News.

South Carolina senators debating a bill that would allow people with concealed weapons permits to carry their guns on Wednesday rejected an attempt to get rid of the requirement for the permits.

Senators voted 25-21 against the so-called constitutional carry amendment after several hours of debate.

It would have allow anyone who can legally own a gun to carry it anywhere the weapons are legally allowed.

The Senate was on its second day of debate on a gun bill that Republicans rapidly brought to the Senate floor. The bill would allow anyone who passes the background check and a roughly eight-hour course to get a South Carolina concealed weapons permit to carry their pistol in the open.

Senators adjourned about 7:15 p.m. Wednesday and said they expected a final vote on the bill after several hours of debate Thursday.

Well I could be disappointed in Shane Massey, and it was a valiant effort on the part of the 21 who voted in favor of the amendment.  But as for disappointed, maybe not.

Maybe Shane knows something we don’t.  Perhaps he knows that this was a poison pill, one that would doom open carry from passing because he knows whether they have the votes.

If that’s the case, then let’s move on.  As I’ve said before, let’s be incrementalists.  Open carry this year, constitutional carry next year.

The ninnies, frightened and the tepid must see for themselves when the state is let out of its cage that the sky doesn’t fall like law enforcement and “The Karens” said it would.

They’re like a frightened, psychologically stunted animal who has been caged its entire life, afraid to leave the confines of its own imprisonment.

Let’s be smart about this.  Move on.

We’re watching.

Open carry.  Let’s get it done guys.  Proceed with intentionality and purpose.

Move it.

Editorial from low state South Carolina where the southern liberals live.

There’s probably nothing we can say at this point to convince S.C. senators who don’t already realize that it’s a bad idea to let concealed-weapon carriers start carrying their guns on their hips.

After all, they’ve heard all the arguments against it, and still they voted more than 2-to-1 last week to bypass committee and put a House-passed open-carry bill at the top of their agenda for debate as early as Tuesday.

They’ve heard from people who say they would feel threatened if they encountered someone wearing a gun, even if that person does nothing (other than wearing the gun) to threaten them. And from those who argued that having those guns visible puts everybody on edge, increasing the risk that disagreements will escalate into deadly violence.

They’ve heard from police who warn that it’ll be even tougher to distinguish the bad guys from the good guns in active-shooter situations. And more commonly, they’ll be placed in a legally precarious situation when citizens call to complain about someone walking around their neighborhood with a holstered gun — because that’s not a crime, and legally speaking, they have no more justification for questioning someone walking down the street with a gun than someone walking down the street without a gun. (Retired SLED Chief Robert Stewart warned that the bill could get a lot of permit holders killed, because carrying a handgun openly would make them target No. 1 if they were present when a crime was being committed.)

Read the rest.  A veritable catalog of stupidity.  None of that has ever happened in open carry states.  Ask me how I know.

Feel threatened.  As if rights are subject to how it makes people feel when they are exercised, a standard never applied to street preachers.

Tough on cops.  As if cops won’t be able to tell perpetrators from people defending themselves, or can’t slow down enough to understand what and who they’re shooting at.

Target #1.  Oooo … such dramatic language.  “Get a lot of permit holders killed.”  Not one, not a few, but a LOT.  Get a LOT of permit holders killed.  That’s what he said.  Those are his words, not mine.  I just want to make sure you aren’t ascribing his stupid words to me.  Besides, whether a man wishes to openly carry and be target #1 is his own business, not yours.  Because freedom.  This bill doesn’t force anyone to do anything he doesn’t choose to.

But you know the general gist of their position when you read the caption under the top photo: “No one has presented a good reason to allow anyone other than police to carry guns openly.”

Because cops, and special rights, and you’re not special, you see.

To which I respond, “No one has presented a good reason to allow you to tell me what to do.”

So we discussed the awful Luke Rankin, head of the South Carolina Senate Judiciary Committee, and how the committee managed to stall open carry just long enough that it wouldn’t be heard this year.

But there is news from S.C.

