Holly Springs Public Hearing re: NO GUNS Postings

tarpleyg

New Member
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
5
Location
Raleigh
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
In case you are not aware, a rabidly anti-gun Holly Springs Town Council member has decided to use that elected position as a platform to deny residents the right to bear arms on town property. As a resident myself and a volunteer for GRNC, I say we cannot let this go unchallenged. I am asking that anyone living in Holly Springs attend the public hearing on Tuesday, August 18th at 7:00 PM. If compelled, please also sign up to speak.

Thanks,
Greg Tarpley
Director of Administration
Grass Roots North Carolina

**************************

From GRNC's latest alert:

Holly Springs in Southern Wake County has scheduled a public hearing August 18th at 7 pm to address the liberty of law-abiding citizens.

Please attend the council meeting and email your opposition to banning freedom. Freedom grabbing council members need to be educated once and for all. Broadcast our message loud and clear.

Town of Holly Springs
128 S Main Street
Holly Springs, NC 27540
Phone: (919) 552-6221
Town Hall Phone: (919) 557-3901


Tuesday August 18th 7pm

https://www.grnc.org/defend-your-ri...c-alert-7-28-20-holly-springs-nc-common-sense
 
I thought State law prohibited this..?
Statewide uniformity as it pertains to concealed carry:

§ 14-415.23. Statewide uniformity.

(a) It is the intent of the General Assembly to prescribe a uniform system for the regulation of legally carrying a concealed handgun. To insure uniformity, no political subdivisions, boards, or agencies of the State nor any county, city, municipality, municipal corporation, town, township, village, nor any department or agency thereof, may enact ordinances, rules, or regulations concerning legally carrying a concealed handgun. A unit of local government may adopt an ordinance to permit the posting of a prohibition against carrying a concealed handgun, in accordance with G.S. 14-415.11(c), on local government buildings and their appurtenant premises.

(b) A unit of local government may adopt an ordinance to prohibit, by posting, the carrying of a concealed handgun on municipal and county recreational facilities that are specifically identified by the unit of local government. If a unit of local government adopts such an ordinance with regard to recreational facilities, then the concealed handgun permittee may, nevertheless, secure the handgun in a locked vehicle within the trunk, glove box, or other enclosed compartment or area within or on the motor vehicle.

(c) For purposes of this section, the term "recreational facilities" includes only the following:

(1) An athletic field, including any appurtenant facilities such as restrooms, during an organized athletic event if the field had been scheduled for use with the municipality or county office responsible for operation of the park or recreational area.

(2) A swimming pool, including any appurtenant facilities used for dressing, storage of personal items, or other uses relating to the swimming pool.

(3) A facility used for athletic events, including, but not limited to, a gymnasium.

(d) For the purposes of this section, the term "recreational facilities" does not include any greenway, designated biking or walking path, an area that is customarily used as a walkway or bike path although not specifically designated for such use, open areas or fields where athletic events may occur unless the area qualifies as an "athletic field" pursuant to subdivision (1) of subsection (c) of this section, and any other area that is not specifically described in subsection (c) of this section.

(e) A person adversely affected by any ordinance, rule, or regulation promulgated or caused to be enforced by any unit of local government in violation of this section may bring an action for declaratory and injunctive relief and for actual damages arising from the violation. The court shall award the prevailing party in an action brought under this subsection reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs as authorized by law. (1995, c. 398, s. 1; 2011-268, s. 21(b); 2013-369, s. 6; 2015-195, s. 15.)
 
It does but the town has stated that since action hasn’t been taken against other cities such as Cary and Chapel Hill iirc, that they are free to ignore the law as well.
That's simply not true. May I ask where you heard that? The Town has stated that they will develop any ordinances in compliance with State law. We are trying to prevent them from passing any ordinance at all.
 
That's simply not true. May I ask where you heard that? The Town has stated that they will develop any ordinances in compliance with State law. We are trying to prevent them from passing any ordinance at all.
Can’t recall where I read it, sorry. But to say that they’ll pass something in compliance with state law doesn’t necessarily contradict what I said. Laws are always interpreted and twisted different ways. The part that stood out to me was that the town, or a member of the council, felt that they could ignore preemption since other local governments had not been forced to remove their ordinances.

