NC OC experience reports

[WalkingWolf]

+1 I was only really concerned if you thought that even with the permission of the owner/manager, that someone who has a CHP and in OC would not be allowed. Gotcha.

The CHP holders that ignore the signs while CC, are not really being LAC's are they?

No they are not, and I do not condone breaking the rules of this site. But I can understand why they would do it, as long as they don't get drunk, or be a asshat while doing it. Most felons that carry are on their good behavior while they are CCing, but unfortunately there is very small segment of the CC crowd that can't seem to control themselves. This is the argument I have had when a certain lobby group tries to make the claim that ONLY CHP holders are sane, sober, and responsible. The fact is there is nothing to back up such a claim, in fact it is the open carry folks that do not get into trouble.

I have nothing against CC, but in this state it has nothing to do with a right. OC is right and I wish it to stay that way, the choice of who can and cannot carry in a private business should fall squarely with the business, not the state. IMO any business that does not post HAS in fact given their permission to carry. But the wise thing to do is get that permission at least verbally from the owner or manager.

What the legislature and the lobbyists do not realize or care, is that most OCers do not even drink, or drink very very little. But that bit of reality hurts the pay for carry industry. Carry was very normal in this state before 1995, much more common than it is now. The laws brought more damage then they did good. The only good I see is putting money in a special segments pocket.

They have done a very good job of convincing the public that OC is bad, and CC is good. I doubt they care about carry other than lining their pockets. Every gun law is a gun control law. But laws have loopholes, and until/if we can rid ourselves of the laws, we can use those loopholes to exercise our rights. There is no doubt that the writer of that law had no intent for it to be used the way I do. I was intended for gun shows, so they could still operate within the law since the venues varied. And gun shows are a major recruiting event for NRA, and other lobbyists. Not that gunshows are bad, they are not, just that is the reason for the loophole.

 

[carolina guy]

No they are not, and I do not condone breaking the rules of this site. But I can understand why they would do it, as long as they don't get drunk, or be a asshat while doing it. Most felons that carry are on their good behavior while they are CCing, but unfortunately there is very small segment of the CC crowd that can't seem to control themselves. This is the argument I have had when a certain lobby group tries to make the claim that ONLY CHP holders are sane, sober, and responsible. The fact is there is nothing to back up such a claim, in fact it is the open carry folks that do not get into trouble.

I have nothing against CC, but in this state it has nothing to do with a right. OC is right and I wish it to stay that way, the choice of who can and cannot carry in a private business should fall squarely with the business, not the state. IMO any business that does not post HAS in fact given their permission to carry. But the wise thing to do is get that permission at least verbally from the owner or manager.

What the legislature and the lobbyists do not realize or care, is that most OCers do not even drink, or drink very very little. But that bit of reality hurts the pay for carry industry. Carry was very normal in this state before 1995, much more common than it is now. The laws brought more damage then they did good. The only good I see is putting money in a special segments pocket.

They have done a very good job of convincing the public that OC is bad, and CC is good. I doubt they care about carry other than lining their pockets. Every gun law is a gun control law. But laws have loopholes, and until/if we can rid ourselves of the laws, we can use those loopholes to exercise our rights. There is no doubt that the writer of that law had no intent for it to be used the way I do. I was intended for gun shows, so they could still operate within the law since the venues varied. And gun shows are a major recruiting event for NRA, and other lobbyists. Not that gunshows are bad, they are not, just that is the reason for the loophole.

Well said!! I especially like the logic "IMO any business that does not post HAS in fact given their permission to carry"

 

[repo_4]

The law clearly states without permission that carry in a business that sells and serves alcohol is prohibited. BUT the change allowed carry with, drum roll, a CHP, without getting permission. Granted the business is not posted. There has been no case law YET to straiten this out, we do know that cc and OC are completely separate in the state constitution. OC is a right, CC is a privilege.

Until the matter is cleared up it is OC at your own risk. But that was not the issue here, it was consumption of alcohol while using a CHP to enter a business that serves while carrying. Since without the owners permission the carrier must rely on the CC they would have to follow the CC rules, IMO. And it was stated in the post I replied to that OCers, without the coveted card, had to leave their guns in the vehicle, which is not true.

