NC Second Amendment Rights Are Suspended

[Ruger]

All things considered...

I think the AG's office (or any local DA) would have a heck of a time trying to get a conviction in the event that someone who is carrying were to be arrested and charged with being in violation (during this particular SoE). All the doublespeak from Perdue & the AG would likely result in the case being tossed, IMO.

 

[EXTREMEOPS1]

I thought Kalifornia law was all screwed up!

Sounds like you guys need to flood the governors office with mail...Gun owners united..Look what happened during Katrina ...guns illegally confiscated ...(obviously when you really need them for protection ) keep on keeping on guys our thoughts and prayers are with you during "Earls" visit

 

[Springfield 40]

Haywood co. Western north carolina

Checked with sheriff office they had no idea Second Amendment rights was suspended..

 

[chiefjason]

On the way to work and don't have time for a long explanation. Read NCGS 14-288.7. She cannot change the law. They choose not to enforce it because some important Dems brought pressure so they could hunt. The buddy system at work.

We just happen to be able to join in on the privileges of the rich and powerful this time.

Law needs to be changed.

Yes the Gov can suspend or modify laws during a SOE. And understand I'm not a supporter of this Gov. During one of the snowstorms where a SEO was enacted, she changed the hours of service for truckers hauling fuel. BTW, hours of service for truckers are set on the federal level! The way she got away with it is that it only worked for truckers that ran in the state of NC. You have to look under a different statute.


North Carolina General Statute

§ 166A‑5. State emergency management.

The State emergency management program includes all aspects of preparations for, response to and recovery from war or peacetime disasters.

(1) Governor. – The Governor shall have general direction and control of the State emergency management program and shall be responsible for carrying out the provisions of this Article.

a. The Governor is authorized and empowered:

1. To make, amend or rescind the necessary orders, rules and regulations within the limits of the authority conferred upon him herein, with due consideration of the policies of the federal government.


All this said, it's another dumb gun law in NC that needs to be clarified or done away with.

 

[Dreamer]

UPDATE:

I just spoke with the Governor's Chief Council, and he informed me that this particular Executive Order (EO-62) was actually invoked under Chapter 166-A of the North Carolina Emergency Management Act, which DOES NOT automatically invoke §14-288.7.

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bychapter/chapter_166a.html

He also said they have send briefings to all local and state LEAs letting them know that this EO does not effect the prohibition on firearms...

So apparently there are two different set of rules under which EOs may invoke a State of Emergency--one that does put §14-288.7 into effect, and one that doesn't. And this one is the kind that doesn't. Apparently, they learned their lesson with the King Fiasco last winter...

He also told me that they had been getting a TON of calls on this matter, and would be looking into changing the State of Emergency statute in the upcoming Legislative Session in January.

Of course, Mr Gura and SAF might force them to change this silly, racist, Jim Crow law in the Courts before they can do it in the General Assembly. We shall see. Will the "Wheels of Justice" turn more quickly than the "Wheels of Legislature"?

Personally, I'd rather see BOTH things happen. I'd like to see the Gura/SAF case win first, and then the GA vote to strike this provision from the NCGC. This would be an EPIC WIN for not just NC residents, but EVERYONE in the country, because it would get this silly law off our books, AND it would establish case-law precedent for other states in similar situations to refer to.

S, don't worry folks. Transporting, carrying, and possessing firearms while you are out and about in NC is PERFECTLY legal and lawful under this EO.

But there is always next time. :banghead:

Stay vigilant...

 

[Ruger]

Thanks for the update Dreamer!

 

[cricketdad]

Yes the Gov can suspend or modify laws during a SOE. And understand I'm not a supporter of this Gov. During one of the snowstorms where a SEO was enacted, she changed the hours of service for truckers hauling fuel. BTW, hours of service for truckers are set on the federal level! The way she got away with it is that it only worked for truckers that ran in the state of NC. You have to look under a different statute.


North Carolina General Statute

§ 166A‑5. State emergency management.

The State emergency management program includes all aspects of preparations for, response to and recovery from war or peacetime disasters.

(1) Governor. – The Governor shall have general direction and control of the State emergency management program and shall be responsible for carrying out the provisions of this Article.

a. The Governor is authorized and empowered:

1. To make, amend or rescind the necessary orders, rules and regulations within the limits of the authority conferred upon him herein, with due consideration of the policies of the federal government.


All this said, it's another dumb gun law in NC that needs to be clarified or done away with.

