Restaurant Carry Bill.??
- Thread starter Landy
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
This is hard to read because the cut and paste doesn't properly show the stricken language. I used underline instead.
Link > http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess120_201 ... s/3053.htm
Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
H. 3053
STATUS INFORMATION
General Bill
Sponsors: Reps. Taylor, Pitts, Harrell, White, Delleney, Merrill, Clemmons, Bannister, Wells, J.R. Smith, G.R. Smith, Sottile, Hiott, Barfield, Hardee, Ballentine, Toole, Brannon, Allison, Wood, Bowen, Hardwick, Goldfinch, Hamilton, Loftis, Bedingfield, Stringer, Limehouse, Hixon, Kennedy, Henderson and Southard
Document Path: l:\council\bills\ms\7029ahb13.docx
Prefiled in the House on December 11, 2012
Currently residing in the House Committee on Judiciary
Summary: Not yet available
HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS
Date Body Action Description with journal page number
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12/11/2012 House Prefiled
12/11/2012 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary
View the latest legislative information at the LPITS web site
VERSIONS OF THIS BILL
12/11/2012
(Text matches printed bills. Document has been reformatted to meet World Wide Web specifications.)
A BILL
TO AMEND SECTION 16-23-465, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFULLY CARRYING A PISTOL OR FIREARM ONTO THE PREMISES OF A BUSINESS SELLING ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS, BEER, OR WINE FOR ON-PREMISES CONSUMPTION, SO AS TO INCLUDE IN THE PURVIEW OF THE STATUTE CARRYING A FIREARM INTO A BUSINESS SELLING ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS, BEER, OR WINE WHEN A SIGN IS POSTED PROHIBITING CONCEALABLE WEAPONS, REFUSING TO LEAVE OR REMOVE THE FIREARM FROM THE PREMISES WHEN ASKED, AND WHILE CONSUMING ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS, BEER, OR WINE, AND TO REVISE THE PENALTY.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
SECTION 1. Section 16-23-465 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 274 of 2002, is further amended to read:
"Section 16-23-465. In addition to the penalties provided for by in Sections 16-11-330 and 16-23-460 and by Article 1 of Chapter 23 of Title 16 16-11-620 and 23-31-220, a person convicted of carrying a pistol or firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than three two years, or both., if the person:
(1) carries a firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises and which, at the time of the offense, has clearly and conspicuously posted a sign prohibiting concealable weapons on the premises in accordance with the provisions of Section 23-31-220;
(2) carries a firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises and refuses to leave or to remove the firearm from the premises when asked to do so by a person legally in control of the premises; or
(3) consumes alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine while carrying a firearm in a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises.
In addition to the penalties described above, a person who violates this section while carrying a concealable weapon pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23, must have his concealed weapon permit revoked."
SECTION 2. The repeal or amendment by this act of any law, whether temporary or permanent or civil or criminal, does not affect pending actions, rights, duties, or liabilities founded thereon, or alter, discharge, release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under the repealed or amended law, unless the repealed or amended provision shall so expressly provide. After the effective date of this act, all laws repealed or amended by this act must be taken and treated as remaining in full force and effect for the purpose of sustaining any pending or vested right, civil action, special proceeding, criminal prosecution, or appeal existing as of the effective date of this act, and for the enforcement of rights, duties, penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities as they stood under the repealed or amended laws.
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.
Link > http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess120_201 ... s/3053.htm
Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
H. 3053
STATUS INFORMATION
General Bill
Sponsors: Reps. Taylor, Pitts, Harrell, White, Delleney, Merrill, Clemmons, Bannister, Wells, J.R. Smith, G.R. Smith, Sottile, Hiott, Barfield, Hardee, Ballentine, Toole, Brannon, Allison, Wood, Bowen, Hardwick, Goldfinch, Hamilton, Loftis, Bedingfield, Stringer, Limehouse, Hixon, Kennedy, Henderson and Southard
Document Path: l:\council\bills\ms\7029ahb13.docx
Prefiled in the House on December 11, 2012
Currently residing in the House Committee on Judiciary
Summary: Not yet available
HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS
Date Body Action Description with journal page number
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12/11/2012 House Prefiled
12/11/2012 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary
View the latest legislative information at the LPITS web site
VERSIONS OF THIS BILL
12/11/2012
(Text matches printed bills. Document has been reformatted to meet World Wide Web specifications.)
