Council committee advances ordinance to ban shooting within 100 feet of occupied structures in unincorporated areas

Charleston County’s public safety committee voted to advance a proposed county ordinance that would prohibit discharging a firearm within 100 feet of an occupied house, school, church or similar structure in unincorporated areas unless the owner of the nearby structure gives permission. The committee voted, by voice, to move the measure to third reading for further consideration. The ordinance was presented to the committee by Edward Phipps, general counsel for the Charleston County Sheriff’s Office. He described the proposal as aimed at preventing reckless or careless gunfire in densely developed unincorporated areas while protecting lawful firearm ownership.

The measure, as explained in committee discussion, would apply countywide but is expected to primarily affect urbanized unincorporated neighborhoods where houses, day‑care centers and schools sit close together. "This proposed Charleston County ordinance addresses a legitimate public safety concern in rapidly developing unincorporated areas," Edward Phipps said, noting the draft seeks to target "generally reckless behavior rather than creating a burden‑shift mechanism that presumes guilt for lawful firearm activities on private property." The sheriff’s office emphasized the ordinance is intended to prevent accidental harm, not to restrict lawful ownership or use.

Councilmember Joe Boykin, a member of the public safety committee, described the rule in practical terms: "This applies across all of Charleston County, and it basically disallows someone to discharge a firearm within 100 feet of an occupied house or school or church or other type building, without that person's permission." Committee members said the 100‑foot buffer replaced an earlier, longer distance in the draft and was viewed by several as a reasonable compromise that would not broadly criminalize lawful firearm use.

Other members raised enforcement and scope questions during the discussion. The committee clarified that the ordinance would require permission from the owner or occupant of the structure located within 100 feet; permission given only by one adjacent occupant would not authorize shooting if another occupant within that 100‑foot radius did not consent. Natalie Hamm of the county attorney’s office assisted with clarifications during the discussion.

Supporters said the proposal aligns county rules with municipal limits on discharging firearms and is aimed at reducing occurrences where people in unincorporated "donut holes" are subject to nearby target practice or careless fire. "Within these urban areas, you've got schools and daycares and things like that. These kids are out playing on the playground and somebody's shooting a gun," Councilmember Moody said. Councilmember Ginny Costa Heinecutt thanked the sheriff’s office for input, saying enforcement capability is central to any regulation: "A rule that we implement is only as good as its enforcement."

The committee did not adopt final ordinance language at the meeting; it advanced the draft to third reading so council can consider final edits and any additional enforcement guidance. Committee members and presenters repeatedly emphasized the draft’s stated purpose of addressing reckless or negligent discharges rather than lawful defensive or sporting uses of firearms. The ordinance will return to the council for a formal vote at/after third reading, at which time any amendments to definitions, buffer distances or enforcement procedures can be proposed.