Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Are these two statutes constitutional under State vs Kerner?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post



    153A‑129. Firearms. A county may by ordinance regulate, restrict, or prohibit the discharge of firearms at any time or place except when used to take birds or animals pursuant to Chapter 113, Subchapter IV, when used in defense of person or property, or when used pursuant to lawful directions of law‑enforcement officers. A county may also regulate the display of firearms on the public roads, sidewalks, alleys, or other public property. This section does not limit a county's authority to take action under Chapter 14, Article 36A. (1973, c. 822, s. 1; 2006‑264, s. 16.)




    § 160A‑189. Firearms. A city may by ordinance regulate, restrict, or prohibit the discharge of firearms at any time or place within the city except when used in defense of person or property or pursuant to lawful directions of law‑enforcement officers, and may regulate the display of firearms on the streets, sidewalks, alleys, or other public property. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit a city's authority to take action under Article 36A of Chapter 14 of the General Statutes. (1971, c. 698, s. 1.)

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greensboro, ,
    Posts
    235

    Post imported post

    No offense, but your question is faulty. State v. Kerner is not the binding case on this matter, therefore how they relate to Kerner is irrelevant. Kerner is a 1921 case and there have been been several other cases on point (though I do not have the cites).

    The gist of current case law (as I understand it), is that municipalities may not outright ban open carry in public, but they can regulate it, i.e. minimum weapon size, a la Chapel Hill.

    Municipalities may also ban ALL wepaons from municipal buildings, parks, etc. but must do so by passing an ordinance and posting the prohibition at all entrances (just like any other property owner who wished to ban CC).

    Furthermore, even wth a ban, it is okay to have the weapon in your car (i.e. carrying, arrive at park, put weapon in trunk while enjoying the fresh air, reholster upon leaving)

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    But State vs Kerner did deal with restictions on open carry (in respect to Forsyth County)

    It seems to me these two statutes allow the total prohibition of public open carrying



  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greensboro, ,
    Posts
    235

    Post imported post

    A narrow reading of Kerner would indicate the court held that Forsyth County's requirement for getting a permit in advance was analogous to an outright ban, and therefore was a violation of the state constitution's right to bear arms. I have no idea what statutory power Forsyth County had to pass that ordinance in the 1920s.

    Remember, that the ordinance in Kerner dealt with any handguns carried off the owner's property.

    The statutes you are referring to specifically limited the muncipality's authority to regulate "display of firearms on the public roads, sidewalks, alleys, or other public property." This is a huge distinction, given the laguage of Kerner.

    Further, the statutes were enacted by the legislature in the 1970s IIRC (they did a complete rewrite of the state code in the 70s I believe.

    While those statutes give the municipality authority to regulate, there are more recent court cases which have said that power does not extend to complete bans butcities and county may ban weapons from their buildings, parks, etc. under a different provision of law.



Posting Permissions

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