The thing is most privilege card holders do not feel they have to get permission, they are special remember. In fact every person I know of before the change in the law with a CHP IGNORED the restriction, because who was going to know anyway. They entered and they drank, and in some cases later were arrested for other things. This has been pointed out by the NY times and the Brady bunch. I once had a exchange with some of the CC crowd pointed out that in fact it was the CC people that were more likely to be drunks, than OC people. Brady bunch had NO stats on OC bad behavior in NC. Actually there is very little mention of bad OC behavior nationwide. There is little OC bad behavior in Virginia where it has been legal to OC in a serving restaurant and drink for years.

WW, I have read enough of your posts to know that you are not for CC or the state being involved in assiging those privledges. But this post came across as more of an attack on CHP holders, not the state or the law itself. I have a CHP but OC probably 90% of the time. Even before the change I didn't ignore laws because i felt i was "special". That is the difference between us LAC's and criminals, we are good to our word.

 

[WalkingWolf]

WW, I have read enough of your posts to know that you are not for CC or the state being involved in assiging those privledges. But this post came across as more of an attack on CHP holders, not the state or the law itself. I have a CHP but OC probably 90% of the time. Even before the change I didn't ignore laws because i felt i was "special". That is the difference between us LAC's and criminals, we are good to our word.

It is not a attack to tell the truth, if you noticed I made it clear that it IS a small segment of CHP holders that get drunk, or commit crimes. It is documented by the New York Times. You would have to be blind not to see the cases yourself, but it remains that these cases of crimes and drunk behavior are not apparent with people who open carry. Even in our northern neighbor Virginia where open carry without a permit, and being legal to both enter a serving business and drink. Seen here by many of the members of OCDO that DO open carry many say they do not drink, or drink very little, and not consume at all while carrying.

If you are not aware of CHP long record of ignoring the rules of carry in serving business, and consumption you are wearing rose colored glasses. All the incidents I have seen of road rage and guns, have been concealed carry, and most of those CHP holders. It is not my fault or problem that certain types of carry tend to elicit bad behavior.

 

[solus]

repo, from another perspective, my insight while out roaming here on the forum and other sites, is there does seem to be a pervasiveness among those who CC credentials in that they feel they are special because they have the document allowing them to carry over the common folk. one specific point, is the recently passed change, (oct 13), for those citizens who carry the 'special' card allowing them in those unmarked establishments which serve adult beverages with their concealed firearm.

as bragg'd by one statewide special interest group and as noted on their website in the past, they successfully passed this extraordinary piece of legislature but not from a perspective of the good citizens of NC who OC and CC, but rather from their organizational president's extremely narrow CC position, which centered on his verbal and written perspective: 'they are the only sane and sober' group to be trusted with this honorarium. (http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?108024-Gold-Carry-State/)

fortunately, my experiences of CC'g gone bad are from a reading perspective but the articles seem more readily available than CC's going amok.

I personally, am disappointed there is not a concerted push by the State's special interest group to assure all citizens who wish to carry, either OC or CC are afforded equal protection when they carry. however, i am of the opinion this will never occur because of the $$$ flowing for the select special interest(s) within this state.

ipse

 

[WalkingWolf]

I remember the days when we bowled twice a week. This is a common area for concealed carry, used to be open, but that changed. Every league night several of the male members were carrying their concealed handgun that could clearly be seen as they bowled. Printing becomes more apparent while making a approach of the lane. I asked them if they had a card, and some even showed it to me, they all claimed to have one. This was well before the law change. The bowling alley served alcohol, and most of these CHP holders consumed, several got falling down drunk before the night was over. Some of the women carried in their purses or bowling bags, I knew a couple of girls we were friends with admitted to carrying and they drank.

The problem with the law it clearly is unenforceable, it is impossible to tell who is carrying and who is not. And the mere presence of a drink is not RAS to search for a weapon. This is no secret and has been no secret for a long time, I have deep suspicions of anyone who denies that it takes place. While all CHP holders may not be involved in this behavior clearly there are many who deny it takes place.

This change in the law was nothing more than a attempt to make OC more unpopular, those in the lobby already know what was taking place.

 

[Vagrant]

Right well open carried my first day in sunny Greensboro, got the newest Safariland GLS holster and went about my business, someone asked about the holster in Subway but at the grocery store and elsewhere alls quiet, ironically I felt very at peace when I holstered my M&P for the first time, like it had always been there and I just forgotten it previously.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Right well open carried my first day in sunny Greensboro, got the newest Safariland GLS holster and went about my business, someone asked about the holster in Subway but at the grocery store and elsewhere alls quiet, ironically I felt very at peace when I holstered my M&P for the first time, like it had always been there and I just forgotten it previously.