A state Senate often resistant to loosening South Carolina’s gun regulations could next week pass legislation that would further expand those rules by allowing legal gun owners to carry their weapon out in the open.

In a 3-2 vote down party lines Thursday morning, a Senate Judiciary Committee panel advanced a House-sponsored bill — H. 3904 — that would still restrict where someone could carry their gun, but allow permitted gun owners with the required training to carry their gun out in the open in the public if they so choose.

But hours later, and minutes before the Senate adjourned for the week, Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey successfully pulled the bill out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, placing the bill on the chamber’s priority list when senators return Tuesday.

The Legislature only has six days left on its regular work calendar, and Republicans have called for the measure to be a priority before the legislative session ends.

“That’s the only way we’re going to have an opportunity to have a full debate on it before the session ends is to do that,” said Massey, who chairs the Senate Rules Committee. “There’s significant interest among our caucus to try to move forward with it, so we made it an issue that we want to try and address this year.”

So after the “panel” heard it (a subcommittee of the full committee, no, I’m not making this up) and then sent it on to the full committee, who doubtless would have further stalled it, Shane Massey apparently got sick of it and pulled the bill from the committee.

There must be some thick, heavy politics going on in South Carolina.

From here we hope this gets a vote.  The real name taking and vote counting starts.  Every word will be recorded, every vote tallied, and the record permanent.

Take care what you do, gentlemen.  We’re watching you.

News.

But maybe they stalled it the first time just long enough to prevent the full committee from hearing and passing it, and then the senate.  This was a subcommittee.

What a ridiculous protocol.  The bill could have just been sent to the floor of the senate when passed by the House.  But that would have given South Carolina open carry, and that’s what they don’t want South Carolinians to have.

So they got what they were after.  They played politics with God-given rights.

News.

The chances of South Carolina joining most other states allowing licensed people to openly carry pistols and not hide them under a jacket dimmed Tuesday as a small group of senators didn’t find time to vote on a House-passed bill.

A Senate subcommittee set a 90-minute deadline to hear testimony about the open carry bill. Several senators held long conversations with witnesses and when the hour-and-a-half was up, the subcommittee adjourned without taking a vote and with several other witnesses waiting to speak online.

Sen. Tom Young, a Republican from Aiken, said he would hold another hearing “as soon as possible,” but with eight days left in the General Assembly’s regular session, it seems doubtful the bill can make it through the subcommittee, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the full Senate.

[ … ]

During the House subcommittee hearing on the open carry bill, lawmakers set a three-minute timer for witnesses and asked almost no questions.

The Senate hearing Tuesday meandered a bit more. Senators asked almost every witness a question and former State Law Enforcement Chief Robert Stewart spent about 30 minutes telling them why he opposed open carry.

So there you go.  They limited the pro-speakers to 3 minutes, let a cop speak for half an hour, chatted some and then walked out without so much as a how do you do?

That’s the sort of consideration they give their constituency.  Their names are here.  Luke Rankin presides.  We suspected he was a controller, and he is.

With the influx of foreign voters into S.C., this may be the last, greatest opportunity to pass open carry in S.C.  Apparently no gun owner in S.C. cares about this enough.

I’ll just file this one under gun control.  I guess South Carolinians are okay with it.

News.

On April 27^th, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee is hearing House Bill 3094, to legalize the open carry of handguns. Please contact subcommittee members and ask them to SUPPORT HB 3094.

House Bill 3094 allows citizens who hold a concealed weapons permit, to carry a handgun in the manner they choose. Currently, South Carolina is one of just five states that does not explicitly allow open carry, among them Illinois, New York, and California. Self-defense situations are difficult to predict and everyone has different circumstances. It is unreasonable for the law to impose a one-size-fits-all method of carrying a handgun for self-defense.

This is very good news.  We’re tracking names, yes?

This narrows the field substantially.  We let Luke Rankin know just very recently that we expected him to pass this bill on for a vote in the senate.

If this fails, the House isn’t to blame.  Right now the finger of attention points to the senators in this subcommittee.  We’re watching you.  Luke, we’re still watching you too.

