Bill aims to bring back stiffer penalties for arson

Don’t play with fire – that’s the message a bill before the S.C. Legislature aims to send to would-be arsonists.

House Bill 3545 will restructure degrees of arson if the bill becomes law. Right now, state law doesn’t differentiate between type of buildings burned, and only levels a first-degree arson charge – the most serious kind – when there is a death, according to Jason Pope, deputy director of the South Carolina Firefighters Association.

The goal of the legislation is to show the value of a building burned, such as the difference between a church and a small shed, and to allow a more serious charge for serious injuries. “You could burn my house down or you could burn the State House – it would be the same conviction,” Pope said.

Currently, state law requires a charge of first degree arson if someone dies in a fire, second degree arson for cases of serious bodily injury, and third degree arson for other injuries and property damage.

These standards took hold in 2010 with the passage of the Omnibus Crime Reduction and Sentencing Reform Act – a lengthy document revising numerous criminal charges. House Bill 3545 changes arson law back to what it was before 2010.

That means a charge of first degree arson for death or serious injury, second degree for buildings such as churches, homes and offices, and third degree for sheds, cars, and similar property, according to Robert Stewart, the former chief of the State Law Enforcement Division and one of the lobbyists representing the Firefighters Association.

The bill currently is in committee, where representatives and senators are working to hammer out its final language. Legislators are on board with the degrees of arson but are debating another aspect of the bill, Pope said.

“We’re just waiting on those conferees to meet again and come to an agreement,” he said. “As far as the Firefighters Association is concerned, we’re good.”

Part of the bill’s goal is deterrence – stiffer penalties for burning residences and other buildings, Stewart said. Another part is just common sense, he said.

“If someone burns a house or a place of worship – and there’s nobody injured or killed in it – just the fact they burned the building shouldn’t be in the same category as someone who sets a car or a shed in a back yard on fire,” he said.

This story was originally published March 8, 2016 at 1:27 PM.