Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: H 3212 - Good Bad/News

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

    Post imported post

    Yesterday the SC Senate rejected the House version of H 3212 but did agree to appoint a committee of conference for it. It now appears to be up to the House to agree to the conference committee or let it die.

    S. 3212--SENATE INSISTS ON THEIR AMENDMENTS
    CONFERENCE COMMITTEE APPOINTED
    H. 3212 (Word version) -- Reps. Delleney, M.A. Pitts, Haley, Crawford, Chellis, G.R. Smith, Owens, Rice, Weeks, Viers, Simrill, Bedingfield, Vick, Duncan, Mulvaney, Stavrinakis, Clemmons and Young: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 23-31-215, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF CONCEALABLE WEAPONS PERMITS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT VALID OUT-OF-STATE PERMITS TO CARRY CONCEALABLE WEAPONS HELD BY A RESIDENT OF ANOTHER STATE MUST BE HONORED BY THIS STATE AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT THIS STATE WILL ONLY HONOR OUT-OF-STATE PERMITS ISSUED BY A STATE WITH WHICH SOUTH CAROLINA HAS RECIPROCITY.
    On motion of Senator MARTIN, the Senate insisted upon its amendments to S. 3212 and asked for a Committee of Conference.
    Whereupon, Senators HAWKINS, KNOTTS, and WILLIAMS were appointed to the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate and a message was sent to the House accordingly.

    H. 3212--Recorded Vote
    Senator GROOMS, BRYANT and VERDIN desired to be recorded as voting against insisting on Senate amendments.
    6/4/2008 House Conference committee appointed Reps. Delleney, Duncan,
    and Vick

    Edited: To add House committee members. If they are given Free Committtee status then it will be up to them to work something out and will be accepted.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    From the official Senate Journal of June 3, 2008:

    "On motion of Senator MARTIN, the Senate insisted upon its amendments to S.
    3212 [there is no such bill as S. 3212, it should be H. 3212 as written
    below] and asked for a Committee of Conference.

    Whereupon, Senators HAWKINS, KNOTTS, and WILLIAMS were appointed to the
    Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate and a message was sent to
    the House accordingly.

    *H. 3212--Recorded Vote*

    Senator GROOMS, BRYANT and VERDIN desired to be recorded as voting against
    insisting on Senate amendments."

    It appears the Senate has refused to grant free conference powers to the
    conference committee. If that is correct, then the conference committee
    will have to choose between the House version and the Senate version. The
    House version is good. The Senate version is worse than existing law.

    We need to contact the House members once we know who they are and let them
    know NOT to agree to the Senate version of H. 3212.

    Then, we should contact Hawkins and Williams to let them know we want the
    House version passed, not the Senate version. Hawkins is leaving the Senate
    at the end of this session. Williams is a Democrat. We have virtually no
    power to influence these senators.

    Contacting Knotts is a waste of time, since he has been the roadblock to
    passing H. 3212 as a good recognition bill or even as a better than we have
    now reciprocity bill. But, it can't hurt to let him know how you feel if
    you have the time. :-)
    [code]

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

    Post imported post

    Friends,

    H. 3212 has been set for a conference committee WITHOUT free
    conference powers. Therefore, the conference committee will be forced
    to choose either the House version or the Senate version of H. 3212.
    The conference committee can not even consider the GrassRoots proposed
    amendment that would actually accomplish what the senate wrongly
    claims their amendment will do.

    Rep. Delleney - the bill's sponsor, told GrassRoots Executive Officer
    Bill Rentiers today that Delleney was going to support the Senate
    version now and reintroduce his bill again next year. Delleney feels
    that getting something passed in an election year so as to be able to
    claim he is pro gun is better than not getting anything passed at all.
    Delleney somehow feels he can fix things next session even though he
    can't get things fixed this session. What is it they say about doing
    the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result?

    Interestingly, everybody waited until Rep. Mike Pitts left town to
    pull this prank. If Rep. Mike Pitts was in the House, he would make
    sure the bill was killed rather than pass a bill that will make things
    worse.

    GrassRoots leadership is down at the statehouse right now passing out
    copies of The Defender to members of the House and asking them to kill
    H. 3212 rather than accept the Senate version.

    Delleney is being asked to provide the GrassRoots analysis to his
    staff attorneys to get confirmation that the GrassRoots analysis is
    correct, just as multiple independent practicing pro gun rights
    attorneys have already done. Unfortunately, Delleney is leaning
    towards believing the very same people who said the March 13 Senate
    amendment was a good amendment. But, after GrassRoots exposed its
    flaws, the Senate amended H. 3212 on March 18 and again on March 20.
    Every time the Senate amended the bill they said it was a good
    amendment. They admitted the March 13 and March 18 amendments were
    bad. The problem is that the March 20 amendment is bad, too. But,
    the Senate is too lazy to take the time to get it right.

    You need to contact your House member and tell him to kill H. 3212
    rather than accept the Senate version of H. 3212.

    You need to contact the members of the House conference committee and
    tell them to kill H. 3212 rather than accept the Senate version of H.
    3212.

    If you have time, you should call all House members from the county in
    which you live and tell them to kill H. 3212 rather than accept the
    Senate version of H. 3212.

    The House is only in session today and tomorrow before adjournment.
    So, YOU MUST ACT NOW or else you will have to live with the
    consequences.

    The House switchboard number is (803) 734-2402.

    The Senate switchboard number is (803) 212-6200.

    BREAKING NEWS!!!!

    Rep. Delleney just told GrassRoots Executive Officer Bill Rentiers
    that the House conference committee signed off on the Senate version
    of H. 3212, but they have not yet told Sen. Knotts.


    We are trying to find out whether the full House must ratify the
    actions of the spineless conference committee.

    If the full House must ratify the action of the conference committee,
    then we can still kill H. 3212 rather than accept the harmful Senate
    version.

    Please call your House member and tell him to vote against the
    conference committee endorsement of H. 3212.

    The House switchboard number is (803) 734-2402.

    [code]

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    71

    Post imported post

    What is different about the Senate version vs. whatever was originally introduced? I live in VA and travel to SC at least once a year to visit family.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Nozoki wrote:
    What is different about the Senate version vs. whatever was originally introduced? I live in VA and travel to SC at least once a year to visit family.
    Note both version edited for ease of readability.
    House Version
    (N) Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of another state must be honored by this State.
    Senate Version that passed and sent to the Govenor.
    (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.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    80

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    Nozoki wrote:
    What is different about the Senate version vs. whatever was originally introduced? I live in VA and travel to SC at least once a year to visit family.
    Note both version edited for ease of readability.
    House Version
    (N) Valid out-of-state permits to carry concealable weapons held by a resident of another state must be honored by this State.
    Senate Version that passed and sent to the Govenor.
    (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.
    Darn, too bad you have to be a resident of a reciprocal state...

    Guess I'm out of luck living in PA.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bluefield, West Virginia, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    This looks good, if the law is signed, for West Virginians. I vacation in South Carolina 2 to 3 times a year. It would be nice to be able to carry there.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Greer, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    yes and as I in SC will be heading to WV for vacation it would be nice to carry there



    James

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lebanon, VA
    Posts
    676

    Post imported post

    340mopar wrote:
    yes and as I in SC will be heading to WV for vacation it would be nice to carry there



    James
    We are ready when you are.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Admitted to practice in West Virginia and Florida.

    Founder, Past President, Treasurer, and General Counsel, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
    Life Member, NRA

Posting Permissions

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