BRobb19
Regular Member
imported post
i just signed the SC open carry petition.
i look forward to signing this one once it is posted.
i just signed the SC open carry petition.
i look forward to signing this one once it is posted.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Petition to repeal carrying in alcohol establishments
- Thread starter Godscreation
- Start date
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
I was able to get a meeting for this afternoon with two local sheriffs. My webmaster is preparing the amendments to be posted on the website. It should be up and running by 6pm (if all goes well). When available, I will post the link.
Also, please PM for my mailing address. If you would like to sign the petition, you will be able to download it, or I can send it to you, so you can sign it andmail it to me.
I was able to get a meeting for this afternoon with two local sheriffs. My webmaster is preparing the amendments to be posted on the website. It should be up and running by 6pm (if all goes well). When available, I will post the link.
Also, please PM for my mailing address. If you would like to sign the petition, you will be able to download it, or I can send it to you, so you can sign it andmail it to me.
partemisio
Regular Member
imported post
I just signed the SC open carry petition and these two:
http://www.petitiononline.com/NFABAN2/
http://www.petitiononline.com/law4nc/
I just signed the SC open carry petition and these two:
http://www.petitiononline.com/NFABAN2/
http://www.petitiononline.com/law4nc/
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
imported post
I will gladly sign the NC petition to remove restrictions on the carriage of firearms in places that serve alcohol. Due to my location in Lynchburg I can just as easily drop down to Greensboro to shop as I can to get to Richmond or other places when Lynchburg and Roanoke don't have what I need. However, I generally avoid NC and choose Richmond, because I know that I'll have to disarm if I want to eat in many of the establishments if I get hungry while I'm gone. So NC laws are actually keeping me from choosing to spend money there.
I will gladly sign the NC petition to remove restrictions on the carriage of firearms in places that serve alcohol. Due to my location in Lynchburg I can just as easily drop down to Greensboro to shop as I can to get to Richmond or other places when Lynchburg and Roanoke don't have what I need. However, I generally avoid NC and choose Richmond, because I know that I'll have to disarm if I want to eat in many of the establishments if I get hungry while I'm gone. So NC laws are actually keeping me from choosing to spend money there.
Godscreation
Regular Member
imported post
Johnston,
I was going to put the current statement on petition online like I originally had in mind. Are you saying that now we have to email YOU to sign it? I'm confused. Might it be better to put in on a site so that anyone can access the petition and sign without having to email you for it?
Johnston,
I was going to put the current statement on petition online like I originally had in mind. Are you saying that now we have to email YOU to sign it? I'm confused. Might it be better to put in on a site so that anyone can access the petition and sign without having to email you for it?
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
Working on it. Server issue is creating some problems. Should be posted online shortly. There will be petition support information on the site.
Working on it. Server issue is creating some problems. Should be posted online shortly. There will be petition support information on the site.
imported post
Godscreation wrote:
Godscreation wrote:
Are petitions that are signed anonymously online even taken seriously? All it required for verification was an e-mail address. It seems that Johnston's petition is a little more..official, requiring an actual signature, and perhaps even verification if identity.Johnston,
I was going to put the current statement on petition online like I originally had in mind. Are you saying that now we have to email YOU to sign it? I'm confused. Might it be better to put in on a site so that anyone can access the petition and sign without having to email you for it?
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
I must first apologize for the delay. We are experiencing some difficulties, and I am sure my webmaster will be working through the night to fix the errors. While the "Home Page" is inaccessible, all other pages are not affected and all links still operate properly.
That said, the link to the Bill Proposal Package is located at:
[align=center]http://www.ncopc.org/site/2009/campaigns.html[/align]
[align=left]Aside from an initial welcome letter by yours truly, there are 8 links to the various pages. Please understand that the pages are written in the format as required by the State Senate. Changes to the statutes are indicated by [/align]
[align=left] (1) a strike-through for sections to be removed from the statute; and
(2) an underline for the sections to be enacted in the statutes.[/align]
[align=left]Please remember that is easier to amend a statute than it is to create a new law. The basic gist of the amendments is to allow the open carry of firearms in the same means as you can for concealed carry. For those of you concerned with restaurants, parades, funerals, etc... I have not left you out. Those specific laws allow concealed carry with a permit, and my noted amendments include the same rights for open carry.[/align]
[align=left]As for those of you interested in carry during a state of emergency, is currently under review, having been proposed by Representatives Cleveland, Hilton and More, and supported by 19 other Senate members. The Amendment which will allow firearms carry during states of emergency has passed by Senate vote and is currently awaiting Judicial approval. So, I did not include those amendments in the Bill proposal.[/align]
[align=left]If you have any questions, a link to my e-mail is located at the bottom right of the page. A link to the Support Letter can be found at thh top right corner of the page. There, you will find the Support Letter that can be signed and returned to me. Physical signatures are need for the Bill Proposal Package. Believe it or not, supporters who electronically support a proposal are NOT included in any proposal package as they are not recognized as LEGAL SUPPORT!!![/align]
[align=left]Please ask friends, family and neighbors to visit the link above and get involved. The more signature the better. If this is something you truly believe in, GET INVOLVED. Don't mumble words on a website or around your kitchen table. If you want the law changed, support this cause. PROVE IT!!!