GRNC's lawyer disagrees with you. See article http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...wrong-about-north-carolina-state-of-emergency

 

[Anthony_I_Am]

I walked around town today with my sidearm. Stopped and talked to a couple of cops outside the coffee shop on the sidewalk. One of them asked me how long I had my license and I had to go thru the speech about no "license" was required to open carry. His pals were educated and confirmed everything I told him.

For real, I don't think most cops and even lawmakers know this law exists, or they really don't care.
I suspect it is one of those jim crow laws that was invented in the 50's when blacks were being fire-hosed and beat with batons.

I am sure this law was meant for instances like riots and looting during a disaster in order to use as a catch-all for those who are obviously up to no good in the situations I stated but the cop doesn't have any hard evidence that they're up to no good.


“it is unlawful for any person to transport or possess off his own premises any dangerous weapon or substance in any area…"

The gasoline in my car is a "dangerous substance" if an open flame is near.

 

[papa bear]

the problem is that the empathy that this generates is the same snake trick that NC gov. uses all the time.

" oh, don't worry about the fine print it really doesn't mean anything"

just another tool to use against us

 

[chiefjason]

GRNC's lawyer disagrees with you. See article http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...wrong-about-north-carolina-state-of-emergency

Can you explain to me what a state of emergency is, if not the suspension of some and enforcement of other laws? It is by definition a change in laws for a state of emergency. Do I agree with the firearms provision? Absolutely not. But to publicly state that the Gov does not have the authority to amend, change, or enforce laws differently under a SOE is just absurd. Curfews, no driving, local traffic only, shutting down roads, making the east bound lane a west bound lane all falls under treating certain laws differently because of the SOE. That is one of the issues I have with GRNC. They should have stuck with how stupid the transportation law is. Instead they are focusing on the Gov's authority, which is a battle they will loose. And IMO it's the wrong battle to fight to get this changed. I think a better stance would be to possibly act appreciative of the effort to rectify this mess this time and use it as an opportunity to justify why the law is a bad idea in practice. And maybe even refrain from a frontal attack on her authority and try to get her to see that it is in everyones best interest to get this one off the books ASAP. Where I'm from you can't slap someone in the face then wonder why they are mad at you.

 

[elixin77]

A state of emergency is when a mini SHTF event is going on (think the King riots in the early 90's).

GRNC is challenging the Gov because she is, by all means, surpassing the checks and balances that have been put in place against such an act being committed. Until we knew that the Gov issued the SoE by means of chapter 166, she single handedly crippled our right to bear arms. While she may have not known of that section, it does exist whenever a real SoE is issued. That part is not my beef though.

The beef I have with the gov is her having the audacity to say that the section that applies to firearms does not have take affect with this SoE (while in the long run this is true, but there was a vast miscommunication, which caused all this ruckus). From what she's said (and done) she seemed to have circumvent the law and, in essence, changed how the law was written *without* approval from the state congress. That is the key situation (apart from all of us getting upset that our rights were taken away from us). This is illegal, no matter how you look at it. One person is not allowed to change how law is written all by themselves. does this happen regularly? more than likely, but this is the most blatant incident of something like this happening - thats why people are getting so uptight about it. And for good reason too.

Now, am I still mad that she supposedly suspended our second amendment rights? F yes. I hope because of this situation, laws are changed so we can carry and transport whatever the F we want during an SoE. The law prohibiting us from protecting ourselves when we would need it the most is racist Jim Crow law that needs to be stricken from the books.

 

[cricketdad]

Can you explain to me what a state of emergency is, if not the suspension of some and enforcement of other laws? It is by definition a change in laws for a state of emergency. Do I agree with the firearms provision? Absolutely not. But to publicly state that the Gov does not have the authority to amend, change, or enforce laws differently under a SOE is just absurd. Curfews, no driving, local traffic only, shutting down roads, making the east bound lane a west bound lane all falls under treating certain laws differently because of the SOE. That is one of the issues I have with GRNC. They should have stuck with how stupid the transportation law is. Instead they are focusing on the Gov's authority, which is a battle they will loose. And IMO it's the wrong battle to fight to get this changed. I think a better stance would be to possibly act appreciative of the effort to rectify this mess this time and use it as an opportunity to justify why the law is a bad idea in practice. And maybe even refrain from a frontal attack on her authority and try to get her to see that it is in everyones best interest to get this one off the books ASAP. Where I'm from you can't slap someone in the face then wonder why they are mad at you.