If I stumble upon the piece again, I’ll post it.
 
Can’t recall where I read it, sorry. But to say that they’ll pass something in compliance with state law doesn’t necessarily contradict what I said. Laws are always interpreted and twisted different ways. The part that stood out to me was that the town, or a member of the council, felt that they could ignore preemption since other local governments had not been forced to remove their ordinances.

If I stumble upon the piece again, I’ll post it.
Yes, please do if you find it. What a Town Council member says doesn't always equate to what the Town as a whole says. They misspeak from time to time. The Town's attorney specifically stated at the meeting where this was first proposed that he'd have to review all the current laws to make sure they were in compliance with whatever they decided to do.
 
Damn yanks flooding in.
The new construction in the area is nuts!
I was picking up someone from an apartment complex in Holly Springs a few weeks ago and the car tags were from all over the place. More out of state than in-state. Canada, Iowa, MO, NY, PA, Wisconsin, MI, CA, NJ. I mean from everywhere
 
Last edited:
I was picking up someone from an apartment complex in Holly Springs a few weeks ago and the car tags were from all over the place. More out of state than in-state. Canada, Iowa, MO, NY, PA, Wisconsin, MI, CA, NJ. I mean from everywhere
That isn't unique to Holly Springs. This whole area is like that (Wake, Orange, Durham, Lee, etc.)
 
That isn't unique to Holly Springs. This whole area is like that (Wake, Orange, Durham, Lee, etc.)
I lived in Cary for 30 years, and moved to Fuquay 18 months ago. I never saw so many out of state tags in one place since I got here.
 
I lived in Cary for 30 years, and moved to Fuquay 18 months ago. I never saw so many out of state tags in one place since I got here.
I've been in the area since '71, I don't ever remember seeing so much new construction, and all over the place, Durham, Cary, Raleigh, Apex, Knightdale, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Me.
Here’s the thing. They can pass their little resolution, or even call it an ordinance or a “law”. It’s invalid. You know it, I know it, they know it. They might even be able to get their local tyrants and thugs to enforce it. That’s really what it comes down to, the ability to physically enforce it against people. If they do and you play the game by their rules, you’ll go to “court” and spend massive $$$$ against an organization that gets its funds by extortion of the locals and has lawyers on the payroll looking for something interesting to do.

Now, that may be the “correct” way to go about it because you know how the illegitimate system works: your kings and rulers declare something and it’s assumed valid until someone can show proper harm and challenge it to a “higher authority”.

Of course, you should go to the meetings, use the (1st of 4) soap box, protest, etc. But ask yourself this too. What would the founding fathers have done in the face of such aggression by a local tyrant.
 
Odd that someone can quote the statute verbatim, and there it is in black and white stating clearly that cities can post. And more than one of you still make the claim that they don't have the authority.

And don't be lumping Cary in with Chapel Hill. Cary has posted all that the statute allows, but they have never attempted to do more than that. And a few years ago they rewrote their Open Carry ordinance that actually opened things up for OC.

As for the Yankees, I recently read in the paper that over half of the people living in NC west of I-95 were born in a different state.
 
Same with all the other transplants. They needed to make some big decisions to become Southern. Then, they get here and start right in on messing with the place they chose over all others to come to. It just doesn’t make sense to me.
Let's not generalize "all" transplants...
The only changes i'm looking to see down here are lower taxes and less restrictions on guns :)
But yeah, I'm already thinking "go back to where you came from" about people who've been here longer than me.
 
Here’s the thing. They can pass their little resolution, or even call it an ordinance or a “law”. It’s invalid. You know it, I know it, they know it. They might even be able to get their local tyrants and thugs to enforce it. That’s really what it comes down to, the ability to physically enforce it against people. If they do and you play the game by their rules, you’ll go to “court” and spend massive $$$$ against an organization that gets its funds by extortion of the locals and has lawyers on the payroll looking for something interesting to do.

