post
    Since Vermont was mentioned, it would seem that all the problems with not requiring training in order to carry would be taking place there. Anybody heard of any major problems with police being able to identify criminals or untrained morons not knowing whether to shoot or not? Do these problems take place with any greater frequency in Vermont than they do in states that require training and permits?
    There are no problems in Vermont. In fact I think were the only state in the union that dosent prohibit fellons from owning firearms. This is a really complicated issue but understand that in Vermont 3rd conviction of driving without a license is a fellony. There are lots more laws like this and the gun rights organization in this state will not accept this kind of law. Lets not forget that the founding fathers of this country and especially my state were traiters and fellons by the laws of the king and parlement
    RmScadd likes this.

  15. #14
    Distinguished Member
    Array RickyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    1,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Gene83 View Post
    Since Vermont was mentioned, it would seem that all the problems with not requiring training in order to carry would be taking place there. Anybody heard of any major problems with police being able to identify criminals or untrained morons not knowing whether to shoot or not? Do these problems take place with any greater frequency in Vermont than they do in states that require training and permits?
    Methinks I identify some sarcasm...

    Agreed that VT and other states with no training requirement (including my home state of GA) demonstrate that forcing training does not necessarily make for a safer state.

    Although I personally recommend training for anyone who is new to our world; I do not believe that the state should require such training.

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array Gene83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyD View Post
    Methinks I identify some sarcasm...

    Agreed that VT and other states with no training requirement (including my home state of GA) demonstrate that forcing training does not necessarily make for a safer state.

    Although I personally recommend training for anyone who is new to our world; I do not believe that the state should require such training.
    It actually wasn't meant as sarcasm. I know that Vermont is one of the states that don't require permits. I've not heard of any problems there, but I thought a member who lived in the state or in the vicinity might be aware of some problem. Personally, I think training is only common sense but in my state the training required for a permit is a basic familiarity with the gun laws and an ability to at least hit the paper most of the time. There's no requirement for common sense at all.
    "The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come." ~ Confucius

Page 1 of 4 1234 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

change name on sc cwp
,
cwp changes in sc
,

sc bill 115

,
sc considers no carry permit for guns
,
sc constitutional carry
,
sc constitutional carry 2013
,
south carolina abolish concealed
,

south carolina cwp ambolish

,
south carolina cwp restrictions 2013
,

south carolina getting rid of cwp

,
south carolina getting rid of cwp 2013
,

south carolina gun cwp amendent

Click on a term to search for related topics.