Carrying Concealed During Emergency In NC [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Carrying Concealed During Emergency In NC


concealedcarry
03-15-2007, 08:27
Recently there was considerable input about NC Concealed Permit holders not being able to carry during a declared emergency. Hopefully, this is about to change for ALL NC citizens, if House Bill 310 passes this year. It was introduced in the House by Representatives Cleveland, Hilton, and Moore. (Primary Sponsors) It has passed the first reading in the House and is now in Judiciary II Committee. This committee is chaired by Dan Blue. Blue is representative from District 33 (Raleigh, NC) His phone number is 919-733-5752 and 919-833-1931. Your support is crucial for this to pass. You can read the content of this bill at http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2007/Bills/House/HTML/H310v1.html

Also, House Bill 573 was introduced 3-12-07 and is now in Judiciary ll Committee. If passed this year, will allow all NC Judges to carry concealed in Courthouses while on official business AND if they have a NC Concealed Handgun Permit.

Thanks, Chris

scottyv
03-15-2007, 09:10
Maybe I'm not smart enough to understand that legal jargin, but does this bill allow us to carry in a state of emergency?

concealedcarry
03-15-2007, 09:19
Yes,if you view the link to the bill, you will see that part of it is underlined. The underlined part is the part of the existing statute that was changed or in this case it was added. It applies to all NC residents in lawful possession of a firearm.

Glocks&Ducs
03-16-2007, 09:22
From what I am reading, this law does nothing to clarify what we were discussing before. The only thing this does, is reword current state law, to conform to the federal law mandating that firearms can't be confiscated during time of emergency. That was a direct result of the weapons confiscations in NOLA after Katrina and subsequent legislation. So basically there is nothing to support or oppose. They are just rewording the state law so it falls in compliance with federal law.

The original discussion, was whether or not a person that held a concealed carry license could continue to carry, concealed or otherwise, off his property if an emergency had been declared.

"Short Title: No Seizure of Lawful Firearms in Emergency."

"AN ACT clarifying that lawfully possessed firearms, ammunition, and ammunition components may not be seized during a declared state of emergency."

This section still reads the same, and still leaves the CCW question open to debate:

" 14‑288.7. Transporting dangerous weapon or substance during emergency; possessing off premises; exceptions.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, it is unlawful for any person to transport or possess off his own premises any dangerous weapon or substance in any area:

(1) In which a declared state of emergency exists; exists, unless the dangerous weapon transported or possessed is a firearm, ammunition, or an ammunition component; or

(2) Within the immediate vicinity of which a riot is occurring.

(b) This section does not apply to persons exempted from the provisions of G.S. 14‑269 with respect to any activities lawfully engaged in while carrying out their duties."

concealedcarry
03-16-2007, 11:42
I disagree with you but will not argue it with you. The underlined part of the proposed statute change is the NEW addition and would include ALL residents not just those with a concealed handgun permit. To me it is very clear that passage of this would allow ALL citizens IN LAWFULL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS to carry off their own premises.

Glocks&Ducs
03-16-2007, 15:12
Now I see the sentence you are talking about. I had only read the law quickly as I walked out the door from work. And the thing that threw me off, was the next section (b). Which doesn't look like it really needs to be there anymore. At least not the way it is currently written. If everyone is already exempted, why state in the next sentence, that there are still some people being exempted?

1911Tuner
04-01-2007, 18:40
Quote: (Edited for speeling. ;) )

>To me it is very clear that passage of this would allow ALL citizens IN LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS to carry off their own premises.<
************

"In lawful possession" being the key phrase. Do you keep your bill of sale and other paperwork from the licensed dealer? If you don't...or if you don't happen to have it with you...how can you prove that you're in "lawful" possession of the firearm? The way it's worded, it's subject to interpretation and the burden of proof lies with the possessor...you.

"May I see your bill of sale, sir? No? Hand it over."

Glocks&Ducs
04-01-2007, 19:26
Originally posted by 1911Tuner
Quote: (Edited for speeling. ;) )

>To me it is very clear that passage of this would allow ALL citizens IN LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS to carry off their own premises.<
************

"In lawful possession" being the key phrase. Do you keep your bill of sale and other paperwork from the licensed dealer? If you don't...or if you don't happen to have it with you...how can you prove that you're in "lawful" possession of the firearm? The way it's worded, it's subject to interpretation and the burden of proof lies with the possessor...you.

"May I see your bill of sale, sir? No? Hand it over."

Lawful possesion simply means you are not barred from buying, owning, or possessing a firearm. And I am sure it includes not being in possession of a stolen firearm, even if you can lawfully do the above mentioned.

obxprnstar
10-07-2007, 23:33
Nothing like old news, but I assume that this was not changed?