The restaurant carry bill is for carry WITH a permit! State park carry is for CC only with a permit! PV himself stated that GRNC represented concealed carry permit holders. The constitutional concealed carry bill does not address carrying without a permit in those restricted areas that GRNC supports restriction UNLESS the person holds a permit, such as state parks and restaurants that serve alcohol.
The fact is Open Carry was not legislated, it was fought for in the courts, by people who would not compromise. In Colorado the recent concealed carry loss was due to the fact that it was over a permit, when the challenge should have been the right to open carry. Same thing happened in Maine with the 4th circuit, the only way to win is by fighting for rights, not compromising for privileges. It is odd that a felon who would not submit brought us a big win in the 4th, not GRNC compromise.
Literally the 4th stated without RAS a person cannot be searched, and that translates into constitutional concealed carry as long as one does not break the law. But now after that ruling is in place GRNC suddenly comes up with a concealed carry constitutional bill that says basically the same thing the 4th circuit court said. If there is no RAS there is no legal search, no crime no search, constitutional concealed carry.
Ahh ok, thanks for the clarification. I was a little confused by the statement in question.
Hey, I'm not one to say that permits are a good thing. I've never had one for various reasons. You have in the past, so you can probably give more insight from that angle. It's one point of contention that I still hold with GRNC, actually. But I also understand things a little differently than you do in terms of their intentions. GRNC fights for all legal carriers, despite your claims to the contrary. Paul V did say he tries to represent permit holders, but he's also on record with saying he is fighting for all carriers. You just choose to cherry pick the parts you don't like, have misunderstood, or purposefully twist to fit your own agenda. It's the only sad part of many of your arguments, really. A bit more honesty in that regard would be appreciated.
Literally the 4th stated without RAS a person cannot be searched, and that translates into constitutional concealed carry as long as one does not break the law. But now after that ruling is in place GRNC suddenly comes up with a concealed carry constitutional bill that says basically the same thing the 4th circuit court said. If there is no RAS there is no legal search, no crime no search, constitutional concealed carry.
The above quote is an interesting take. I actually agree with some of it. But sadly, and honestly, the laws against concealed carry of a handgun were on the books in North Carolina long before Paul V ever came on the scene, or was even old enough to know what concealed carry was, for that matter. You, me, Paul V, GRNC,....none of us had anything to do with CC becoming illegal. Trying to say that GRNC came around with a constitutional carry bill which basically said the same thing that the 4th Amendment did, thereby making CC legal by virtue of the fact that there is no reason to search is disingenuous, at best.
The simple fact that the 4th Amendment is there to prevent illegal searches is not a legal justification for carrying a concealed handgun- not by a long shot. That's the equivalent of saying "It's only illegal if yer caught!". Simply being protected from illegal searches is not a defense for carrying a concealed handgun. The fact is, the laws are on the books. They have been on the books long before GRNC was around, too.
From what I've read, GRNC tried to attack those laws in teh form of a full frontal attack early on in it's existence. It didn't work so well and the politicians who supported it got creamed by teh Democrats in charge of the NCGA at the time. Since then, he switched tactics and tried to chip away at the stone ever since. Sometimes it's maddeningly unsuccessful, and sometimes little victories are won. It's the nature of the beast. Each little bit chips away at that stone just a little bit.
If you would like to try a full frontal assault again and tear down these oppressive laws in one fell swoop, I'm all for it. Let's do it. Simply find a politician there that will sponsor the bill and I'll go all the way with you. Start calling their offices on Monday morning and let me know which one takes on the fight. I'll call and email him/ her, too, and we'll get this ball rolling. I'll be waiting for your updates here, or feel free to send them through PM. I'm with ya.
But, dont forget about this, please:
it is not much of a right if GRNC gets it's way and puts more restrictions on where a NON permit holder can carry
I would like you to cite one single additional restriction that GRNC has placed on where we can OC in North Carolina, as per your claim. I'd really like to settle this one once and for all.
Thanks!