Carry in Polling Places?

could a state or local government legitimately say that they are in control of a polling place during the time voting is allowed?

the one major problem i see with this is that they, the state and counties, allow polling places to be in places of worship

i don't see ANY state or county agency claiming to be taking control of a church or any other house of worship at any time and if a federal election is on the ballot then it would certainly be a violation of the US Constitution

Dreamer... i would think that if you know of a polling place in Beaufort county that is in a house of worship you could call the sheriff's dpt back and ask how they can legally seize a church without it being an endorsement of religion or an infringement upon peoples freedom to worship?

the government uses loopholes to go after us, use any loophole you can get to go back after them

farkles said:

Dreamer, that post said "offices under control of the County"...would the polling place really be considered an "office"? Is the general public allowed into County offices? I don't think we are, so I don't see how they could call this an office.

Click to expand...

I'm a member of the "general public", and I go into County Offices ALL THE TIME. Sheriff's office, County Clerk, Election Commission, etc, etc, etc...

Now, whether or not the County Election Board or the Sheriff can classify a polling place as "being under control of the County or State" to classify it as a prohibited place for carry is, as the Deputy told me, "a matter for the courts to sort out". They have said clearly that they would consider carrying in a polling place as a chargeable offense, and would act accordingly...

I then said that under that logic, it would be illegal to carry while walking or driving on a state or county road in NC, and asked him if that was the case. His answer was "well, that's different"... More hemming and hawing...

The general gist I'm getting for answer to this question is who cares what the law actually SAYS--it's what the "badges on the street" WANT it to say in a given situation that determines how a given LEO will act in a particular situation. Thus it shall ever be...

When I first called the Sheriffs office about this, he said "Well, I'm not sure, but I think people wouldn't want folks carrying at polling places."

My reply was "I understand that Deputy, but the question is not what people want. The question is what does the LAW say on the matter..."

I think their answer shows that they don't really care what the LAW SAYS. What they are really interested in is how THEY want things to be...

NC needs to repeal this silly "cities and counties can opt out of State Preemption" clause, and do things like VA and WV. The state law in NC should say "Cities and Counties cannot impost restrictions on possession, carry, transport, or commerce of firearms above and beyond State Law." Period, end of discussion. This municipal patchwork of convoluted (and often carefully hidden) restrictions on carry, transport, and possession of firearms in NC is an unholy mess, and needs to be dismantled.

Either we have State Preemption that stands as Rule of Law, or we have a toothless token of a statute that has no real effect, power, or authority over localities, and allows them to enact whatever restrictions they see fit...

Either we have a 2A in NC, or we don't.

here is another example of the "whites only water fountain" attitude as it pertains to the 2A. constitutional rights ought to be first priority in public property. dosen't the taxes we pay go to these facilities.

It seems to me that all portions of the above mentioned law should be easily able to be beaten in court.

It is shocking to the conscience that in order to exercise one fundamental right, you cannot be exercising another...

Funerals - Right to assemble
Protest - free speech, right to assemble, redress of grievances
Parades - free speech, right to assemble
Polling places - right to vote
Public places owned by the state - right to assemble, redress of grievances

There is no way that ANY of those could be justifiably qualified to be the kinds of "sensitive places" referred to in Heller.

I could see SOME public places being "sensitive", courthouses, city hall, jails... but not EVERY public place.

The rest are completely out of line with the idea of exercising your rights.

mekender said:

It seems to me that all portions of the above mentioned law should be easily able to be beaten in court.

It is shocking to the conscience that in order to exercise one fundamental right, you cannot be exercising another...

Funerals - Right to assemble
Protest - free speech, right to assemble, redress of grievances
Parades - free speech, right to assemble
Polling places - right to vote
Public places owned by the state - right to assemble, redress of grievances

There is no way that ANY of those could be justifiably qualified to be the kinds of "sensitive places" referred to in Heller.

I could see SOME public places being "sensitive", courthouses, city hall, jails... but not EVERY public place.

The rest are completely out of line with the idea of exercising your rights.

Click to expand...

I agree completely, but I don't have the money to test it.

I wont comment on Beaufort's (pronounced Bow-Fert) interpretations. Because they should not be making them at all. If it isnt in the law then they should not be enforcing it. Cut and dry. However I am will to wager a large sum that if anyone OC's while voting that a person whether they are liberal or not will call the police.