I am not a lawyer I cant explain anything. Ed Green is. This is his take.

Says Grass Roots North Carolina’s Director of Legal Research, Ed Green:

“On Sept. 1, 2010, Governor Perdue issued Executive Order No. 62 declaring ‘that a state of emergency exists in the State due to the approach of Hurricane Earl.’ Nothing in EO 62 mentions gun owners or the possession of guns in any way. Nothing in EO 62 purports to suspend the operation of any
NC law.

“NCGS § 14-288.7 clearly and unambiguously forbids the possession of any firearm off one's premises during any declared State of Emergency, with exceptions only for law enforcement and military in the course of their duties. Under NC law, whenever a State of Emergency is declared, no citizen
may possess any gun outside of their home.

“Even if EO 62 were worded (or amended) to expressly permit the possession of firearms, the governor has no constitutional or statutory authority to suspend the effect or enforcement of a valid NC criminal law. Once she declared a State of Emergency, Gov. Perdue legally disarmed all NC civilians outside their own homes, including the thousands of otherwise legally licensed hunters expected to take to the fields for the opening of Dove season at noon Saturday.”


As for GRNC not doing the right thing, GRNC is one of the plaintiffs in Alan Gura's lawsuit.

Purdue's party killed two bills that would have prevented this situation. Trying to get the law changed didn't work.

What would your next step be?

 

[chiefjason]

What would your next step be?

First, my current step would not be to continue to inflame the situation by calling people names. But that's SOP for GRNC in the emails I read. I would absolutely point out the problems with this law. I would want detailed reasons why it is not in effect. I would want a means for the public to know when it is and isn't in effect for the next SOE. I would be pointing out the ridiculous nature of this law. How necessary is it if your going to not enforce it? And I would continue to work to change it.

Personally, I'm going to be sending out a few more emails to reps. I've already emailed NCWRC. And I'll vote accordingly this fall. And tell everyone I know to do the same.

What I will not do in those emails. Is call people names. Use inflammatory rhetoric and hyperbole. I'll keep them simple, to the point, and focused on the issues and solutions. I would expect people that claim to represent me, as a gun owner, to do the same.

 

[cricketdad]

First, my current step would not be to continue to inflame the situation by calling people names. But that's SOP for GRNC in the emails I read. I would absolutely point out the problems with this law. I would want detailed reasons why it is not in effect. I would want a means for the public to know when it is and isn't in effect for the next SOE. I would be pointing out the ridiculous nature of this law. How necessary is it if your going to not enforce it? And I would continue to work to change it.

already been done

Personally, I'm going to be sending out a few more emails to reps. I've already emailed NCWRC. And I'll vote accordingly this fall. And tell everyone I know to do the same.

What I will not do in those emails. Is call people names. Use inflammatory rhetoric and hyperbole. I'll keep them simple, to the point, and focused on the issues and solutions. I would expect people that claim to represent me, as a gun owner, to do the same.

Right now sending emails is not going to accomplish anything. Your next suggestion is what will make a difference. Vote and encourage others to vote. There are at this point only two people that need to be persuaded. Holliman and Ross. The only way to persuade Holliman is to fire him. If you know anyone in District 81 get them involved in his removal.

 

[NCBobD]

What I will not do in those emails. Is call people names. Use inflammatory rhetoric and hyperbole. I'll keep them simple, to the point, and focused on the issues and solutions. I would expect people that claim to represent me, as a gun owner, to do the same.

There is the exact behavior that costs them support and money... "Inflammatory rhetoric and hyperbole." Yet, no matter how often they're called out on it, here and elsewhere, they cannot refrain from it. What good do they believe can come from calling someone a "liar?" And how will such behavior change anything?

I did send them a letter about the restrictive gun regulations on NC gamelands and suggested they "call out the troops" during the current comment period. If they're truely interested in protecting and improving our 2A rights in NC we should see some action on this matter. If we don't I'll have to assume it's because it's not inflammatory enough for them.

Time will tell.

 

[chiefjason]

Right now sending emails is not going to accomplish anything. Your next suggestion is what will make a difference. Vote and encourage others to vote. There are at this point only two people that need to be persuaded. Holliman and Ross. The only way to persuade Holliman is to fire him. If you know anyone in District 81 get them involved in his removal.