A BILL
TO AMEND SECTION 16-23-465, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFULLY CARRYING A PISTOL OR FIREARM ONTO THE PREMISES OF A BUSINESS SELLING ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS, BEER, OR WINE FOR ON-PREMISES CONSUMPTION, SO AS TO INCLUDE IN THE PURVIEW OF THE STATUTE CARRYING A FIREARM INTO A BUSINESS SELLING ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS, BEER, OR WINE WHEN A SIGN IS POSTED PROHIBITING CONCEALABLE WEAPONS, REFUSING TO LEAVE OR REMOVE THE FIREARM FROM THE PREMISES WHEN ASKED, AND WHILE CONSUMING ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS, BEER, OR WINE, AND TO REVISE THE PENALTY.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
SECTION 1. Section 16-23-465 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 274 of 2002, is further amended to read:
"Section 16-23-465. In addition to the penalties provided for by in Sections 16-11-330 and 16-23-460 and by Article 1 of Chapter 23 of Title 16 16-11-620 and 23-31-220, a person convicted of carrying a pistol or firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than three two years, or both., if the person:
(1) carries a firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises and which, at the time of the offense, has clearly and conspicuously posted a sign prohibiting concealable weapons on the premises in accordance with the provisions of Section 23-31-220;
(2) carries a firearm into a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises and refuses to leave or to remove the firearm from the premises when asked to do so by a person legally in control of the premises; or
(3) consumes alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine while carrying a firearm in a business which sells alcoholic liquor, beer, or wine for consumption on the premises.
In addition to the penalties described above, a person who violates this section while carrying a concealable weapon pursuant to Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23, must have his concealed weapon permit revoked."
SECTION 2. The repeal or amendment by this act of any law, whether temporary or permanent or civil or criminal, does not affect pending actions, rights, duties, or liabilities founded thereon, or alter, discharge, release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under the repealed or amended law, unless the repealed or amended provision shall so expressly provide. After the effective date of this act, all laws repealed or amended by this act must be taken and treated as remaining in full force and effect for the purpose of sustaining any pending or vested right, civil action, special proceeding, criminal prosecution, or appeal existing as of the effective date of this act, and for the enforcement of rights, duties, penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities as they stood under the repealed or amended laws.
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
S. 308 Restaurant Carry Bill
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/agendas/agns540.htm
Subcommittee on S.308
SENATE JUDICIARY
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
S.308
(Firearms)
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
10:00 A.M.
Room 105, Gressette Building
Subcommittee Members: Senators Massey (Ch.), Coleman, Nicholson, Bennett, Shealy
Staff: J. J. Gentry
Last Updated: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 1:21 P.M.
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/agendas/agns540.htm
Subcommittee on S.308
SENATE JUDICIARY
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
S.308
(Firearms)
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
10:00 A.M.
Room 105, Gressette Building
Subcommittee Members: Senators Massey (Ch.), Coleman, Nicholson, Bennett, Shealy
Staff: J. J. Gentry
Last Updated: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 1:21 P.M.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
Committee meeting reminder for those interested. I'm out of state at a funeral, or I would go.
bilall
Well-Known Fanatic
Note from NRA-ILA a few minutes ago:
Yesterday, Senate Bill 308 passed in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee. S. 308, introduced by state Senator Sean Bennett (R-38), is a critical self-defense reform that would remove the prohibition on a Concealed Weapon Permit (CWP) holder carrying a concealed firearm into a restaurant licensed to serve alcohol. Under S. 308, a permit holder would still be prohibited from consuming alcohol while in the restaurant if he or she is carrying a concealed firearm for personal protection. An NRA representative testified in support of S. 308 at this subcommittee meeting yesterday.
S. 308 will soon be considered by the full Senate Judiciary Committee, so please contact members of this committee today and urge them to support this important Restaurant Carry bill.
Yesterday, Senate Bill 308 passed in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee. S. 308, introduced by state Senator Sean Bennett (R-38), is a critical self-defense reform that would remove the prohibition on a Concealed Weapon Permit (CWP) holder carrying a concealed firearm into a restaurant licensed to serve alcohol. Under S. 308, a permit holder would still be prohibited from consuming alcohol while in the restaurant if he or she is carrying a concealed firearm for personal protection. An NRA representative testified in support of S. 308 at this subcommittee meeting yesterday.
S. 308 will soon be considered by the full Senate Judiciary Committee, so please contact members of this committee today and urge them to support this important Restaurant Carry bill.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
It's time to start making calls.
http://www.thestate.com/2013/02/14/2631 ... R1T1Mi9Kc1
Senator Hutto needs to be reminded that the response time for the police when one calls 911 is not "instant".
http://www.thestate.com/2013/02/14/2631 ... R1T1Mi9Kc1
Senator Hutto needs to be reminded that the response time for the police when one calls 911 is not "instant".
armaborealis
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2011
- Messages
- 575
Do you have contact info for the committee members handy?
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
http://www2.wspa.com/news/your-side/201 ... r-5630298/
S-308 passed out of committee yesterday with a 15-7 (y-n) vote.
There is a poll at the above link. Lets hit it. Currently at 66% to 34% in favor.
