Ok, if I hear anyone else bring up this arcaine "law", I might have to give everyone a subscription to Municode.com. Yes, the ordinance exists, but it is very clear on what constitutes "Going Armed to the Terror of the Public" (272 N.C. 535; 32 N.C. App 495). There are four distinct conditions that must be met. The scenario that was proposed does not meet any one of them except for having a firearm.
1. Must be armed with unusual and dangerous weapon. (Firearm)
2. With the intent to terrify others
3. Out on public highways (in public, but possibly not on private property)
4. Acting in a manner to cause terror (whether anyone is terrified or not.)
I do love the "unusual and dangerous weapon". Isn't any weapon by definition dangerous? Also, what is so unusual about a firearm nowadays or ever?
However, this being an open carry state, the simple possession of a firearm is not a violation of the first condition. If someone was truly going in terror of the public, there would be no question.
As you can tell, when it comes to Open Carry, this subject is my #1 pet peeve.