Did South Carolina’s 2001 machine-gun exception also cover sawed-off shotguns and rifles?

Plain-English summary

A federal firearms official asked whether South Carolina’s 2001 amendment to § 16-23-250, exempting some federally authorized possessors, reached sawed-off shotguns and rifles as well as machine guns and military firearms. In February 2002, the AG read the new phrase “these weapons” as referring to machine guns and military firearms specifically named nearby. He said sawed-off shotguns and rifles did not appear to be included, but expressly called the conclusion uncertain and suggested legislative clarification.

The requester also asked who could provide the certification required by the federal machine-gun transfer regulation. The AG said South Carolina law required an application approved by the local sheriff and registration with the State Law Enforcement Division, but did not itself specify who signed the federal certification. He concluded any official listed in the then-cited federal regulation could do so for a South Carolina applicant.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2002. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

Firearms regulators and possessors

The opinion construed the 2001 federally authorized-possession exception narrowly to the machine guns and military firearms named in the paragraph, with an express caveat that the reading was not free from doubt.

Transfer certification officials

The AG distinguished the state application and registration process from the federal transfer certification. He deferred the identity of certifying officials to the federal regulation cited in the letter.

Common questions

Did the AG say the new exception covered sawed-off shotguns? A: He said they did not appear to be covered, while acknowledging uncertainty.

Who could certify a machine-gun transfer for a South Carolina applicant? A: The AG said any official listed in 27 C.F.R. § 179.85 could provide the certification required by that then-current rule.

Background and statutory framework

The AG interpreted the phrase “these weapons” in the 2001 amendment to § 16-23-250 by reference to the machine guns and military firearms named in that provision. He separately discussed § 23-31-330 on state machine-gun applications and 27 C.F.R. § 179.85 on federal transfer certification.

Citations and references

• § 16-23-250: firearms exception amended in 2001.
• § 23-31-330: state machine-gun registration process.
• 27 C.F.R. § 179.85: federal transfer certification regulation cited by the AG.

Official title

Asking if the language added to the 2001 amendment to S.C. Code Ann. § 16-23-250 applies only to machine guns and military firearms or whether it also applies to sawed-off shotguns and rifles.

Requester

Mr. David C. Lieberman, Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/febuary-28-2002/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/02feb28lieberman.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLIE CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

February 28, 2002

Mr. David C. Lieberman
Department of the Treasury
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms
6701 Carmel Road, Suite #200
Charlotte, NC 29226

Re:

Possession of Machine Guns in South Carolina

Dear Mr. Lieberman:
First, I must apologize for the delay in responding to your request for clarification regarding S.C. Code Ann. § 16-23-250 and its amendment of September 21, 2001. As you may be aware, the State of South Carolina has experienced significant budget reductions due to declining revenue for the State. As a result of these reductions this Office has been forced to reallocate resources and personnel leaving certain divisions at less than full-operating capacity. We appreciate your patience in this regard. Your first question posed asked ifthe language added in the 2001 amendment to S.C. Code Ann. § 16-23-250 applies only to machine guns and military firearms or whether it also applies to sawed-off shotguns and rifles. The portion of this statute that was amended reads as follows: The provisions of this article do not apply to any manufacturer of machine guns or military firearms licensed pursuantto the provisions of 18 U.S. C. Section 921 et seq., any person authorized to possess these weapons by the United States Department of the Treasury, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, or any other federal agency empowered to grant this authorization, any common or contract carrier transporting or shipping any machine gun or military firearm to or from the manufacturer if the transportation or shipment is not prohibited by federal law, or persons licensed pursuant to Section 23-31-3 70. South Carolina Senate Bill Number 488, effective September 21, 2001 made an addition to the list of exceptions by including "any person authorized to possess these weapons by the United States Department of the Treasury, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, or any other federal agency empowered to grant this authorization .... " The "weapons" referred to in this amendment appear to be the machine guns and military firearms mentioned in the first sentence of this paragraph REMBERT

c. DENNIS BUUDING

,efA~'"' &~

•

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA,

s.c. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

Mr. Lieberman
Page 2
February 28, 2002

I

L

and that portion referring to contract or common carriers. As this paragraph specifically mentions "any manufacturer of machine guns or military firearms"and common or contract carriers transporting any "machine gun or military firearm," the maxim of statutory interpretation called expressio unius est exclusio alterius, meaning the specific expression of one thing is the express exclusion of another, seems applicable. Statutes' words must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to a forced or subtle construction which would work to limit or to expand the statute's operation. As this portion of the statute expressly refers only to machine guns and military firearms, sawed-off shotguns and rifles do not appear to be contemplated by this amendment to S.C. Code Ann. § 16-23-250. This conclusion, however, is not free from doubt and perhaps legislative clarification is necessary. Your second question asked which official in South Carolina may provide the certification required for the transfer of machine guns as required by 27 C.F.R. § 179.85. Under S.C. Code Ann.
§ 23-31-330, any person entitled to possess a machine gun must file an application with the State Law Enforcement Division approved by the sheriff of the county in which the applicant resides or has a principal place of business. The State Law Enforcement Division then registers the applicant upon approval, and the applicant is given a card which allows possession of a machine gun in the State. Our statutes do not expressly state which official must provide the certification required by 2 7 C .F .R. § 179. 85 for the transfer of machine guns and it seems our intention is to adhere to the federal regulation in this respect. Therefore, any official listed in 27 C.F.R. § 179.85 could provide the proper certification for the transfer of machine guns as required by that regulation for a South Carolina applicant. I hope the information provided herein proves helpful. Please contact me if you have any further questions. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Assistant Attorney General and represents the position ofthe undersigned as to the specific questions asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General nor published in a manner of a formal opinion. Sincerely,

Assistant Attorney General
DKA/an