Index Journal.

How will local law enforcement go about enforcing a law that allows CWP holders to openly carry handguns?

McCormick Police Chief Bo Willis said he has received numerous phone calls from people asking about the open carry law. While he hasn’t had any problems with people openly carrying before the law’s enactment date, he said last week he’s still waiting on guidance from SLED on how to enforce the law.

The Index Journal hasn’t gotten answers from SLED because SLED doesn’t yet understand.  I’ve tried to explain it.

That’s what LEOs in Texas thought as well – we’ll just walk up and demand to see permits when a call comes in.

That’s not the way this worked out in Texas, and it’s not the way it will work out in South Carolina.  You see, in order to conduct a stop, LEOs need to ensure that it’s a valid “Terry Stop.”  In other words, you have to suspect that a crime has been or is being committed, or else the stop isn’t legal.

It’s not good enough to say that the individual is openly carrying a weapon.  To be sure, if someone is openly carrying and commits a crime leading to detention or arrest, and you ascertain that the individual has no permit, then you can charge him with a crime under the new law.  But then, you could have charged him with a crime under the concealed handgun law as well.  Nothing has changed.

You need to pretend that you can’t see the weapon, because that’s the way the carefully worded law is written.  This is what’s going to happen the first few times such a stop is conducted by LEOs for open carriers.

LEO: “Sir, I need to see your permit.”

Person A: “Sure, but you’re being videoed and this video will end up in court, and I need to ask you two questions.  First of all, am I being detained, and if so, do you suspect me of a crime?  In other words, is this a so-called “Terry Stop?”  Second question.  Does S.C. have a “stop and identify statute?”

The LEO is in a very hard place.  If the LEO says that person A is suspected of a crime, the proper response is, “What crime?”  To which he can give no valid response.  If the LEO says that person A is not suspected of a crime, question #2 becomes salient, and I assure you, S.C. has no stop and identify statute.

In other words, it is not legal for a LEO to conduct this stop for openly carrying.  Finally, you should read the bill again.  The open carry bill approved into law by the governor does not expand S.C. to include any sort of stop and identify stipulation, either under this statute or any other.  You can read it again for yourself.

Here is a much better idea.  Train your 911 operators to respond to callers with this information: “Ma’am, open carry is now legal in S.C.  Are you calling to report any other criminal activities?  Is this person brandishing the weapon or threatening anyone?  If not, we need to hang up.”

If you don’t follow this counsel, the two questions I posed above will be heard in court very soon.

SLED doesn’t know how they’re going to enforce the new law because South Carolina has no stop and identify statute, and neither should it.

You cannot (and should not be able to) stop someone who is doing nothing illegal.  The law as signed stipulates that a permit is required to be able to legally openly carry in S.C.  But there is no provision in existing statutory framework or in the recently signed open carry bill that makes provision for stopping people who are openly carrying to demand identification and permit.

But despite my best efforts, I cannot seem to interest anyone in the coming problems.  It’s not a problem to me, especially since I believe the S.C. legislature should have passed constitutional carry.  No permit should be required.

But it will soon be a problem with law enforcement if they think they are going to stop every open carrier they see to demand identification.

And by the way, try to reach any South Carolina law enforcement via email, whether Sheriff’s Association, city law enforcement, county law enforcement, or SLED.  It cannot be done.  They do not make their email addresses known to the public.