[/align]
I must first apologize for the delay. We are experiencing some difficulties, and I am sure my webmaster will be working through the night to fix the errors. While the "Home Page" is inaccessible, all other pages are not affected and all links still operate properly.
That said, the link to the Bill Proposal Package is located at:
[align=center]http://www.ncopc.org/site/2009/campaigns.html[/align]
[align=left]Aside from an initial welcome letter by yours truly, there are 8 links to the various pages. Please understand that the pages are written in the format as required by the State Senate. Changes to the statutes are indicated by [/align]
[align=left] (1) a strike-through for sections to be removed from the statute; and
(2) an underline for the sections to be enacted in the statutes.[/align]
[align=left]Please remember that is easier to amend a statute than it is to create a new law. The basic gist of the amendments is to allow the open carry of firearms in the same means as you can for concealed carry. For those of you concerned with restaurants, parades, funerals, etc... I have not left you out. Those specific laws allow concealed carry with a permit, and my noted amendments include the same rights for open carry.[/align]
[align=left]As for those of you interested in carry during a state of emergency, is currently under review, having been proposed by Representatives Cleveland, Hilton and More, and supported by 19 other Senate members. The Amendment which will allow firearms carry during states of emergency has passed by Senate vote and is currently awaiting Judicial approval. So, I did not include those amendments in the Bill proposal.[/align]
[align=left]If you have any questions, a link to my e-mail is located at the bottom right of the page. A link to the Support Letter can be found at thh top right corner of the page. There, you will find the Support Letter that can be signed and returned to me. Physical signatures are need for the Bill Proposal Package. Believe it or not, supporters who electronically support a proposal are NOT included in any proposal package as they are not recognized as LEGAL SUPPORT!!![/align]
[align=left]Please ask friends, family and neighbors to visit the link above and get involved. The more signature the better. If this is something you truly believe in, GET INVOLVED. Don't mumble words on a website or around your kitchen table. If you want the law changed, support this cause. PROVE IT!!!
[/align]
partemisio
Regular Member
imported post
"The basic gist of the amendments is to allow the open carry of firearms in the same means as you can for concealed carry. For those of you concerned with restaurants, parades, funerals, etc... I have not left you out. Those specific laws allow concealed carry with a permit, and my noted amendments include the same rights for open carry."
Where did you get this information about concealed carry? Last I knew(two months ago), the places you listed are off limits for both open and concealed carry, not just open.
"The basic gist of the amendments is to allow the open carry of firearms in the same means as you can for concealed carry. For those of you concerned with restaurants, parades, funerals, etc... I have not left you out. Those specific laws allow concealed carry with a permit, and my noted amendments include the same rights for open carry."
Where did you get this information about concealed carry? Last I knew(two months ago), the places you listed are off limits for both open and concealed carry, not just open.
partemisio
Regular Member
imported post
Are we supposed to print these and sign them then send them to you?
Are we supposed to print these and sign them then send them to you?
imported post
K, I have a few concerns. Adding an open carry clause to the law that makes concealed carry illegal seems redundant. Open carry is already accepted as legal since there is no law restricting it.
The amendments to 153A-129 and 160A-189 only effect private property. As far as I knew this was already the case. The problem with those laws in the first place is that it gives localities the power to create a minefield of "no gun" zones throughout the community.
As far as the admission and alcohol law, the way you have it written implies that those with a concealed handgun permit could always carry in those areas. That's not true.
And this sentence in 14-288.7 doesn't make sense to me:
[align=left]This section does not apply to persons exempted from the provisions of G.S. 14-269 or with respect to any person lawfully engaged in while carrying out their duties or any person while openly carrying a firearm for the lawful purpose of self-defense.[/align]
K, I have a few concerns. Adding an open carry clause to the law that makes concealed carry illegal seems redundant. Open carry is already accepted as legal since there is no law restricting it.
The amendments to 153A-129 and 160A-189 only effect private property. As far as I knew this was already the case. The problem with those laws in the first place is that it gives localities the power to create a minefield of "no gun" zones throughout the community.
As far as the admission and alcohol law, the way you have it written implies that those with a concealed handgun permit could always carry in those areas. That's not true.