Here's how it goes - in my own personal "you can't have a gun here" experience
1) Create a policy that they "believe" complies with the law - or what they wish the law was under a creative interpretation
2) Find somebody who has violated the policy
3) Send a team of cops to corner the person, take the gun, issue some BS ticket on the spot
4) Refer it to the prosecutor who files BS charges for something you didn't do
5) Prosecutor gets ready to plea you down to something more generic that can stick and hope screws up your life somehow
6) Hopes you don't have a lawyer or the resources/determination to fight
If you do have a lawyer and the ability to fight they do the following
7) Tell the judge they need an extension because they need more time to prepare for a full trial
8) Tell the judge they need another extension because some paperwork got lost and they need to get it replaced
9) Tell the judge they need another extension because the law "isn't really clear" on the matter and they need to investigate
10) Tell the judge they don't want to drop the case but can't find anything to prosecute with so they have to
10) Stall about giving you your gun and CHL back
11) Tell you they have no means to return your gun because it has already been sent to the crime lab for testing and destruction
12) Crime lab says they have no way to give it back because they can't determine if you are allowed to get it back
13) Finally give in IF you can get your lawyer to convince the judge to send a harshly worded letter that you are entitled to your property
14) Set annoying conditions about the time/place/process for coming to get your property
15) Look for the next person who has violated the policy because, since they dropped charges, no court precedent has been set
 
Odd that someone can quote the statute verbatim, and there it is in black and white stating clearly that cities can post. And more than one of you still make the claim that they don't have the authority.
Law states they can make an ordinance about carrying a concealed handgun inside of a city building and it's premises
While they shouldn't, they can probably say something about that under the current interpretation
But under the statue referenced you should also be able to go in there with a glock in a chest rig, another in a drop leg, and probably slinging a rifle too (not sure where the law is on that)
Or at least that's how it was up in MI when we frequently had this fight up there.
They started by trying to ban concealed carry at certain things, then they tried saying it applied to open carry too, but it didn't. So then they started telling people who were OCing to leave, and threatening them with trespass. We tried fighting that in the courts, that they couldn't ask us to leave based on something that was legal, but the courts were too far left. It was fought up to the state supreme court and we still lost - the kicker is that the court completely ignored the argument our lawyer was making and ruled on other stuff that wasn't really relevant.

Oh, but we did have a different ruling go more in our favor a couple years before that - it was still mostly ignored by the local agencies. They just put up the signs, harass whoever ignores them, and make all sorts of other threats that really aren't worth fighting for most people.
 
Late to the party, but just sent my letter.

There's no public comment allowed, but I assume people are still allowed to show up?
 
No public comment? Why go? A serious question.

Are they going to have a public vote or do what they want?
Same reason a ton of people showed up the Wake County Council meeting regarding the public range even if only a few dozen spoke. It shows you're willing to take time out of your day to ensure you're noticed.
 
Last edited:
Here’s the thing. They can pass their little resolution, or even call it an ordinance or a “law”. It’s invalid. You know it, I know it, they know it. They might even be able to get their local tyrants and thugs to enforce it. That’s really what it comes down to, the ability to physically enforce it against people. If they do and you play the game by their rules, you’ll go to “court” and spend massive $$$$ against an organization that gets its funds by extortion of the locals and has lawyers on the payroll looking for something interesting to do.

Now, that may be the “correct” way to go about it because you know how the illegitimate system works: your kings and rulers declare something and it’s assumed valid until someone can show proper harm and challenge it to a “higher authority”.

Of course, you should go to the meetings, use the (1st of 4) soap box, protest, etc. But ask yourself this too. What would the founding fathers have done in the face of such aggression by a local tyrant.

not sure what our founding fathers would have done, but I’ll tel ya what BLM and ANtifa would do...set those police cars and steaming pile of feces they call council building on fire, then march on down to the Counsel member houses and be aggressive, loud, and uncomfortable.


I wish I was joking. Anything less is simply a waste of time. What’s that definition of insanity? The good boy bit has been unsuccessful 8376 times. Current events have shown the population what works. Mob rule. If not going to be a mob, save your PTO
 
not sure what our founding fathers would have done, but I’ll tel ya what BLM and ANtifa would do...set those police cars and steaming pile of feces they call council building on fire, then march on down to the Counsel member houses and be aggressive, loud, and uncomfortable.


