• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

SC to copy New Jersey's "gun laws"?

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
http://www.scfirearms.org/


According to grass roots gun rights, what started off as a constitutional carry bill with problems, has turned into a bill that will require out of state people to get a license to even possess a handgun in SC. Currently, it's legal to have a loaded handgun in a glovebox. According to grass roots, NRA has recommended that this now become illegal without a license also.

I'm having a difficult time believing this.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Oh my goodness-what has the NRA done? (Viers amendment)

Section 16-23-20 as amended has stricken the exceptions forbidding carry about the person and replaced it only with the condition that you can't carry a firearm in a prohibited place or with intent to commit a crime. All well and good, progress is progress.

Then you read that this only applies to SC residents. And because the exceptions have been stricken, nonresidents will not even be able to touch a loaded handgun without SC license or that of a reciprocal state's. It also removes vehicle glovebox carry.

Am I reading this right? Is the NRA capable of such incredible and deep betrayal of principle?
 

press1280

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
399
Location
Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
Section 16-23-20 as amended has stricken the exceptions forbidding carry about the person and replaced it only with the condition that you can't carry a firearm in a prohibited place or with intent to commit a crime. All well and good, progress is progress.

Then you read that this only applies to SC residents. And because the exceptions have been stricken, nonresidents will not even be able to touch a loaded handgun without SC license or that of a reciprocal state's. It also removes vehicle glovebox carry.

Am I reading this right? Is the NRA capable of such incredible and deep betrayal of principle?

Not sure what's going on here but I can tell you they'll have an equal protection problem if residents can carry and non-residents can't.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Just got a return email from the bills main sponsor Mr. Pitts. He says that non residents will need a permit to carry, but unlicensed nonresidents will still be able to have a gun in the glove box or on private property.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
Just got a return email from the bills main sponsor Mr. Pitts. He says that non residents will need a permit to carry, but unlicensed nonresidents will still be able to have a gun in the glove box or on private property.

That ain't gonna work. Equal protection 'n all that within the borders of SC. AZ has reciprocity w/SC... but this ain't gonna work. They'd better fix it 'fore they sign it. New Jersey has one gun law... 'No Guns'.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
That ain't gonna work. Equal protection 'n all that within the borders of SC. AZ has reciprocity w/SC... but this ain't gonna work. They'd better fix it 'fore they sign it. New Jersey has one gun law... 'No Guns'.

I certainly hope you're right, but my mind says no.
 

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
The Privileges & Immunities Clause of Article IV, § 2 of the U.S. Constitution does not permit a state to discriminate against nonresidents regarding the right to carry. Although there are plenty of states that discriminate in the issuance of carry permits and a few (including SC) regarding reciprocity, most have not been called on it. However, it appears Wyoming just passed a "constitutional carry" law that (unlike AK, AZ & VT) does discriminate against nonresidents and SC may follow suit. There is no constitutionally-permissible basis for a state to expressly make the legality of carrying dependent solely on a person's state of residence.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
The Privileges & Immunities Clause of Article IV, § 2 of the U.S. Constitution does not permit a state to discriminate against nonresidents regarding the right to carry. Although there are plenty of states that discriminate in the issuance of carry permits and a few (including SC) regarding reciprocity, most have not been called on it. However, it appears Wyoming just passed a "constitutional carry" law that (unlike AK, AZ & VT) does discriminate against nonresidents and SC may follow suit. There is no constitutionally-permissible basis for a state to expressly make the legality of carrying dependent solely on a person's state of residence.

We know all restrictions on the peaceful carrying of weapons is foolish, but a provision only letting residents have constitutional carry seems double secret stupid. Do you know what the "logic" on such a restriction is? It's very bizarre.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
Unless they hear my Yankee accent, how will they know I'm not a Reb who lives there? :>

Won't stand up to scrutiny. Violates the state Constitution:

SECTION 3. Privileges and immunities; due process; equal protection of laws.

The privileges and immunities of citizens of this State and of the United States under this Constitution shall not be abridged, nor shall any person be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. (1970 (56) 2684; 1971 (57) 315.)

The state constitution adopts the Federal 2A verbatum, as well.
 
Top