Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: H. 3212 has passed the Senate

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    H. 3212 has passed the Senate and been sent back to the House as follows:
    "(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 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 can make of it whatever you want and either urge the House to pass or reject it. Under this version I think that VA will be included but GA will not. I have no idea if it is any better than the previous version or not. I would think that it will pass the House but have no idea when it/if will be considered.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    Hopefully they force it to conference. The bill sucks, still discriminates against non-residents of license holders

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Thank you for your recent email regarding H. 3212. I wanted to let you know that the Senate passed it today with the amendment below:



    Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 1, by striking SECTION 1 in its entirety and inserting:

    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 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.”



    The NRA helped draft and also supports this bill with this amendment. Thank you again for contacting me.

    Regards,

    Jake Knotts [code]

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Goochland, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    585

    Post imported post

    I wonder if a criminal in SC uses a firearm to slaughter an unarmed victim, will the criminal get extra jail time if they do not have firearms training?

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    They will get extra jail time for merely possessing a fire arm through the NRA's Palmetto Exile, the state's Project Exile, thanks to GOSC the NRA aSSiliate. One one is 'criminal' only after the fact.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Since [a gentleman] posted his exchange with Shane Massey, here's mine. His initial response was the same to me as to Bill. My response to his response was similar.
    [a gentleman]
    N. Augusta

    Mr. [gentleman],

    I certainly didn't mean to suggest an association between you and the NRA. Many individuals and groups have an interest in this bill, and I simply intended to point out that we're working with the different interests to see what we can come up with.

    Thanks for your input.

    Shane

    Thanks for Responding, Senator.

    Please don't associate my motives, support, or inclinations to much of anything represented as the NRA in South Carolina - or anywhere else for that matter.

    GrassRootsSC has a finger on the pulse of both SC gun owners, CWP Holders (the good guys) AND the legislators. GrassRootsSC speaks for me - NOT the NRA. Please move to restore H.3212 to the bill it was intended to be - a RECOGNITION Bill.

    Also - please do not be deceived by the NRA Lobby in Columbia. They do not look out for the best interests of gun owners, hunters, CWP Holders, or competitive shooters in SC.

    Sincerely,

    [a gentleman]
    Former NRA Certified Instructor (Resigned)
    North Augusta

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: SHANE MASSEY
    To: [a gentleman]
    Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 2:38 PM
    Subject: Re: GrassRoots GunRights speaks for me!


    Mr. [gentleman],

    Thank you for the email. We're taking a look at different amendments and working with Grassroots Gunrights and NRA to come up with acceptable language.

    Thanks for your comments. If I can ever do anything for you, please let me know.

    Shane

    >>> 3/18/2008 11:43 PM >>>

    GRASS ROOTS SPEAKS FOR ME, SHANE!

    Change H. 3212 back into the CWP recognition bill that came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee!

    GrassRoots GunRights speaks for me!

    [gentleman]
    North Augusta, SC


    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


    [code]

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    For those who didn't see the NRA-ILA summary, they sure painted a rosy picture of their amendment.

    A few interesting excerpts:
    "On Tuesday, March 18, the Senate amended H 3212 over some
    **questionable** concerns raised regarding its new language"
    (asterisks mine)
    I'm not sure why they think raising an issue about a federal criminal background check that exceeds SC requirements is "questionable."

    Here's another excerpt that should leave no doubt who was behind this amendment. This one sentence sums it up nicely.
    "NRA supported the amended version of H 3212, and we appreciate the help of the Senators who worked directly with NRA to ensure we could pass the best possible language; especially State Senators Jim Ritchie (R-13) and Jake Knotts (R-23)."

    I counted three: NRA, Knotts and Ritchie. What did y'all get?

    You can read the entire load at:
    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3711

    Interesting in light of what we know from GrassRoots.


    [/code]

Posting Permissions

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