I wish I was joking. Anything less is simply a waste of time. What’s that definition of insanity? The good boy bit has been unsuccessful 8376 times. Current events have shown the population what works. Mob rule. If not going to be a mob, save your PTO
I liked because i believe you are correct, that's what they would do.
 
Despite the naysayers, last night was mostly a success. They received 118 (I think) public comments AGAINST the ordinances and 3 (yes, THREE) comments FOR the ordinances. There were a total of 15 speakers, 13 AGAINST, 2 FOR, but only 13 spoke. One of the FOR speakers was a second grader. :rolleyes:

The council voted AGAINST the concealed carry ordinance. There was some debate over the open carry ordinance and a lot of dancing around its constitutionality, whether they could ban open, but not concealed carry within picnic shelters (what?), and other issues. The council voted to defer this ordinance until the next meeting.

I've reached out to the town clerk to see if there will be another opportunity to publicly comment on the (amended) open carry ordinance. I think supporting OC is important due to the current state of Wake County's carry permit processing. Basically, you are at Sheriff's Baker mercy on whether or not Holly Springs will let you carry a firearm on public property.
 
Last edited:
Clerk got back to me -- there will not be an opportunity to speak again, but the public is welcome to e-mail public comments to the clerk.

Mods, can I post about this over in the Firearms News and Views subforum? I suspect it'll reach more eyes and the council will get an even more overwhelming response.
 
Last edited:
Despite the naysayers, last night was mostly a success. They received 118 (I think) public comments AGAINST the ordinances and 3 (yes, THREE) comments FOR the ordinances. There were a total of 15 speakers, 13 AGAINST, 2 FOR, but only 13 spoke. One of the FOR speakers was a second grader. :rolleyes:

The council voted AGAINST the concealed carry ordinance. There was some debate over the open carry ordinance and a lot of dancing around its constitutionality, whether they could ban open, but not concealed carry within picnic shelters (what?), and other issues. The council voted to defer this ordinance until the next meeting.

I've reached out to the town clerk to see if there will be another opportunity to publicly comment on the open carry ordinance. I think supporting OC is important due to the current state of Wake County's carry permit processing. Basically, you are at Sheriff's Baker mercy on whether or not Holly Springs will let you carry a firearm on public property.

Thanks for the update and going to the meeting!
 
I've been in the area since '71, I don't ever remember seeing so much new construction, and all over the place, Durham, Cary, Raleigh, Apex, Knightdale, etc.
But for all that construction, housing prices would be into the stratosphere by now. As it is $/sf in that are is 2 to 3X the surrounding suburbs.
 
Clerk got back to me -- there will not be an opportunity to speak again, but the public is welcome to e-mail public comments to the clerk.

Mods, can I post about this over in the Firearms News and Views subforum? I suspect it'll reach more eyes and the council will get an even more overwhelming response.


Sent my input yesterday. Glad that they're listening (somewhat)
 
It ends up as an open carry issue when voted on.

Conceal carry will still be allowed everywhere it was before, but ordinance 20-04 will make it a crime to open carry in town owned buildings, parks and greenways.

Three of the five council members believe that it is okay to deny constitutional rights if it makes a few people in Holly Springs “uncomfortable”. Literally, that was the reason stated for the new ordinance not allowing open carry in city parks, greenways and builds.

Holly Springs council members that voted to denying open carry even when there were no real problems or dangers with the current laws:

C. Kelly (up for re-election in 2021)
Peter V. (up for re-election in 2021)
A. Wolff

Since the vote was 3/2 on a new ordinance, a second vote needs to be taken on Sep 15th before it becomes law.
 
Last edited:
I think that everyone should start making regular contributions!
I just renewed my membership and set it up for monthly donations.

tenor.gif
 
What if we took training and received Armed Security Guard certification, we can open carry anywhere, just have a small brief case in hand?
 
Voting the bad council members out next year would be quicker, cheaper and easier I think
No doubt, I'll be doing what I can to get them voted out. It's clear they don't care about the constituents and I think the GRNC has the ability to send a clear message. The number of times "Is this constitutional?" was asked during the August meeting was a bit disturbing.
 
Back
Top Bottom