Congratulations, on breaking your cherry, and your equipment. I have two new holsters coming from China to test out, my last one from China was a good, strong holster, still functioning great. These are designed for lights or lasers, which I plan on trying those out also on our Glocks.

One of these days I will break down and buy a M&P, everything I have read it outclasses the Glock. Probably should have got M&P's instead of the Glocks in the first place. Ohhh well...

 

[Vagrant]

Congratulations, on breaking your cherry, and your equipment. I have two new holsters coming from China to test out, my last one from China was a good, strong holster, still functioning great. These are designed for lights or lasers, which I plan on trying those out also on our Glocks.

One of these days I will break down and buy a M&P, everything I have read it outclasses the Glock. Probably should have got M&P's instead of the Glocks in the first place. Ohhh well...

My Brother had a Glock 17 back in the day, and i learned to fire off one, but when it came to decide on buying a handgun for myself i just couldnt see myself getting a glock, i went to Gander Mountain by the Four Seasons Mall, and just felt the ergonomics of each weapon.\\

Springfield felt like a functional gun but in my hands it felt like it was a handgun with an identity crisis, which is it wanted to be glock-like ergonomically and a mix of a Walther style pistol.

Glock always felt bulky to me, just like people say using a tree trunk, so it didnt appeal.

The FN series and the M&P series were the two that kinda screamed me out of everything.

 

[Vagrant]

Also I am curious about what condition everyone carries their fire arms in? I have my M&P in Condition 3 and I worry about in a stressful situation my Condition 3 carry wouldnt become a liability.

 

[WalkingWolf]

I always carry with a torpedo in the tube, condition depends on the type of firearm. There is no condition 1 with a Glock. I do not believe there is with a M&P either. Condition 3 would be loaded mag, empty pipe. Since both the Glock and M&P are partially cocked with a round in the tube with no safety it would be condition 0.

 

[Brian D.]

Probably shouldn't bother to post my NC open carry experiences in this thread since I've just been visiting from Ohio for the last few days, but what the heck. Pretty much a non-issue in western North Carolina, from say Murphy to Asheville, most of the time in or near Bryson City. I just pay close attention to where the Cherokee reservation boundaries are, and NOT carry, openly or concealed, within those lines.

 

[bc.cruiser]

Welcome! We're always glad when visitors have uneventful carry experiences.

 

[repo_4]

I remember the days when we bowled twice a week. This is a common area for concealed carry, used to be open, but that changed. Every league night several of the male members were carrying their concealed handgun that could clearly be seen as they bowled. Printing becomes more apparent while making a approach of the lane. I asked them if they had a card, and some even showed it to me, they all claimed to have one. This was well before the law change. The bowling alley served alcohol, and most of these CHP holders consumed, several got falling down drunk before the night was over. Some of the women carried in their purses or bowling bags, I knew a couple of girls we were friends with admitted to carrying and they drank.

The problem with the law it clearly is unenforceable, it is impossible to tell who is carrying and who is not. And the mere presence of a drink is not RAS to search for a weapon. This is no secret and has been no secret for a long time, I have deep suspicions of anyone who denies that it takes place. While all CHP holders may not be involved in this behavior clearly there are many who deny it takes place.

This change in the law was nothing more than a attempt to make OC more unpopular, those in the lobby already know what was taking place.

To be clear, I dont wear rose colored glasses nor am I bumb enough to believe it doesnt happen. Hell, my class instructor told us he carried while in restaurants (before the law change). But he was a 30+ year retired Dept Sheriff. My reply was simply that your post came across that ALL CHP's engage in this behavior and was an attack on all. If it wasnt and I read it wrong, my opologies.

 

[solus]

To be clear, I dont wear rose colored glasses nor am I bumb enough to believe it doesnt happen. Hell, my class instructor told us he carried while in restaurants (before the law change). But he was a 30+ year retired Dept Sheriff. My reply was simply that your post came across that ALL CHP's engage in this behavior and was an attack on all. If it wasnt and I read it wrong, my opologies.

haven't you have just proven WW's point? here you mention a law enforcement officer who, while instructing during what i perceive is a CHP course, readily admits to other citizens he regularly violated the law...

how many NC citizens has this CHP instructor made that comment and other similar comment(s) to with the direct implication: ignore the firearm laws, I as a law enforcement officer regularly did so because i apparently don't believe they are worthy enough for me to follow.

if this august dep implies the law isn't worth for him, why should john q citizen have to follow it?

