This takes effect Dec 1
Walk softly and carry a large caliber.
While reading through that bill to see what all it does, I noticed one interesting thing. There might be a loophole that allows you to CC on some posted property.
Here's part on the new bill.
So cities/counties can still post against CC. But does that sign have any legal weight?§ 14‑415.23. Statewide uniformity.
It is the intent of the General Assembly to prescribe a uniform system for the regulation of legally carrying a concealed handgun. To insure uniformity, no political subdivisions, boards, or agencies of the State nor any county, city, municipality, municipal corporation, town, township, village, nor any department or agency thereof, may enact ordinances, rules, or regulations concerning legally carrying a concealed handgun. A unit of local government may adopt an ordinance to permit the posting of a prohibition against carrying a concealed handgun, in accordance with G.S. 14‑415.11(c), on local government buildings and their appurtenant premises. A unit of local government may adopt an ordinance to prohibit, by posting, the carrying of a concealed handgun on municipal and county recreational facilities that are specifically identified by the unit of local government. If a unit of local government adopts such an ordinance with regard to recreational facilities, then the concealed handgun permittee may, nevertheless, secure the handgun in a locked vehicle within the trunk, glove box, or other enclosed compartment or area within or on the motor vehicle. For purposes of this section, the term "recreational facilities" includes only the following: a playground, an athletic field, a swimming pool, and an athletic facility."
Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like only signs on private property carry any legal weight. Local governments can still prohibit by posting, but do those postings have any legal weight?"§ 14‑415.11. Permit to carry concealed handgun; scope of permit.
(c) A Except as provided in G.S. 14‑415.27, a permit does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun in any of the following:
(8) On any private premises where notice that carrying a concealed handgun is prohibited by the posting of a conspicuous notice or statement by the person in legal possession or control of the premises.
(c) A Except as provided in G.S. 14-415.27,
"§ 14-415.27. Expanded permit scope for district attorneys, assistant district attorneys,
and investigators employed by office of the district attorney.
Notwithstanding G.S. 14-415.11(c), any person who is a district attorney, an assistant
district attorney, or an investigator employed by the office of a district attorney and who has a
concealed handgun permit issued pursuant to this Article or that is considered valid under
G.S. 14-415.24 is not subject to the restrictions and prohibitions set out in G.S. 14-415.11(c)
and may carry a concealed handgun in the areas listed in G.S. 14-415.11(c) unless otherwise
prohibited by federal law."
a permit does not authorize a person to
carry a concealed handgun in any of the following:
(1) areas Areas prohibited by G.S. 269.2( 14‑269.2. Weapons on campus or other educational property.), 14-269.3(§ 14‑269.3. Carrying weapons into assemblies and establishments where alcoholic beverages are sold and consumed.), and 14-277.2(§ 14‑277.2. Weapons at parades, etc., prohibited.)
(2) Areas prohibited by G.S. 14-269.4("§ 14-269.4. Weapons on certain State property and in courthouses.), except as allowed under
G.S. 14-269.4(6).(New locked vehicle storage rule)
(3) in In an area prohibited by rule adopted under G.S. 120-32.1(Allows rules to be set and changed for the legislative house)
As far as I can tell, right now there is not a section in the law dealing with cc permits allowing posting against their carry on public property
I for one find § 14-415.27 to be a disgusting example of our "public servants" giving themselves perks that they then insist on denying the Citizens of our fair State.
Giving extra privileges to district attorneys, assistant district attorneys, and investigators employed by office of the district attorney just because they hold certain offices is a disgusting abuse of the legislative process, and should be grounds for ousting ANY legislator who voted for this bill, as well as any DA who lobbied FOR this provision.
It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
--Barry Goldwater, 1964