Should this pass on to a vote in the senate, if the bill fails, I’ll publish the votes of every senator, along with the city they live in and area they represent.

The field is being winnowed.  You cannot hide from this vote.  The only thing you can do is take it and be prepared for what comes.

The only update I can find.

First of all, that’s an idiotic objection.  Her problem is psychological.  The fact of a weapon not being visible means nothing concerning whether an individual has a weapon or is a “bad guy.”

Second, this is the page for Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Luke Rankin.  The future may look bleak for open carry in South Carolina.  It appears that Luke Rankin has pulled open carry before and is possibly anti-gun.

Perhaps Luke Rankin needs to meet the same fate as Larry Martin and be ejected from the S.C. Senate.  So what gives, Luke?  Where do we stand?  Why hasn’t action been taken?

Here is his place of employment and here is his contact page.  Are you a gun controller, Luke?

Oh that’s easy.  The Supreme Court has already spoken to this, as have lower courts.  Stops for lawful behavior aren’t allowed.

I think Justin Bamberg is a liar.  I think this is just a red herring.  I think this is the real reason.

“This bill is going to be very problematic for law-enforcement,“ said Representative Justin Bamberg of Bamberg, Barnwell, and Colleton Counties.

Bamberg is a gun-owning supporter of the 2nd Amendment, whose father, brother, and mother all have careers in law enforcement. His father is the current sheriff of Bamberg County.

His peeps aren’t so special any more if other people carry openly.  Bamberg is just hawking the law enforcement line.

Ask the other 46 states that have open carry.  The sky isn’t falling.  It’s all just lies.

And as for the bill, it should be considered the “Open Carry With Infringement Act” since it still requires government approval.

News from South Carolina.

A bill that would allow people to carry guns without concealing them in South Carolina is heading to the House floor.

The House Judiciary Committee approved so-called open carry of weapons for people who already have a concealed-weapons permit by a 16-8 vote Tuesday.

South Carolina is one of only five states without open carry, joining atypical partners such as California, Florida, Illinois and New York.

The committee ignored amendments by Democrats that would remove the ban on weapons at the Statehouse and would refine rules on weapons at public events like festivals.

The bill is enthusiastically backed by many Republicans and conservatives, who said it makes sense to let people carry the weapons they can already have in a visible holster. Laws against pointing a gun at someone or threating someone with a gun without a legal reason would remain on the books.

Of course laws against assault will remain on the books, just like laws against brandishing.  Why does that even need to be stated?

Now.  Since the committees have apparently taken their job seriously and refused to allow this bill to perish in committee like it always seems to do, the real struggle begins.

From here on we take names and make lists.  Every member of the House will have to cast a vote, since as I understand it, turning this bill over from committee constitutes a motion and second.  It’s a live bill.

Oh, there are still parliamentary tricks that could be played, like someone could make a substitute motion to do something like send it back to the committee to study this more, or some such nonsense.  But that also requires a vote by every member of the House.

So we take names, and no one gets to hide behind the fact that there is no live bill to vote on.  That horse has left the barn.

It’s time to ramp up the comms to House members, and after that, members of the senate.  They need to hear from people, especially if you live in South Carolina.  I frequently visit relatives in South Carolina and so I should have a say, but they won’t listen to me like they would from my readers in South Carolina.

Get busy.

Views from SC.

“When you go to open carry, I think you are creating more problems,” Greenwood Police Chief T.J. Chaudoin said. “I think it would cause too many problems with the general public.”

Chaudoin said having someone walking down the street with 16 guns on their belt could cause people to panic or be afraid.

“This isn’t the wild west where everybody walks around with a gun on their hip,” he said.

Okay, goober.  I think we understand your view.

You haven’t been anywhere open carry is legal, so you think this causes the wild, wild west.  You should travel a little.

You support the second amendment, but not really, and want people to hide their weapons.

You think open carriers are able to carry 16 guns on their hips.  So this is just a joke to you.

A joke, as long as LEOs get to openly carry, because you’re special, and you do live in the wild, wild west.  Unlike “the poors” who cannot be trusted to openly carry like the special ones like you.

You’d fit better in New York.