H. 3659 is another gun control bill that makes possession of a handgun a felony (unless you fit into one of the listed exceptions) instead of a misdemeanor, drastically increases the felony penalties for possession of a handgun by a prohibited person, and defines what an “assault weapon” is under South Carolina law.
GrassRoots GunRights strongly opposes H. 3659. Mere possession of a handgun without having used - or intending to use - the handgun in a crime should not be a crime.
The 2nd Amendment guarantees a person the right to “keep and bear arms.” A “right” is something that can be exercised without a permit. Only a privilege requires a permit. Both Vermont and Alaska recognize the “right to keep and bear arms” and allow people to possess a handgun without a permit. South Carolina should change the law to properly recognize the “right to keep and bear arms,” not change the law to increase the penalty from a misdemeanor to a felony.
H. 3659 could be used to convict a concealed weapon permit (CWP) holder of a felony simply for innocently violating the law with regards to where one can legally carry. If a CWP holder is carrying pursuant to - but not in complete compliance with - the CWP law, then the CWP holder would not come under one of the listed exceptions to the law prohibiting possession of a handgun. Thus, a CWP holder could be convicted of a felony for innocently violating the CWP law.
Drastically increasing the penalties for possession of a handgun by a prohibited person is another step in the wrong direction. The increased penalties are NOT for committing a crime with the handgun, the increased penalties are for mere possession of a handgun by a prohibited person. So, who are these prohibited people that need to have their penalties increased for possessing a handgun? Better yet, will the increased penalties actually make anyone safer? Will increased penalties for a child under 18, a habitual drunkard or a pot smoker, or a mentally incompetent person possessing a handgun make you safer? Do you really think that children, drunks, and mentally incompetent people are able to properly reason and conclude they should not possess a handgun because the penalties are being increased? Remember, these prohibited people will incur the increased penalties for mere possession of the handgun, any criminal use of the handgun would rightfully incur additional penalties. The current penalties are working just fine and there is no need to drastically increase the penalties on people who are not capable of rational thought anyway.
H. 3659 will define “assault weapon” in South Carolina law. Unfortunately, there is no logic to the definition and appears to be an assault upon AR-15s and newer semiautomatic rifles with greater than 20 round magazines, and tactical shotguns. Here is how H. 3659 defines an “assault weapon”:
|
“'Assault weapon' means a firearm with any of the following characteristics: (a) all semiautomatic action, centerfire rifles with a detachable magazine with a capacity of twenty-one or more rounds; (b) all semiautomatic shotguns with a folding stock or a magazine capacity of more than six rounds, or both; (c) a firearm which has been modified to be operable as an assault weapon as defined in this item; and (d) any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an assault weapon, including a detachable magazine with a capacity of twenty-one or more rounds, or any combination of parts from which an assault weapon may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person. |
'Assault weapon' does not include weapons that do not use fixed cartridges, weapons that were in production prior to 1898, manually operated bolt-action weapons, lever-action weapons, slide-action weapons, single-shot weapons, multiple-barrel weapons, revolving-cylinder weapons, semiautomatic weapons for which there is no fixed magazine with capacity of twenty-one or more rounds available, semiautomatic weapons that use exclusively en bloc clips, semiautomatic weapons in production prior to 1954, rimfire weapons that employ a tubular magazine, a firearm that use .22 caliber rimfire ammunition, or an assault weapon which has been modified either to render it permanently inoperable or to permanently make it a device no longer defined as an assault weapon.”
To show just how stupid this bill is, one need only consider that a foreign made AK-47 semiautomatic rifle with a 100 round magazine is not an “assault weapon” under this bill while an American made AR-15 semiautomatic rifle with a 30 round magazine is an “assault weapon.”
An AR-15 with a 20 round magazine is not an “assault weapon.” But, buy a 30 round magazine that fits into the AR-15 and suddenly you are in possession of an “assault weapon.” An SKS is defined as not an “assault weapon” because it was in production prior to 1954 even though it can be fitted with a 100 round magazine.
The whole concept of calling semiautomatic rifles “assault weapons” just because they look like fully automatic military weapons comes from the play book of the gun grabbers. The anti gun zealots are counting on the ignorance of the masses regarding firearms, along with the complicity of the mass media that show videos of fully automatic weapons when discussing semiautomatic “assault weapon” legislation, to get more guns banned.
H. 3659 is so poorly drafted that it includes references to “assault weapon” (which is a rifle or shotgun) in the article of law dealing with handguns. H. 3659 provides that an “assault weapon” can be confiscated when used to violate a handgun law. The biggest problem with H. 3659 is that it is the first step in banning semiautomatic rifles and shotguns, not that it bans them now.
The idea is to ban guns on an incremental basis. First, ban those small inexpensive handguns by labeling them as “Saturday Night Specials.” If people only knew the origin of the term “Saturday Night Special,” they would see how gun control has racist origins. Then, ban anything that looks like a military weapon since only a minority of gun owners own such weapons. Then, ban other handguns since that will not offend the largest group of gun owners - hunters. Then, ban those high powered sniper rifles used by hunters to kill at long distances. Finally, ban those shotguns.
H. 3659 bans some semiautomatic military looking rifles but not others. Why? The reason is that to ban them all would get too many people opposed to H. 3659. So, the gun grabbers want to divide the pro gun forces. But, once the gun grabbers have banned some of the semiautomatic military looking rifles, they will come back for the rest of them. We must all stand united and stop the gun grabbers now.
Gun owners need to understand that the gun grabbers will not rest until all guns are banned. Gun owners must stick together and fight all attempts at gun control. Remember, a house divided can not stand.
GrassRoots GunRights opposes H. 3659 because it is just more gun control that turns misdemeanor possession of a handgun into a felony when we should be repealing the laws making mere possession of a handgun a crime at all, it drastically increases penalties for mere possession of a handgun by prohibited persons who will not be dissuaded by the increased penalties, and it promotes more gun control by intentionally misleading people into thinking that semiautomatic rifles and shotguns are fully automatic weapons.