First, me reps are all pro gun. So emails will likely be a good move for me, since hopefully they will remain in place. I'm lucky like that. For those folks with anti reps, it's tougher, but enough emails might get them rethinking things. Since each email represents a vote or two for those of us who are married. I emailed Hagan knowing full well she would not change her stance on issues. She's still my rep, whether either one of us likes it or not, so she gets to hear from me.

Second, we don't need to get rid of Holliman or Ross. We need to get the controlling party changed. Which means elect enough Republicans so that they can change the committee leadership. Ross is appointed by the Dems. The Republicans will not appoint her back to her position. At least that's my understanding of how this game is played.

And, thanks Bob.

 

[cricketdad]

First, me reps are all pro gun. So emails will likely be a good move for me, since hopefully they will remain in place. I'm lucky like that. For those folks with anti reps, it's tougher, but enough emails might get them rethinking things. Since each email represents a vote or two for those of us who are married. I emailed Hagan knowing full well she would not change her stance on issues. She's still my rep, whether either one of us likes it or not, so she gets to hear from me.

Second, we don't need to get rid of Holliman or Ross. We need to get the controlling party changed. Which means elect enough Republicans so that they can change the committee leadership. Ross is appointed by the Dems. The Republicans will not appoint her back to her position. At least that's my understanding of how this game is played.

And, thanks Bob.

Unbelievable, the one person who has stopped all the pro gun bills, you think should still be in office.

 

[oneofthepeople]

The way I see it, the order is written within the State and applies to the State and its employees and franchisees--Not unconstitutional as it applies to the State. If applied to the people in their private capacity, that's unconstitutional. The State's police power is limited to things and persons in commerce. Like "mandatory" evacuation. Yes, it's mandatory upon certain employees of the State to evacuate people per the government's own regulations, but cannot be mandatory upon the people in their strictly private capacities.

 

[chiefjason]

Unbelievable, the one person who has stopped all the pro gun bills, you think should still be in office.

You're missing my point. Most of us do not live in one of their districts. So we have no mechanism for removing them from office. That does not mean we cannot stop them. We have to get the Republicans in power so they can appoint new leadership in the committees. That way it does not matter one bit if they stay or go. If they go, it's a double win. There is no love loss between me and Ross, and I am NOT a fan. I got no response from her office on the Castle Doctrine.

Do they need to be thrown out? Absolutely! But it's not the only means of getting them out of the way so pro gun bills can pass. That's my point. And changing leadership so they can be removed may be the easiest thing to do. I'm not sure how popular Ross is around Raleigh. But the metro areas are going Democrat a lot these days. I don't want anyone to think they can't do anything about the current situation in Raleigh if they don't live there. There are options.

 

[cricketdad]

You're missing my point. Most of us do not live in one of their districts. So we have no mechanism for removing them from office. That does not mean we cannot stop them. We have to get the Republicans in power so they can appoint new leadership in the committees. That way it does not matter one bit if they stay or go. If they go, it's a double win. There is no love loss between me and Ross, and I am NOT a fan. I got no response from her office on the Castle Doctrine.

Do they need to be thrown out? Absolutely! But it's not the only means of getting them out of the way so pro gun bills can pass. That's my point. And changing leadership so they can be removed may be the easiest thing to do. I'm not sure how popular Ross is around Raleigh. But the metro areas are going Democrat a lot these days. I don't want anyone to think they can't do anything about the current situation in Raleigh if they don't live there. There are options.

Just because you don't live in the area doesn't mean you have no options. I am involved in two races.One district I live in one I don't.

First option would be to help GRNC. Since you are reluctant to do that.......

Option two. Contact the candidates and ask what you can do to put them in office. Money is always an option.

District 38 (Ross)
Madison E. Shook (Wake) (R)
1801 Diploma Ct. 204, Raleigh, NC 27606 919-571-3466

District 81 (Holliman)
Rayne Brown (Davidson) (R)
416 Lee Ave., Lexington, NC 27295 336-249-2608

Wish I lived in a district like you. This is the first time in the 12 or so years I have been involved in politics that I have a pro gun candidate running in any of the many districts I live in.

Holliman is vulnerable. Ross is probably not. Ross is in a district that was made for her. I live in a custom made district. That is one of the reason that this election is so important. You are 1005 correct. We need to put Republicans in the House and Senate because the party in power will redraw the districts for the next ten years. If your (anyone reading this) district is safe, pick another one to fight in. The next ten years depend on what we do now.