Goldfinch's Opposition to permitless carry raises Second Amendment concerns
Stephen Goldfinch spent years actively blocking constitutional carry legislation in South Carolina while gun owners fought for a decade to eliminate permit requirements. Now running for state Attorney General, his record directly contradicts the positions expected from the state's top law enforcement officer.
A decade of obstruction
Gun owners in South Carolina pushed consistently to remove the state's permit requirement for lawful carry. Goldfinch stood in the way repeatedly. His legislative actions show a pattern of opposing permitless carry bills as they moved through the statehouse.
Constitutional carry removes the government's power to deny or delay a citizen's right to carry a firearm. Forty-one states have passed permitless carry laws. South Carolina remains among those requiring permits, a direct result of officials like Goldfinch blocking reform.
What the role actually requires
South Carolina's Attorney General serves as the state's top law enforcement officer. The position carries responsibility for defending the state Constitution—which includes the Second Amendment rights of citizens.
An Attorney General who opposed permitless carry legislation signals he will not aggressively defend Second Amendment protections in court. The job requires defending constitutional rights, not restricting them.
The practical impact on carriers
South Carolina gun owners currently need permits to carry. The state charges fees and processes applications—creating delays and unnecessary friction on a constitutional right.
Goldfinch's years of blocking constitutional carry mean South Carolina residents still face these government barriers. A candidate with his track record cannot be trusted to reverse course and protect carry rights as Attorney General.
Why this matters now
Second Amendment litigation continues in federal courts across the country. States need Attorneys General willing to defend carry rights, not restrict them.
The Supreme Court's recent decisions emphasize that carry restrictions require strict scrutiny. States cannot impose arbitrary barriers on constitutional rights. An Attorney General opposing permitless carry signals weakness defending South Carolina in these legal battles.
Gun owners considering candidates for statewide office should examine their actual voting records, not campaign promises. Goldfinch's decade of opposition to constitutional carry is documented. That record predicts future actions.
DownRange Analysis
Candidates seeking high office often shift their messaging during campaigns. What matters is what they actually did when they held power.
Goldfinch actively worked against constitutional carry when gun owners needed support most. South Carolina's constitutional carry fight took a decade—meaning Goldfinch's obstruction lasted years, not a single vote.
An Attorney General position requires defending state law and the state Constitution. Goldfinch's record shows he will not defend Second Amendment rights aggressively. South Carolina gun owners deserve leadership that actually protects their rights, not blocks them.
Voters should demand specific answers from Goldfinch about his opposition to constitutional carry and whether he will defend carry rights as Attorney General. His past behavior is the best predictor of future performance.
Source: DownRange research of South Carolina legislative records
