(red above is my editing) --Moderator edited to bold black, color fonts are a rule #19 violation --In Raleigh take a look 13-2010 d which (imho) is a blatant violation of 2A meant to provoke a court case..."It shall be illegal to possess a firearm, including concealed handguns otherwise allowed by the provisions of G.S. article 54B, on or about the person on any City-owned or controlled property, whether real or personal."
Has to be a typo??? Couldn't be actual law could it??? But it is...and you could probably still get arrested for it regardless of whether you OC or CC. It's almost too ludicrous to acknowledge which is why I was doing the research before I OC'd on the local section of the MSC trail.
Cary exception #4 (temporary transport) might get you farther than self defense when cited for a violation unless you could prove a real and immediate threat to you or someone else that caused you to display your firearm in self defense. I don't want to be the one to test that theory.
From this angle Raleigh looks worse for open carry than Cary.
And sorry for the hijack too...
I think the Cary ordinance would have to say USED in self defense for the person to need to prove a real or immediate threat. Otherwise, simply HAVING it is the essence of self defense...and I don't think you need to "prove" your intent...simply the fact that you state it as your motivation is MORE than enough. The 2A does the rest. I think the prosecution would have to be the one to establish that it was NOT carried for self defense. Hard to prove a negative without the defendant shooting them self in the foot.
As far as Raleigh...I think it MIGHT be unconstitutional as far as current court decisions...but only if you are actually in an assembly, gathering or parade. And I think if the "gathering" decided it was a protest against the ordinance, then it might get REALLY dicey if they wanted to try to prosecute!
Last edited by a moderator: