• 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.

An analysis of H. 3094

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
627
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
Here is how to look at H. 3094.

First, go to https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess124_2021-2022/bills/3094.htm. This brings you to the official SC General Assembly web site and H. 3094.

Next, scroll down to “Versions of this bill” and click on 5/7/2021. This brings you to the last marked up version of the bill. This allows you to see exactly what was changed with the exact deletions and additions to existing laws, and what completely new things were added.

Once you get to the 5/7/2021 version of the bill, you can start to analyze the legislation. So, lets start from the beginning and go through things section by section.

Sections 1 through 3 have no significant changes other than allowing open carry.

Section 4 will be addressed after Section 5 to better understand things.

Section 5 addresses the posting of signs to prohibit concealed carry or open carry. The history of this section of law is important. Under the original concealed carry law, concealed weapon permit holders could not know whether a property was posted or not prior to entering the premises. You could go to the mall and not know you were on posted premises until you read the small print at the bottom of a mall kiosk in the center of the food court. But, by that time, you had already broken the law. GrassRoots GunRights drafted and pushed legislation to get standardized signage for signs that prohibited concealed carry so that concealed carry permit holders would be given proper notice they were breaking the law prior to breaking the law. Thanks to GrassRoots GunRights, concealed carry permit holders know to simply look at the entrance to a building to see whether it is posted against concealed carry. Unfortunately, Section 5 simply confuses things and puts concealed weapon permit holders at great risk. The added “D” section of Section 5 states that a sign “which may be unique to that business” can be posted. What the hell does that even mean? Sections A, B, and C all detail exactly what a sign shall be in order to be legally enforceable against a concealed weapon permit holder. Then, section D says forget about sections A, B, and C. So, is the law that which is detailed in sections A, B, and C, or is the law whatever is allowed in section D? This is an issue of criminal law. Criminal law should not be so poorly written that you can not know what it is.

Section 4 is about posting signs to prohibit concealed weapons upon the premises. Section 4 adds openly carried to concealed carry for purposes of prohibiting concealed weapons upon the premises. This simple change is not actually a simple change. Lets be honest, open carry will frighten many people. So, what does a business owner do who wants to allow concealed carry, but not open carry because it frightens too many customers? Under H. 3094, the business owner only has one option. The business owner must post a sign that prohibits BOTH concealed carry and open carry. Is this the situation we want to force upon business owners? On one hand, business owners might decide not to offend concealed weapon permit holders and not post. But, on the other hand, business owners might well post against concealed carry just to ensure there is no open carry that frightens their customers. This is a gamble that gun owners could easily lose.

Then, Section 4 goes even further to screw things up by adding a section C that allows for a “unique” sign that any business can post IN ADDITION TO the already legally proscribed signs to prohibit both concealed weapons and openly carried weapons. So, which sign is legally enforceable if the “unique” sign differs from the legally proscribed sign?

There is an old saying that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The SC sign laws were not broke until H. 3094 broke them. Get rid of all of the “unique” sign provisions. No one knows what they are, and it will cost a lot of money in legal fees to find out the hard way. Do NOT force business owners to treat concealed weapons and openly carried weapons as if they are the same thing unless you are willing to take the gamble that business owners will not post to stop open carry. Instead, you can avoid the risk by providing two signs for business owners - one prohibiting open carry and one prohibiting concealed carry.

Section 6 adds a few things to be taught in the concealed weapon permit class.

Section 7 provides for churches that use government buildings to be treated as churches, not government buildings, for the provision of gun laws.

Section 8 is a horrible screw up. After the police and military forces confiscated firearms from the people during and after Hurricane Katrina, GrassRoots GunRights pushed, and got enacted into law, legislation that denied government forces the power to confiscate firearms or ammunition unless incident to an arrest. H. 3094 repeals this law so that government forces are no longer denied the power to confiscate firearms. Instead, H. 3094 replaces the old law with a new one. The new law allows a government body to issue a permit for an organized event on public property with the stipulation that open carry is not allowed. There are no standards set to determine whether open carry should or should not be allowed. This legislation might actually require the organizer of an event to post signs saying whether open carry is allowed or not allowed at all such events whether permitted or not. Unfortunately, this legislation is so poorly drafted that one can not know whether the requirement to post signs telling whether open carry is allowed or not allowed at an organized event is applicable to events without a permit. There are no provisions in the law regarding the posting of such signs. This section prohibits the confiscation of firearms and ammunition unless incident to an arrest for violating this section of the law. It gives NO PROTECTION for the types of confiscation of firearms as happened after Hurricane Katrina. It is going to require a lot of money spent on attorneys to finally determine what this legislation actually means. This is a big loss for gun owners.

Section 9 is worthless platitudes. There are no penalties prescribed for violating anything in Section 9. So, if any government agents violate Section 9 and harm a SC resident, there are no penalties for the government agent who violated the law and no relief for the SC resident who was harmed. Worthless.

Section 10 deals with transmitting court proceedings to SLED so as to better enforce firearm prohibitions.

Section 11 removes the requirement that government agents must be “carrying out the duties of their office” to be granted special carry privileges. Now, government agents will be allowed to carry concealable weapons anywhere within the State whether they are working or playing. Why should government agents not on the job be allowed to carry where the rest of us can not carry? What happened to all men are created equal?

Section 12 removes the concealed weapon permit fee. It also removes the cap of $50 for a SLED provided concealed weapon permit class.

Section 13 says that if anything in H. 3094 is found to be contrary to law, then the rest of H. 3094 is still to be enforced. It is called severability. Otherwise, the entire bill could be negated.

Section 14 says it becomes effective in 90 days after the governor signs it.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,687
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Doug, why isn't this posted in the thread you started addressing this subject?

It is a garbage bill.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,159
Location
here nc
Dougie...why on earth aren't the illustrious SC firearm advocating grassroot organization(s) providing insight on their sites for this bill...

Dougie, you stated in your initial post that section 1 'allows open carry'...hummm my reading of the section 1's title states the bill's intention quite clearly:

This act may be cited as the "Open Carry With Training Act"
Section 2, DEFINITIONS is also quite revealing as it states, quote:
'Concealable weapon' means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that may be carried openly on one's person or in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property."
that is their perception of open carry?

Section 39(b) is also telling, quote:
... carried openly or concealed on or about his person, and he has a valid concealed weapons permit....

yet you're initial post stated... "1 through 3 have no significant changes other than allowing open carry."

so you do not believe this bill which is mandating SC citizens must be trained, have a SC concealed privilege permit, is not significant? Darn dougie...now you are exhibiting Lott's mentality...

delved into your explanation of section 5 first then section 4 and I have no further interest in examining your perception of SC's legislative body calling open carry ~ only with an overseer's granting privilege ~ to their citizenry a boon!

but kudos...you have achieved points for opening numerous SC threads on the same subject...from WI!
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,159
Location
here nc
In this particular case, I corresponded with the JD author of the analysis for his permission to copy and repost work product.

Yes, it is a garbage bill. Thank you for your contribution.
So the initial post's material you presented on this forum wasn't your own?

And then only, only then, when the content's accuracy was challenged did you state the fact it wasn't your work!

dougie, that's called PLAGIARISM an act of fraud and to be honest quite a disappointment to me personally that you would stoop so low to violate the very premise of academia as well as subject this forum's membership to your dishonesty.

To top it off you have still left the original material showing as your own in your initial posting.
 
Last edited:

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
627
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
I am quite proud of my GrassRoots Gorilla pins. I notice it whenever I get into my gentleman’s jewelery box of pins and stuff.

“Politicians are a lot like cockroaches, they both hate the light of day.

GrassRoots Gorillas would show up at a subcommittee or committee meeting to record exactly how these politicians voted on every vote taken whether voice vote or show of hands. Our Gorillas would all have orange clip boards upon which to record the votes. We used disabled members to serve as transportation for the Gorillas because parking around the Statehouse is designed to stop people from attending meetings unless they are willing to pay a fortune in parking fines. Disabled people are not required to feed the meters and can park for free. This just shows how everyone can play a role. Each Gorilla was assigned a single politician to record votes, assuming we had enough Gorillas. I was questioned about our Gorillas by politicians on more than one occasion. As I said, politicians hated their votes were not secret from the public. Although, a couple of politicians did like our Gorillas because the Gorillas sometimes forced a politician sitting on the fence to vote our way, and those otherwise against us would suddenly miss the vote because they needed a bathroom break.

Bathroom breaks are a great way for your “friends” to claim they are your friend, yet not vote your way. GrassRoots Gorillas exposed these weak bladder “friends.”09C08252-7488-4BDD-9551-D4588530E99D.jpeg
 
Last edited:

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
government should not be able to provide private businesses with the authority of law to violate an individual right. That's a clear violation of liberty.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,159
Location
here nc
I am quite proud of my GrassRoots Gorilla pins. I notice it whenever I get into my gentleman’s jewelery box of pins and stuff.

“Politicians are a lot like cockroaches, they both hate the light of day.

GrassRoots Gorillas would show up at a subcommittee or committee meeting to record exactly how these politicians voted on every vote taken whether voice vote or show of hands. Our Gorillas would all have orange clip boards upon which to record the votes. We used disabled members to serve as transportation for the Gorillas because parking around the Statehouse is designed to stop people from attending meetings unless they are willing to pay a fortune in parking fines. Disabled people are not required to feed the meters and can park for free. This just shows how everyone can play a role. Each Gorilla was assigned a single politician to record votes, assuming we had enough Gorillas. I was questioned about our Gorillas by politicians on more than one occasion. As I said, politicians hated their votes were not secret from the public. Although, a couple of politicians did like our Gorillas because the Gorillas sometimes forced a politician sitting on the fence to vote our way, and those otherwise against us would suddenly miss the vote because they needed a bathroom break.

Bathroom breaks are a great way for your “friends” to claim they are your friend, yet not vote your way. GrassRoots Gorillas exposed these weak bladder “friends.”View attachment 13849

sorry dougie...personally chasing someone into a restroom to gain their "support" for a cause seems a bit...

do you also leave your fone number with a quickie msg on the stall wall stating..."for a good cause call me..."
 
Top