• 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.

On and AFTER 15 AUGUST VALID CWP HOLDERS CAN CARRY HANDGUNS OPENLY OR CONCEALED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SOUTH CAROLINA LAW

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
723
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan

Sherra Scott is the president of South Carolina Carry, an organization pushing for more pro-gun legislation. While she applauds McMaster for signing the bill into law, it’s still not exactly what she had hoped for.

“We were hoping for constitutional carry,” Scott said.

Constitutional carry would have allowed anyone to openly carry a gun without a permit. While Scott wishes that’s what passed, she said open carry will still have benefits, primarily individuals looking to harm someone likely won’t target those who have their weapon visible.

“If we look like we have the ability to fight back, then they’re more likely to move on and leave us alone,” Scott said.

How long until the retention holster / gun snatch kerfuffle rises in the Fudd consciousness?
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc

Sherra Scott is the president of South Carolina Carry, an organization pushing for more pro-gun legislation. While she applauds McMaster for signing the bill into law, it’s still not exactly what she had hoped for.

“We were hoping for constitutional carry,” Scott said.

Constitutional carry would have allowed anyone to openly carry a gun without a permit. While Scott wishes that’s what passed, she said open carry will still have benefits, primarily individuals looking to harm someone likely won’t target those who have their weapon visible.

“If we look like we have the ability to fight back, then they’re more likely to move on and leave us alone,” Scott said.

How long until the retention holster / gun snatch kerfuffle rises in the Fudd consciousness?
oh goodie dougie...another wanna_be SC firearm advocacy for SC citizens who are pretending they are advocating just cuz they have a website with outdated commentary on "pending" non profit states [SC SoS states they were incorp as non profit in 2015]; under sponsors there are 63 first and last names [wonder if the sponsors know their name and county is listed?]; while incorp in 2015, one legislative listed in 2017 & 2018, ad nauseam, yet nothing mentioned about the results of their advocacy -anywhere on their site.

so you are and your out of state egoists are excited SC citizens can open carry w/SC overseers insisting SC citizens have a SC STATE privilege card -- good to see yet another success from the SC Carry advocacy org.

oh wait did they also capitulate like the LoneStar state and include in the legislation, LE can immediately stop SC OC'g citizens and "ask for papers please?"[oh wait 21-31-215 already mandates show and tell to LE's}

finally the SC Gov signed this into law 17 May and two months later you tout it and absolutely nothing about it on the SC advocating website...
 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
723
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
Wisconsin has been OC by omission from the statutes since at least 1997. Open carry was just not mentioned.

Then in 2011, with legal concealed carry, a subsection was added to the Disorderly Conduct statute (947.01) reading “Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the person apply, a person is not in violation of, and may not be charged with a violation of, this section for loading, carrying, or going armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed or openly carried.”

This codified open carry and ended debate as to its legality.

I commented to Milady Wife at dinner last night on the effect of the SC law on the gated communities of Kiawah and Seabrook Island, whence we moved, “They’ll be all atwitter at the thought of some ‘guest’ strutting around their Islands while openly armed.”. (SC has state preemption of carry ordinances.). I mentioned that Wisconsin has always allowed OC, and she responded that she had never seen it.

I OC occasionally and she does not see or notice it. I CC almost always and she does not see or notice it.

Absence of evidence (what one may see) is not evidence of absence.
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,887
Location
Granite State of Mind

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Charleston is passing their own rules.

So, Charleston is still promoting Jim Crow laws.
 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
723
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
Charleston is passing their own rules.

ARTICLE 7

Local Regulations

SECTION 23-31-510. Regulation of ownership, transfer, or possession of firearm or ammunition; discharge on landowner's own property.

No governing body of any county, municipality, or other political subdivision in the State may enact or promulgate any regulation or ordinance that regulates or attempts to regulate:

(1) the transfer, ownership, possession, carrying, or transportation of firearms, ammunition, components of firearms, or any combination of these things;

 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
ARTICLE 7

Local Regulations

SECTION 23-31-510. Regulation of ownership, transfer, or possession of firearm or ammunition; discharge on landowner's own property.

No governing body of any county, municipality, or other political subdivision in the State may enact or promulgate any regulation or ordinance that regulates or attempts to regulate:

(1) the transfer, ownership, possession, carrying, or transportation of firearms, ammunition, components of firearms, or any combination of these things;

But the state unconstitutionally regulates open carry. I've pointed this out before.

South Carolina is still living in the Jim Crow era. I'm surprised they don't still have black and white drinking fountains. Some southern states just can't let go.
 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
723
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
But the state unconstitutionally regulates open carry. I've pointed this out before.