It's not in this article, but Katrina Shealy said in the committee meeting that she had received 864 emails and only one was against S-308. Emails send a message.
S-308 passed out of committee yesterday with a 15-7 (y-n) vote.
There is a poll at the above link. Lets hit it. Currently at 66% to 34% in favor.
It's not in this article, but Katrina Shealy said in the committee meeting that she had received 864 emails and only one was against S-308. Emails send a message.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
http://www.thestate.com/2013/02/19/2640 ... -form-area
I haven't been able to confirm this yet, but I believe this was a party line vote with all D's voting against. The "they" quoted above have made it so the bill will require a 2/3 vote to pass.
It's time to flood the inboxes of all Democrat Senators. That is of course, if anyone cares...
I haven't been able to confirm this yet, but I believe this was a party line vote with all D's voting against. The "they" quoted above have made it so the bill will require a 2/3 vote to pass.
It's time to flood the inboxes of all Democrat Senators. That is of course, if anyone cares...
Enjay
Well-Known Fanatic
Thank you for sharing the info. 
I care very much.
I care very much.thebrasilian
Well-Known Fanatic
John Canuck said:
Posted to my blog on Facebook and twitter. Between them I have over 2500 followers.
11B3XCIB
Well-Known Fanatic
I saw the Katrina Shealy comment in the post 2 above. She's the senator for my district and so far has been awesome. I've written all my reps countless times over the past couple months and she actually responds to ALL of them personally. Glad I voted for her and got ole Jake Knotts out of there.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
I'm glad you did too. I'm not in her district but did send her a little contribution, and wrote numerous letters on her behalf. I hope the NRA chokes on it for supporting Jake Knotts. Part of the contribution I sent to the Shealy campaign was the $30 I will not give the NRA.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
It appears that Senator Hutto is responsible for the Minority Report.
He is in District 40, Allendale, Barnwell, Colleton, Hampton, and Orangeburg Counties
Those in his district should note his lack of concern for your safety.
He is in District 40, Allendale, Barnwell, Colleton, Hampton, and Orangeburg Counties
Those in his district should note his lack of concern for your safety.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
Legislative update re: S 308
Senator PEELER moved that the Bill be made a Special Order.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Ayes 26; Nays 15
AYES
Alexander Bennett Bright
Bryant Campsen Cleary
Corbin Courson Cromer
Davis Fair Gregory
Grooms Hayes Hembree
Leatherman Martin, Larry Martin, Shane
Massey O'Dell Peeler
Shealy Thurmond Turner
Verdin Young
Total--26
NAYS
Allen Coleman Ford
Jackson Johnson Lourie
Malloy McElveen McGill
Nicholson Reese Scott
Setzler Sheheen Williams
Total--15
Having failed to receive the necessary vote, the motion to make the Bill a Special Order failed.
Senator PEELER moved that the Bill be made a Special Order.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Ayes 26; Nays 15
AYES
Alexander Bennett Bright
Bryant Campsen Cleary
Corbin Courson Cromer
Davis Fair Gregory
Grooms Hayes Hembree
Leatherman Martin, Larry Martin, Shane
Massey O'Dell Peeler
Shealy Thurmond Turner
Verdin Young
Total--26
NAYS
Allen Coleman Ford
Jackson Johnson Lourie
Malloy McElveen McGill
Nicholson Reese Scott
Setzler Sheheen Williams
Total--15
Having failed to receive the necessary vote, the motion to make the Bill a Special Order failed.
rotarymike
Well-Known Fanatic
So is it still a going concern as a bill (ie, both houses passed and signed by Haley) or is it dead in the water?
I'm not as familiar with the intricacies of making law in SC as I should be. Of course, I also have an active negative desire to be a politician, so it's not something I have had to look at in the course of life.
I'm not as familiar with the intricacies of making law in SC as I should be. Of course, I also have an active negative desire to be a politician, so it's not something I have had to look at in the course of life.
John Canuck
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2011
- Messages
- 832
Well, I'm not as familiar with the rules as some, so I asked them.
If I understand it right, when Hutto filed a report for the
minority in opposition, that put the bill into the contested calendar where it will never be heard.
To get it heard and voted on, it will need to be a special order. At least two of the no votes will need to become yes votes. That will require some calling and emailing. Everyone should call them, but if any of the no's are your guy, get on him.
If I understand it right, when Hutto filed a report for the
minority in opposition, that put the bill into the contested calendar where it will never be heard.
To get it heard and voted on, it will need to be a special order. At least two of the no votes will need to become yes votes. That will require some calling and emailing. Everyone should call them, but if any of the no's are your guy, get on him.
armaborealis
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2011
- Messages
- 575
John Canuck said:
Do you have emails, phone #s, or fax #s for the "nays?" Happy to fire for effect, but need some help with the contact info.