Finally, who gives a rat's arse if he is chief of the world, the NC statutes passed by our special interest group here in NC are meant to be followed by everyone, even law enforcement. while they believe they are above the law, truth be told, naw'lll they ain't.

one caveat, if the dep believed he was on duty 24/7 and had a letter to that effect from his sheriff, then his statement is not out of place.

ipse

 

[Grapeshot]

haven't you have just proven WW's point? here you mention a law enforcement officer who, while instructing during what i perceive is a CHP course, readily admits to other citizens he regularly violated the law...

how many NC citizens has this CHP instructor made that comment and other similar comment(s) to with the direct implication: ignore the firearm laws, I as a law enforcement officer regularly did so because i apparently don't believe they are worthy enough for me to follow.

if this august dep implies the law isn't worth for him, why should john q citizen have to follow it?

Finally, who gives a rat's arse if he is chief of the world, the NC statutes passed by our special interest group here in NC are meant to be followed by everyone, even law enforcement. while they believe they are above the law, truth be told, naw'lll they ain't.

one caveat, if the dep believed he was on duty 24/7 and had a letter to that effect from his sheriff, then his statement is not out of place.

ipse

The deputy may have an exemption under LEOSA

§ 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers
http://le.nra.org/leosa.aspx

 

[WalkingWolf]

The deputy may have an exemption under LEOSA

§ 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers
http://le.nra.org/leosa.aspx

My understanding of retired LEOSA is that they must follow all state laws. Unless of course they are on duty. It would be a matter of whether the retired officer retained the power of arrest in NC. I do not bank on my LEOSA status, since I don't CC it is moot. LEOSA only counts for CC.

My opinion is that since he was retired that he must follow the same laws as a CHP holder at the time. And that is not taking into account the date, was the class taken prior to LEOSA? The problem is, that CC holders ignore laws, I am guessing because they believe they will not get caught, and it is common. Not all CC do it, but I would imagine that all are aware, it sorta like that blue wall of silence, except it is a CHP wall of silence.

§ 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.(c) As used in this section, the term "qualified retired law enforcement officer" means an individual who--(1) separated from service in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer;

 

[Grapeshot]

My understanding of retired LEOSA is that they must follow all state laws. Unless of course they are on duty. It would be a matter of whether the retired officer retained the power of arrest in NC. I do not bank on my LEOSA status, since I don't CC it is moot. LEOSA only counts for CC.

My opinion is that since he was retired that he must follow the same laws as a CHP holder at the time. And that is not taking into account the date, was the class taken prior to LEOSA? The problem is, that CC holders ignore laws, I am guessing because they believe they will not get caught, and it is common. Not all CC do it, but I would imagine that all are aware, it sorta like that blue wall of silence, except it is a CHP wall of silence.

§ 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.(c) As used in this section, the term "qualified retired law enforcement officer" means an individual who--(1) separated from service in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer;

Good to be reminded of that limitation.

 

[solus]

The deputy may have an exemption under LEOSA

§ 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers
http://le.nra.org/leosa.aspx

alas, carry into any place serving adult beverages was verboten by state statute for all before 1 October 13. as stated in the cite...state statutes overrides HR 218.

my perception of the the context of repo's post was the dep was bragging in his CHP class(es) to his students about how he has over the years regularly carried in restaurants before the law was changed and by my leap of faith did not discern the dep was doing it in the official performance of his duties. this prompted my post.

w/o the great assistance of a special interest group who passed this specific law for CHP holders, those who have the privilege CHPs can now enter these establishments unfettered while those who OC remain on the outside looking in.

ipse

hate when you get there first WW...lol

 

[JamesCanby]

(snip)

The problem is, that CC holders ignore laws, I am guessing because they believe they will not get caught, and it is common. Not all CC do it, but I would imagine that all are aware, it sorta like that blue wall of silence, except it is a CHP wall of silence.

Let me state for the record, as a CHP holder, that I obey the law. I do not imbibe alcohol when I am carrying either openly or concealed. It's not because I believe I would not get caught if I was carrying concealed and was drinking, it's because (1) I am a law abiding citizen and (2) If something should occur that necessitated my use of my firearm, I absolutely want to avoid any suspicion that my actions were caused by being under the influence. The second reason applies also to when I'm openly carrying.

Your weak caveat (Not all CC do it) notwithstanding, I believe that you are painting with too broad of a brush. I may be somewhat naive, but I believe that the vast majority of people who carry, openly or concealed, are highly aware of, and honor, their legal responsibilities.