South Carolina is still living in the Jim Crow era. I'm surprised they don't still have black and white drinking fountains. Some southern states just can't let go.
Depending on one’s understanding of the Second Amendment, let alone its jurisprudence, all states do that prohibit open carry of any weapon. And the Jim Crow Era as exemplified by modern South Carolina is not so bad. Race relations there were the most comfortable that I have enjoyed.

Realize the difference between IS and OUGHT arguments.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Depending on one’s understanding of the Second Amendment, let alone its jurisprudence, all states do that prohibit open carry of any weapon. And the Jim Crow Era as exemplified by modern South Carolina is not so bad. Race relations there were the most comfortable that I have enjoyed.

Realize the difference between IS and OUGHT arguments.
Of those states that regulate both open and conceal carry they are in direct conflict with the constitution and the supreme court. Since Heller these states have not been challenged as to their stance. Though, in general, I disagree with the courts belief that rights are not absolute, to regulate that right governments must prove that they have a compelling interest in restricting your rights. The problem is liberal courts always seem to justify the governments compelling interest.

So, the "Depending on one’s understanding of the Second Amendment" idea is horse-pucky. If the founding fathers intended exceptions to the Bill of rights they would have so stated. They didn't.

Based on the Supreme Court reasoning of not absolute we can stop woman from voting just to mention one. The boarders extend 100 miles into the country.

Rights? the only rights you have are those the government grants you. Papers please.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Depending on one’s understanding of the Second Amendment, let alone its jurisprudence, all states do that prohibit open carry of any weapon. And the Jim Crow Era as exemplified by modern South Carolina is not so bad. Race relations there were the most comfortable that I have enjoyed.

Realize the difference between IS and OUGHT arguments.

last time you lived there as a good olde boy white person?

[weapon...mean i can't OC my fountain pen in my pocket...darn!]
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,887
Location
Granite State of Mind

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
It appears that almost all the gun forums are gone or on their last legs. And what's posted on most is useless information. I still post law stuff here and for the most part crickets. I got kicked off Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forum For posting law stuff pertaining to Ohio. I think some of the gun guys have gone WOKE.

Right now we are in the biggest fight for our gun rights than ever before. And there is no discussions about what is going on.

End of rant.
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
It appears that almost all the gun forums are gone or on their last legs. And what's posted on most is useless information. I still post law stuff here and for the most part crickets. I got kicked off Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forum For posting law stuff pertaining to Ohio. I think some of the gun guys have gone WOKE.

Right now we are in the biggest fight for our gun rights than ever before. And there is no discussions about what is going on.

End of rant.
STOP IT WITH THE BS, Color of Law.
.
You know as well as I do that you weren't banned from OFCC's forums for "posting law stuff pertaining to Ohio". Give me a break!
.
You were banned (again) for being an insufferable, condescending male donkey.
.
I invite readers of this thread to figure out who CoL is: https://ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic.php?p=4420349#p4420349
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,964
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
STOP IT WITH THE BS, Color of Law.
.
You know as well as I do that you weren't banned from OFCC's forums for "posting law stuff pertaining to Ohio". Give me a break!
.
You were banned (again) for being an insufferable, condescending male donkey.
.
I invite readers of this thread to figure out who CoL is: https://ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic.php?p=4420349#p4420349
Here you go again, blowing smoke. You posted a link that appeared at the end of a controversy, knowing full well I was not the instigator. Reading the whole thread would demonstrate that.

Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, said: "Accuse your opponent of what you are doing, to create confusion and to inculcate voters against evidence of your own guilt"

In other words, you start a fight then accuse your victim, that fought back and whooped your butt, of starting the fight.

BB62, people have caught on to your game. You get people to help you accomplish your goal and then take credit for the very help you received as your own. And I have the E-Mails to prove it.

BB62, how about providing us with some of your legal battles that you won that highlight your legal prowess. Inquiring minds would like to see them.

But if you are going to post misleading examples, how about this misleading example.


Your post number two points to the application and approval highlighting that “All permits are subject to the regulations contained in the City of Cincinnati Municipal Code, Section 739-3 (Use of Central Riverfront) and Section 739-5 (Prohibited Use of the Central Riverfront)”. You should note that Section 739-5(9) of the Municipal code says it does not apply to “… to the possession, transporting, or carrying of firearms as defined by Section 708-1-B of the Cincinnati Municipal Code, components of firearms, or firearm ammunition as defined and regulated by Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2923, Conspiracy, Attempt, and Complicity; Weapons Control and Corrupt Activity.” Your quote.

Where did you get that information from? Oh, that’s rights, you got it from Color of Law. Color of Law provided that application and Approval of that application to you, but you sure took credit for it by failing to give credit where credit is due. Remember BB62, I have the E-Mails.

Classic Alinskyite strategy. I understand you are trying to be vainglorious in the open carry world, but your days of seeking fame and fortune is over. Instead, how about you just encourage others to perform noble, difficult and worthy deeds. That would be refreshing coming from you.
 
Top