And this sentence in 14-288.7 doesn't make sense to me:
[align=left]This section does not apply to persons exempted from the provisions of G.S. 14-269 or with respect to any person lawfully engaged in while carrying out their duties or any person while openly carrying a firearm for the lawful purpose of self-defense.[/align]
Godscreation
Regular Member
imported post
Regardless if you have a permit or not, you cannot conceal or open carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, or where an admission fee is charged like the statute says. Permits do not have any weight. I am curious though, why you said you could. Is there something I missed? I hope I'm wrong.
Regardless if you have a permit or not, you cannot conceal or open carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, or where an admission fee is charged like the statute says. Permits do not have any weight. I am curious though, why you said you could. Is there something I missed? I hope I'm wrong.
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
Currently, 153A-129 and 160A-189 currently only affect county-owned, city-owned or town-owned ("Public Property"). The addition to the current statute (153A-129) is "Nothing contained within the section shall permit a county to regulate the display of firearms on private property or within a private establishment." The rest of the statute as written already exists. The addition would permit the open carry of firearms in areas that are not publicly owned, for example a gas station, restaurant, bar, movie theater. Those are all private establishments (according to the Attorney General). Adding this clause to 153A-129 and 160A-189 would prohibit a county, city or town from placing restricts on firearm carry in any private establishment (as listed above).
As for 14-288.7 you are correct it doesn't make sense.The line will read, "This section does not apply to persons exempted from the provisions of G.S. 14-269." This will allow open carry and concealed carry at those types of events, as the statute already permits concealed carry and 14-269 will also include open carry).
Currently, the law regarding concealed carryallows carry into a restaurant, even if they serve alcohol. Section 14-269.3(b)(1) (Click Here To Read)allows the concealed carry by a person who is exempted by Section 14-269. Section 14-269(a1)(1) (Click Here To Read) states that a person who has a concealed weapons permit is exempt. SO as the law is currently written, you CAN conceal carry into a restaurant, but you may NOT consume alcohol.
As far as redundancy, can you be a more specific? I cannot find redundancy anywhere. Please remember that only the underline text will be added. Everything else is currently on record. I am not petitioning to make new laws, I am petitioning to AMEND the laws as they are currently written to allow the same open carry rules as concealed carry rules.
Currently, 153A-129 and 160A-189 currently only affect county-owned, city-owned or town-owned ("Public Property"). The addition to the current statute (153A-129) is "Nothing contained within the section shall permit a county to regulate the display of firearms on private property or within a private establishment." The rest of the statute as written already exists. The addition would permit the open carry of firearms in areas that are not publicly owned, for example a gas station, restaurant, bar, movie theater. Those are all private establishments (according to the Attorney General). Adding this clause to 153A-129 and 160A-189 would prohibit a county, city or town from placing restricts on firearm carry in any private establishment (as listed above).
As for 14-288.7 you are correct it doesn't make sense.The line will read, "This section does not apply to persons exempted from the provisions of G.S. 14-269." This will allow open carry and concealed carry at those types of events, as the statute already permits concealed carry and 14-269 will also include open carry).
Currently, the law regarding concealed carryallows carry into a restaurant, even if they serve alcohol. Section 14-269.3(b)(1) (Click Here To Read)allows the concealed carry by a person who is exempted by Section 14-269. Section 14-269(a1)(1) (Click Here To Read) states that a person who has a concealed weapons permit is exempt. SO as the law is currently written, you CAN conceal carry into a restaurant, but you may NOT consume alcohol.
As far as redundancy, can you be a more specific? I cannot find redundancy anywhere. Please remember that only the underline text will be added. Everything else is currently on record. I am not petitioning to make new laws, I am petitioning to AMEND the laws as they are currently written to allow the same open carry rules as concealed carry rules.
Fahrenheit
Regular Member
imported post
Sorry I got to this thread a tad late, so forgive me if my suggestions are not timely.
I'd like to point out one issue in the proposal to eliminate GS 14‑269.3.
edit: Yeah, I just got finished reading the actual proposals, instead of just this thread. Looks like you have my concerns covered.
Sorry I got to this thread a tad late, so forgive me if my suggestions are not timely.
I'd like to point out one issue in the proposal to eliminate GS 14‑269.3.
edit: Yeah, I just got finished reading the actual proposals, instead of just this thread. Looks like you have my concerns covered.
partemisio
Regular Member
imported post
So, according to the links you last posted I am allowed to carry concealed into movies, when I go bowling, or when I go to the drag strip with my car?
So, according to the links you last posted I am allowed to carry concealed into movies, when I go bowling, or when I go to the drag strip with my car?
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
As the law is technically written, yes. But the law is open to interpretation by police, so you may be arrested. The Proposal would amend this and permit carry without interpretation.
As the law is technically written, yes. But the law is open to interpretation by police, so you may be arrested. The Proposal would amend this and permit carry without interpretation.
