Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Uneventful carry in Durham

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    766

    Post imported post

    I have carried in Food Lion, Harris Teeter, Sam's Club, PetsMart, Office Max with no problems or incidents whatsoever.

  2. #2
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    I asked Grass Roots North Carolina to link to OpenCarry.org today - and suggested John link to them from our site.

    If anyone on this board is a GRNC member, can you tickle them to link to us?

    I think that we can really energize openc arry in NC - especially since the NC Supreme Court has held that the state cannot require a permit to open carry military size handguns under the NC Constitution - that's why the Chapel Hill open carry ban is limited to handguns < 6 inches in size (their ordinance creates some rube goldberg way of measuiring a handgun).

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    Cite case?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    416

    Post imported post

    I think Mike may be referring to State v. Kerner.

    ProguninTN

  5. #5
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    State v. Fennell, 95 N.C.App. 140, 382 S.E.2d 231, N.C.App.,1989
    SNIP
    "North Carolina decisions have interpreted our Constitution as guaranteeing the right to bear arms to the people in a collective sense-- similar to the concept of a militia--and also to individuals." State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 546, 159 S.E.2d 1, 9 (1968). Yet, as the Supreme Court of this state also noted, "These decisions have ... consistently pointed out that the right of individuals to bear arms is not absolute, but is subject to regulation." Id. The regulation must be " 'reasonable and not prohibitive, and must bear a fair relation to the preservation of the public peace and safety.' " Id. at 547, 159 S.E.2d at 10
    ...
    As the court stated in State v. Kerner [i]t is ... a reasonable regulation ... to require that a pistol shall not be under a certain length, which, if reasonable, will prevent the use of pistols of small size, which are not borne as arms, but which are easily and ordinarily carried concealed. To exclude all pistols, however, is not a regulation, but a prohibition, of arms, which come under the designation of "arms" which the people are entitled to bear [emphasis added].
    181 N.C. 574, 578, 107 S.E. 222, 225 (1921). Thus, the State can regulate the length of a particular firearm as long as there is a reasonable purpose for doing so. We are not convinced by Fennell's argument that such a restriction leads us down the "slippery slope" [emphasis added] and gives the legislature full license to restrict any and all firearms possessed by individuals. We overrule this assignment of error.

    ---------------------
    State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 159 S.E.2d 1 (1968)

    SNIP
    "Any statute or construction of common-law rule which would amount to a destruction of right to bear arms would be unconstitutional. Const. art. 1, § 24."
    -----------------------
    State v. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222(1921)
    SNIP
    "The statute in this case, Public Local Laws 1919, c. 317, is especially objectionable in that it requires (section 2) that in order to carry a pistol off his own premises, even openly, and for a lawful purpose, the citizen must make application to the municipal court, if a resident of a town; or to the superior court, if not residing in town, describing the weapon and giving the time and purpose for which it may be carried off his premises and must pay to the clerk of the court the sum of $5 for each permit and must file a bond in the penalty of $500 that he will not carry the weapon except as so authorized. In the case of a riot or mob violence, or other emergency requiring the defense of public order, this would place law-abiding citizens entirely at the mercy of the lawless element. As a regulation even this is void because an unreasonable regulation, and, besides, it would be void because for all practical purposes it is prohibition of the constitutional right to bear arms."

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    416

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    State v. Fennell, 95 N.C.App. 140, 382 S.E.2d 231, N.C.App.,1989
    SNIP
    "North Carolina decisions have interpreted our Constitution as guaranteeing the right to bear arms to the people in a collective sense-- similar to the concept of a militia--and also to individuals." State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 546, 159 S.E.2d 1, 9 (1968). Yet, as the Supreme Court of this state also noted, "These decisions have ... consistently pointed out that the right of individuals to bear arms is not absolute, but is subject to regulation." Id. The regulation must be " 'reasonable and not prohibitive, and must bear a fair relation to the preservation of the public peace and safety.' " Id. at 547, 159 S.E.2d at 10
    ...
    As the court stated in State v. Kerner t is ... a reasonable regulation ... to require that a pistol shall not be under a certain length, which, if reasonable, will prevent the use of pistols of small size, which are not borne as arms, but which are easily and ordinarily carried concealed. To exclude all pistols, however, is not a regulation, but a prohibition, of arms, which come under the designation of "arms" which the people are entitled to bear [emphasis added].
    181 N.C. 574, 578, 107 S.E. 222, 225 (1921). Thus, the State can regulate the length of a particular firearm as long as there is a reasonable purpose for doing so. We are not convinced by Fennell's argument that such a restriction leads us down the "slippery slope" [emphasis added] and gives the legislature full license to restrict any and all firearms possessed by individuals. We overrule this assignment of error.

    ---------------------
    State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 159 S.E.2d 1 (1968)

    SNIP
    "Any statute or construction of common-law rule which would amount to a destruction of right to bear arms would be unconstitutional. Const. art. 1, § 24."
    -----------------------
    State v. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222 (1921)
    SNIP
    "The statute in this case, Public Local Laws 1919, c. 317, is especially objectionable in that it requires (section 2) that in order to carry a pistol off his own premises, even openly, and for a lawful purpose, the citizen must make application to the municipal court, if a resident of a town; or to the superior court, if not residing in town, describing the weapon and giving the time and purpose for which it may be carried off his premises and must pay to the clerk of the court the sum of $5 for each permit and must file a bond in the penalty of $500 that he will not carry the weapon except as so authorized. In the case of a riot or mob violence, or other emergency requiring the defense of public order, this would place law-abiding citizens entirely at the mercy of the lawless element. As a regulation even this is void because an unreasonable regulation, and, besides, it would be void because for all practical purposes it is prohibition of the constitutional right to bear arms."
    Mike, I guess I was thinking along the same lines. I suppose I should post more information. Not everybody as Law Database access. Anyways,I'm happy to help with providing information.

    ProguninTN

  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    It's a team effort

    John, link to NC page please as you see fit.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    766

    Post imported post

    I ventured into J.C. Penney at one of the yuppie malls - no problem.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    91

    Post imported post

    I am a member of GRNC and will ask them about this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •