Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: NC Trunk Carry Law

  1. #1
    Regular Member Sc0tt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Asheboro, NC
    Posts
    315

    Post NC Trunk Carry Law

    New Laws to Permit Firearms in the Parking Lot
    North Carolina and several other states recently enacted new gun legislation that substantially broadens citizens’ rights to carry firearms. The key provisions of the legislation will include the following:

    Employees are allowed to carry licensed firearms onto their employee’s property if the firearms remain locked in the vehicle.
    Companies may not inquire about firearms licenses or possession or make informal agreements about firearms.
    “Pistol-free” zones are allowed.
    Employers are not liable for violence committed against employees or vendors.
    Additional security procedures are not required of the employer.

    The dilemma for companies relates to a 2008 incident in Kentucky, when a plant employee argued with his supervisor over company regulations, then retrieved his gun from his car, went back inside the plant, and shot his supervisor and four co-workers, then himself. While many state laws protect employers from liability in cases like this, companies still need to be aware of their options and recognize the increased possibility of “heat of the moment” incidents.
    FROM: http://www.sunstatessecurity.com/Our...ews.aspx?id=20

    One of the companys I part time for had this on the news letter. I knew this bill was going through the legislator last time I posted but I have not heard anything on it passing.

    Does anyone know if this bill has passed and if so what does it mean and whats the statute so I can read it.

    (Yes Ive tried google )
    -----------------
    --SCOTT

    Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum

    "A government that is big enough to give you everything you need is beg enough to take everything you have, the course of history shows that as government incresses - liberty decreases."


    LEGAL NOTICE: I am not a lawyer, no content in the above post should considered legal advice

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Sc0tt View Post
    FROM: http://www.sunstatessecurity.com/Our...ews.aspx?id=20

    One of the companys I part time for had this on the news letter. I knew this bill was going through the legislator last time I posted but I have not heard anything on it passing.

    Does anyone know if this bill has passed and if so what does it mean and whats the statute so I can read it.

    (Yes Ive tried google )
    I hope so. My employer does not allow weapons in cars so I've been agonizing over it when I do start to open carry. Most of the time I'm driving, I'm going to my place of employment and I was really thinking it is pretty bad not to be able to have my pistol in my car. I hope this is for real..how would one interact with human resources on this issue? I've been thinking about bringing it up but of course I don't want to risk my job.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    It was going to be in HB 650 IIRC. But it was struck from the bill. The article is wrong. WE had a few folks in Raleigh that turned on us at the last minute. They had R's behind their names too. It was the "A3 McGrady amendment" during the second reading. All info can be found here if you look for it.

    http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascript...otesToView=all


    Here's your list of Republicans that voted FOR the McGrady amendment.

    Representative(s): Brubaker; Daughtry; Dockham; Dollar; Guice; Howard; McCormick; McGee; McGrady; Rhyne; Stam

  4. #4
    Regular Member Northerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Clayton, NC
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefjason View Post
    It was going to be in HB 650 IIRC. But it was struck from the bill. The article is wrong. WE had a few folks in Raleigh that turned on us at the last minute. They had R's behind their names too. It was the "A3 McGrady amendment" during the second reading. All info can be found here if you look for it.

    http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascript...otesToView=all


    Here's your list of Republicans that voted FOR the McGrady amendment.

    Representative(s): Brubaker; Daughtry; Dockham; Dollar; Guice; Howard; McCormick; McGee; McGrady; Rhyne; Stam
    ++1 (got my roll call for Nov 12' updated)

    In this case described above..."Law Schmaw"

    Really? A possible bill before NC legislature (later stripped) that would give me the right to keep my legal fire arm in my car...really....Geee thanks Legislators. What right does an employer have about whether one keeps a fire arm locked/secured and out of sight in your vehicle. I understand the private property rights, but where would it stop (i.e., no beat up cars, no trucks, no blue cars, etc.). Unless they do random car searches (issue right there) or they know you carry a fire arm all the time, chances are it will never be seen, therefore a non-issue. I can put my holster on inside my car without flashing it to everybody. I do it daily when I go to lunch, arriving and leaving work. What would happen? They could ask you to park somewhere else or, worst case, fire you (don't get me wrong, it’s a strong motivator, but so is self-protection). What other law(s) have you broken by keeping it locked/secured and out of site in your vehicle? In this case, nothing illegal happens if you were to keep it in your vehicle. You have only broken a company policy - obviously less ramifications. The same cannot be said for taking the same stand with say, CC in a resteraunt that serves alcohol. Although people may never know you are carrying, if you were found out, there is a law(s) with seriuos teeth and ramifications.
    Last edited by Northerner; 08-09-2011 at 12:32 PM.
    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
    Thomas Jefferson

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    Northerner, it's not as much the law you are breaking as it is your employment contract. I agree with your premise that the car and gun are my property, thus non of their business. This would have done away with their ability to disallow firearms in cars and protected the property owner from civil liability if there was a problem.

  6. #6
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    An employer can fire an employee for any reason they wish, as long as they are not a branch of government or accepting gov funds. Now that does not make them immune from lawsuits if the firing is unjustified. I have not read the law, but an employers rights have to be honored just as much as the rights of others.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Sc0tt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Asheboro, NC
    Posts
    315
    They may of stripped out the truck carry law, but they did throw in a new exemption to basicly allow the DA, ADA, and any invesitgator hired by either to CC anywhere they please with the exception of the courthouse (and as long as they are not drinking or drunk) so long as they have a CHP

    "§ 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."
    Its so awesome how they can exempt the people who are resposible for defining the law and procusiting the violators to be exempt from some of those laws

    http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions...ML/H650v6.html
    -----------------
    --SCOTT

    Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum

    "A government that is big enough to give you everything you need is beg enough to take everything you have, the course of history shows that as government incresses - liberty decreases."


    LEGAL NOTICE: I am not a lawyer, no content in the above post should considered legal advice

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Northerner View Post
    ++1 (got my roll call for Nov 12' updated)

    In this case described above..."Law Schmaw"

    {snip}

    What would happen? They could ask you to park somewhere else or, worst case, fire you (don't get me wrong, it’s a strong motivator, but so is self-protection). What other law(s) have you broken by keeping it locked/secured and out of site in your vehicle? In this case, nothing illegal happens if you were to keep it in your vehicle. You have only broken a company policy - obviously less ramifications. The same cannot be said for taking the same stand with say, CC in a resteraunt that serves alcohol. Although people may never know you are carrying, if you were found out, there is a law(s) with seriuos teeth and ramifications.
    BIG deal for me. Been in this job for almost two years. I was laid off previously and couldn't find work for a year. I did everything i could to find work. If you haven't been in that situation, you don't know what it's like. Eventually found this job. I sure as hell don't want to be out looking again in this economy. So I'm torn between my rights and my job.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Sc0tt View Post
    Its so awesome how they can exempt the people who are resposible for defining the law and procusiting the violators to be exempt from some of those laws
    The legislators tried to exempt themselves too. The outcry was swift and loud. They withdrew the legislation within about a week. Personally, I'm torn on this one. These folks are working with the same people as the cops, but unarmed. I don't mind them being able to carry. I would prefer to do it myself too though.

  10. #10
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    first of let me say the worst thing you can have is a job. it will hold you back from any success in life.

    one thing i noticed in that letter was a lot of errors. they are not broadening rights, we already have the right. they are taking away the infringements ( i know nit picky)

    "Employees are allowed to carry licensed firearms onto their employee’s property if the firearms remain locked in the vehicle."
    i am pretty sure that was a typo about the "employers property", but the point is you are not carrying onto your employer's property , you are leaving it in your property

    they assume you are going to go ape sh** just because you have a firearm in your car, how many people are car jack or robbed on their way home

    check out the alerts on http://www.grnc.org/ about HB 650
    Last edited by papa bear; 08-10-2011 at 12:38 AM.
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Sc0tt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Asheboro, NC
    Posts
    315

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by chiefjason View Post
    The legislators tried to exempt themselves too. The outcry was swift and loud. They withdrew the legislation within about a week. Personally, I'm torn on this one. These folks are working with the same people as the cops, but unarmed. I don't mind them being able to carry. I would prefer to do it myself too though.
    It still sticks to high hell! What they are doing is creating an eltist group that will soon be exempt from gun laws.

    I understand and support LEO's rights to carry pretty much at all times becuase the work they do is exstremley danergous, but if the argument is going to be made about working with cops giving them the right to the same exemptions from gun laws then why did we stop at DA's, ADA's and thier "invesigators"?

    What about:

    ::1::
    Tactical Medics who are on local SERT teams?
    Most of them are not sworn LEO's, they are only subject to the same gun rights as a LEO while on a call out, once they leave they must obey all normal gun laws and the chance that these medics could run into the same perp or a family member while on a routine medical call on an ambulace that they have ran on a call out is there, and what about just around. These guys and gals have the same chance of retibution as a cop.

    ::2::
    Bail Enforcment Agents?
    When you make a living, breaking into people house and taking them back to jail,those people generally are not happy when they see you at walmart a week later when they get out?

    ::3::
    Process servers?
    The people who are hired and licinced by sherrif offices to serve legal papers.

    You see how this argument can go on and on? Why do DA's ADA's and invesitgators have any more right than everyone else who puts thier life on the line in the LE feild but arnt sworn LEO's?
    HB 63: “FIREARMS/LOCKED VEHICLES”
    The good news is that although this bill is dead, the language in the bill got a recorded vote in HB 650. The bad news is that, thanks to anti-gun opposition orchestrated by House Majority Leader Skip Stam (R-Wake, GRNC 0-star), the language was amended out of the bill.
    http://grnc.org/updates/update7_2_11.htm

    But it looks like Truck Carry was dead but HB 650 did have a lot of great changes and a few disapointing ones

    [Sent from my VZW mobile device]
    Last edited by Sc0tt; 08-10-2011 at 05:04 AM.
    -----------------
    --SCOTT

    Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum

    "A government that is big enough to give you everything you need is beg enough to take everything you have, the course of history shows that as government incresses - liberty decreases."


    LEGAL NOTICE: I am not a lawyer, no content in the above post should considered legal advice

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Fayetteville NC
    Posts
    751
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    An employer can fire an employee for any reason they wish, as long as they are not a branch of government or accepting gov funds. Now that does not make them immune from lawsuits if the firing is unjustified. I have not read the law, but an employers rights have to be honored just as much as the rights of others.
    I'm an "at will" employee of a government contractor. I can be fired at any time for any, or no, reason. This applies to everyone, from the Project Manager on down, who do not have a separate written contract.

    Company policy prohibits firearms on company property or while on company business. This is apparently less important than drugs/alcohol or profanity, but ahead of insubordination, fighting, or sleeping on the job.

    Federal law applies where I work, and concealed weapons are prohibited. I don't carry while at work and the cops have yet to find the secured (but NOT CONCEALED) gun during several random searches of my vehicle.

  13. #13
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by bc.cruiser View Post
    I'm an "at will" employee of a government contractor. I can be fired at any time for any, or no, reason. This applies to everyone, from the Project Manager on down, who do not have a separate written contract.

    Company policy prohibits firearms on company property or while on company business. This is apparently less important than drugs/alcohol or profanity, but ahead of insubordination, fighting, or sleeping on the job.

    Federal law applies where I work, and concealed weapons are prohibited. I don't carry while at work and the cops have yet to find the secured (but NOT CONCEALED) gun during several random searches of my vehicle.
    I cannot see the constitutionality of a law that says a property owner has to allow firearms on their property whether in a vehicle or not. To have credibility in our fight to maintain/keep/get our rights we must also recognize and respect the rights of others. It is not just employers who have this right, any business can refuse service and order a LEO/Judge/Bail Bondsman to leave their business for any reason as long as that LEO is not in performance of their duties. So the exceptions mean diddly. I know this because I have done it, which it resulted in the loss of stripes of a county deputy that refused my order to leave my business. I called 911 and his co workers had to arrest him.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Fayetteville NC
    Posts
    751
    Walking Wolf, I'm not sure why you quoted me. Perhaps I wasn't real clear. First paragraph was in response to your statement about not being fired without cause if the company accepts government money. We are a DOD contractor, and almost all of us are "at will employees". We can be let go without cause. We can also leave without notice and incur no penalty.
    Second paragraph is probably more of an inside joke: Company policy lists offences for which termination may be appropriate. The examples I gave are in the order listed in the manual. There are more which I did not list. Third paragraph: I abide by the policy in that I don't carry while on company property or while on business. I don't park in company controlled areas. Elsewhere, I am allowed to have the guns as long as they are not concealed. It's easier to secure the guns in transport mode (out of sight and not accessible) until I'm back on NC land.

    Maybe businesses should institute the town marshal concept. When you enter the property, you check your guns and pick them up again when you leave. This way you wouldn't have to negotiate the hodge-podge of who does/doesn't allow guns.

  15. #15
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by bc.cruiser View Post
    Walking Wolf, I'm not sure why you quoted me. Perhaps I wasn't real clear. First paragraph was in response to your statement about not being fired without cause if the company accepts government money. We are a DOD contractor, and almost all of us are "at will employees". We can be let go without cause. We can also leave without notice and incur no penalty.
    Second paragraph is probably more of an inside joke: Company policy lists offences for which termination may be appropriate. The examples I gave are in the order listed in the manual. There are more which I did not list. Third paragraph: I abide by the policy in that I don't carry while on company property or while on business. I don't park in company controlled areas. Elsewhere, I am allowed to have the guns as long as they are not concealed. It's easier to secure the guns in transport mode (out of sight and not accessible) until I'm back on NC land.

    Maybe businesses should institute the town marshal concept. When you enter the property, you check your guns and pick them up again when you leave. This way you wouldn't have to negotiate the hodge-podge of who does/doesn't allow guns.
    I don't think for most people it is a problem, I have not heard a lot of complaints on the subject, or seen a lot of company lots posted. It is always different when dealing with government. I can see and understand your situation. But I think as much as I want my rights honored and respected that it is important that I or we respect the right of others, even if we do not like them. This does not mean you I was just responding, I should have made it clear that I was not pointing at you but all of us. As a former LEO I can tell you that at the time we felt we had no rights, that the public's rights superseded ours, seems things have changed over the years. I cringe at what I sometimes see present day law enforcement does.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Sc0tt View Post
    but if the argument is going to be made about working with cops giving them the right to the same exemptions from gun laws then why did we stop at DA's, ADA's and thier "invesigators"?
    It's not about working with cops. It's about working with the same criminals cops are. Generally speaking, private citizens are not targeted for who they are. I could see the possibility of folks in the entire chain of LE being targeted for being part of the system. That said, I'd rather have them all inclusive. There were exemptions last go round IIRC. So this is nothing new really. I'll continue to fight for my rights to carry. But in some cases, I'm less inclined to fight against certain exemptions. I'll let you know that I was VERY much against the legislator exempting themselves. And let mine know that too.

    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    I cannot see the constitutionality of a law that says a property owner has to allow firearms on their property whether in a vehicle or not.
    Well, the state is current telling private property owners that they cannot allow firearms on their property if the serve alcohol. The state sees fit, in most cases, to limit it's authority to actually possessing the firearm while physically walking on state property. In many places where you cannot carry you are express allowed to keep the firearm in your vehicle.


    (f) Nothing contained in this section prohibits municipalities or counties from application of their authority under G.S. 153A‑129, 160A‑189, 14‑269, 14‑269.2, 14‑269.3, 14‑269.4, 14‑277.2, 14‑415.11, 14‑415.23, including prohibiting the possession of firearms in public‑owned buildings, on the grounds or parking areas of those buildings, or in public parks or recreation areas, except nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a person from storing a firearm within a motor vehicle while the vehicle is on these grounds or areas.

    http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedL...14-409.40.html


    The main question here is where does my right end and the property owners right begin. And if it's inside my car, what else can they prohibit me from having that I am in lawful possession of? In reality, this is probably much more an issue of liability than allowing firearms in cars. And the legislation took the liability away from the property owner.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Sc0tt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Asheboro, NC
    Posts
    315
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefjason View Post
    It's not about working with cops. It's about working with the same criminals cops are. Generally speaking, private citizens are not targeted for who they are. I could see the possibility of folks in the entire chain of LE being targeted for being part of the system. That said, I'd rather have them all inclusive. There were exemptions last go round IIRC. So this is nothing new really. I'll continue to fight for my rights to carry. But in some cases, I'm less inclined to fight against certain exemptions. I'll let you know that I was VERY much against the legislator exempting themselves. And let mine know that too.
    Basicly my gripe is that I work with the LE community very closely and very closely with the criminals. They (the criminals) Dont differentitae between me (a non sworn contrator) and a LEO. Basicly my best form of protection is a mask 90% of the time.

    [Sent from my VZW mobile device]
    -----------------
    --SCOTT

    Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum

    "A government that is big enough to give you everything you need is beg enough to take everything you have, the course of history shows that as government incresses - liberty decreases."


    LEGAL NOTICE: I am not a lawyer, no content in the above post should considered legal advice

  18. #18
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefjason View Post
    Well, the state is current telling private property owners that they cannot allow firearms on their property if the serve alcohol. The state sees fit, in most cases, to limit it's authority to actually possessing the firearm while physically walking on state property. In many places where you cannot carry you are express allowed to keep the firearm in your vehicle.
    IMO the above is unconstitutional. I believe the state has no right to tell a private property owner the parameters of how business is conducted with relation to our rights. It is my opinion that we have a right/responsibility to our own safety, and when the state takes that right away they should step up to the plate and provide me a armed policeman to protect my family while I am in one of those establishments. We all know what the likelihood of that is though. Should I be injured unarmed in one of those establishments I would bring a suit against the state for violating my right to my self preservation. Though I do believe SCOTUS has already ruled that law enforcement is not responsible for personal safety, but not in a 2A case?

Posting Permissions

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