Fahrenheit
Regular Member
imported post
partemisio wrote:
GS 14‑415.11 (c) specifically does NOT prohibit restrictions in 14-269.2, 14-269.34, 14‑269.4, or 14‑277.2.
partemisio wrote:
Um, no.So, according to the links you last posted I am allowed to carry concealed into movies, when I go bowling, or when I go to the drag strip with my car?
GS 14‑415.11 (c) specifically does NOT prohibit restrictions in 14-269.2, 14-269.34, 14‑269.4, or 14‑277.2.
(c) A permit does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun in the areas prohibited by G.S. 14‑269.2, 14‑269.3, 14‑269.4, and 14‑277.2
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
And, Fahrenheithas proved my point. One law says yes, one law says no. And then another law says that no law shall be enacted which violates federal law. Federal law permits the carry of firearms (read the Second Amendment). So on state level it is illegal, federal level it IS legal. As I said, it is open to interpretation by police, but the Supreme Court reads it as you ARE ALLOWED TO CARRY! You cannot read the law on ONE statute. You must read every law, both state and federal.
You must also remember that police officers enforce the law, but a Judge enforces both law and precedence. A judge looks at past conclusions. In North Carolina, based on common law precedence, a person has never been convicted of open carry. Precedence allows open carry of firearms, and judges routinely dismiss open carry cases.
And, Fahrenheithas proved my point. One law says yes, one law says no. And then another law says that no law shall be enacted which violates federal law. Federal law permits the carry of firearms (read the Second Amendment). So on state level it is illegal, federal level it IS legal. As I said, it is open to interpretation by police, but the Supreme Court reads it as you ARE ALLOWED TO CARRY! You cannot read the law on ONE statute. You must read every law, both state and federal.
You must also remember that police officers enforce the law, but a Judge enforces both law and precedence. A judge looks at past conclusions. In North Carolina, based on common law precedence, a person has never been convicted of open carry. Precedence allows open carry of firearms, and judges routinely dismiss open carry cases.
Johnston-Wake COPTF
Regular Member
imported post
And as to partemisioquestion about the drag strip, if you are bringing your car to race, then you are a participant and not a patron. The law permits that a participant may carry a firearm, unless the property own prohibits the carry of firearms by posting a sign.
And as to partemisioquestion about the drag strip, if you are bringing your car to race, then you are a participant and not a patron. The law permits that a participant may carry a firearm, unless the property own prohibits the carry of firearms by posting a sign.
imported post
Responses in red...
Johnston-Wake COPTF wrote:
Responses in red...
Johnston-Wake COPTF wrote:
Currently, 153A-129 and 160A-189 currently only affect county-owned, city-owned or town-owned ("Public Property"). The addition to the current statute (153A-129) is "Nothing contained within the section shall permit a county to regulate the display of firearms on private property or within a private establishment." The rest of the statute as written already exists. The addition would permit the open carry of firearms in areas that are not publicly owned, for example a gas station, restaurant, bar, movie theater. Those are all private establishments (according to the Attorney General). Adding this clause to 153A-129 and 160A-189 would prohibit a county, city or town from placing restricts on firearm carry in any private establishment (as listed above).
My understanding was that localities were already preempted from restricting firearms possession except in publicly owned parks and property. That preemption law already keeps localities from making laws regarding private property.What we need to do is stoplocalities from being able to take it upon themselves to ban random areas throughout the State.
As for 14-288.7 you are correct it doesn't make sense.The line will read, "This section does not apply to persons exempted from the provisions of G.S. 14-269." This will allow open carry and concealed carry at those types of events, as the statute already permits concealed carry and 14-269 will also include open carry).
Ok, I assumed it was just a wording mistake. I just wanted to make sure it was caught and fixed.
Currently, the law regarding concealed carryallows carry into a restaurant, even if they serve alcohol. Section 14-269.3(b)(1) (Click Here To Read)allows the concealed carry by a person who is exempted by Section 14-269. Section 14-269(a1)(1) (Click Here To Read) states that a person who has a concealed weapons permit is exempt. SO as the law is currently written, you CAN conceal carry into a restaurant, but you may NOT consume alcohol.
My understanding was similar to Fahrenheit's. Even legitimate sources (lawyers, for example) have made it clear that firearms are simply not allowed in places where alcohol is served, unless you're law enforcement, of course. You're the first person that I've known to say otherwise.
As far as redundancy, can you be a more specific? I cannot find redundancy anywhere. Please remember that only the underline text will be added. Everything else is currently on record. I am not petitioning to make new laws, I am petitioning to AMEND the laws as they are currently written to allow the same open carry rules as concealed carry rules.
Perhaps redundant wasn't the right word. What I meant is that open carry is already legal. Laws are written to define illegal acts. Legal acts are those which are not defined as illegal. Since it's already legal to open carry, why attempt to amend a law to state that again?