• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

"Not authorized" = "Prohibited" ???

janus

New member
Joined
Sep 5, 2007
Messages
20
Location
Georgia
imported post

North Carolina laws seem to have two sets of categories of places where you "may" not carry.

One is where you are "not authorized" and second where you are either prohibited or it is illegal or unlawful for you to carry.

First the unlawful or prohibited places:

Schools: Pretty cut and dried(Mostly felonies and some misdemeanors).

Admission charged or alcohol sold and consumed: Pretty clear here too(class 1 misdemeanor).

Some, but not all,state buildings and grounds: Clear here too(class 1 misdemeanor).

Parades, demonstrations and funeral processions.

Declared state emergencies

Where it gets fuzzy is in Section 14-415.11

It starts out saying that "Any person who has a concealed handgun permit may carry a concealed handgun unless otherwise specifically prohibited by law."

It then says the "permit does not authorize" then lists all the places prohibited above and thenlists bunch of other places "not authorized" like state office buildings and federal office buildings.

What's the point of listing those prohibited places again( 14-269.2, 14-269.3 and 14-269.4) unless it is to indicate that it is "specifically prohibited by law".

14-269.2, .3 and .4 does not specifically prohibit weapons carry with a permit so without 14-415.11(c), 14-415.11(a) would override 14-269.2, .3 and .4.

So the point of my post comes to this: Does "not authorized" mean "specifically prohibited"?

Without an otherwise general prohibition somewhere else in the code does 14-415.11(c) automatically "prohibit" carrying of concealed handgun in:

state office building; state offices; or financial institutions?

It is "unlawful" to carry a concealed handgun while drinking or having alcohol in your blood. But how about open carry while drinking or having alcohol in in your blood?

My personal opinion is that "not authorized" means that you are not empowered by this permit to override any state law, local ordinance or even any regulation or private property rights, and "not authorized" does not mean prohibited.

So I believe,in the absence of any other law, ordinance, regulation or property owner's wishes, it is not unlawful for you to conceal carry in those places.

Can someone show me how I'm wrong in my reasoning. Does anyone know of any caselaw on this subject?

Thanks,
 

DreQo

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,350
Location
Minnesota
imported post

My personal opinion is that "not authorized" means that you are not empowered by this permit to override any state law, local ordinance or even any regulation or private property rights, and "not authorized" does not mean prohibited.
You're on the right track, here. It's already been pretty much cleared up that, in North Carolina, having a concealed weapon in a financial institution is illegal, and your permit doesn't help you. However, having an OPENLY carried weapon IS NOT illegal. I have tested this multiple times, doing my business in a bank with a full-sized side arm (even went into an office and applied for a loan lol). Actually, I was questioned by a customer oncein the middle of the line one day about why in the world I had a gun ina bank...after telling him, politely, that I was within my rights and the law, he shut up and nothing else was said.

This same theory also applies to the "no weapons/concealed weapons/whatever" signs on properties. A concealed permit does not authorize you to carry there, meaning that if the owner of the property wishes you to leave because of your weapon, you must, otherwise you will be trespassing. Since these properties are otherwise private, however, there is nothing illegal about carrying a weapon there. The end result here is that you can legally carry any way you'd like, but if you are asked to leave, you must. I have tested these waters as well, by purposefully openly carrying in establishments where a "No Concealed Weapons" sign was posted. The end results were mixed...some didn't care, some did. Bottom line: If there's a sign on private property, but you're otherwise legally carrying, you're not breaking the law by carrying there, you're only violating the owner's policy.

As far as the other areas you referenced, like the alcohol related ones, I'll have to take a closer look. It was my impression that the two situations I just mentioned were the only not authorized vs. unlawful ones.

As a whole, NC's laws on weapons, hand guns, and the like are mostlyconfusing, sometimes redundant, often unnecessary, and always unconstitutional. I'm personally getting fed up with having to constantly leave it in the car, then re-holster, then go concealed, then leave it in the car again, then put it back on my belt...all on one 4 hour fishing trip.

Janus...try to clear up your ideas a little bit...I got lost when you started comparing numbers lol....and we'll see what we can come up with. There are many other members on this forum with more legal knowledge than myself who should have some solid answers to offer. :)

Oh yeah, btw, I am not a lawyer, lol.
 

janus

New member
Joined
Sep 5, 2007
Messages
20
Location
Georgia
imported post

Thanks for the reply DreQo.

The numbers that I quoted were the actual chapter and section numbers for NC statutes.

School prohibition was 14-269.2, admission charged places was 14-269.3 and some specific state buildings and groundswas 14-269.4

Since the "not authorized" language applies equally at "banks" as well as posted private property, one would think that both places are legal or illegalin the same manner for concealed carry.


Anyone know of a court case where someone was prosecuted for concealed carry at a bank?
 
Top