It ain't non
Is isn't any of their business. How are they gonna know. They'll have to arrest you to find out.
NC Constitutional Carry moves forward
- Thread starter Tigard
- Start date
- Replies 214
- Views 14,342
If you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't have to worry either way and(my opinion) they will ask you eventually if you have any weapons and then you can say I'm carrying
Dale Gribble
Can't starve us out; Can't make us run
Charter Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Ya know....
Discussions like this make me think of those that came before us round about 250 years ago...knowing full well the consequences for their defiance, they chose to stand and the punishment they faced was far worse than anything we would be looking at.
Were they here, wonder what they'd do? Think they'd roll over and say, "Well...that's just they way it is and we don't like it, but we just have to deal with it"?
Hell no, they wouldn't. Furthermore, I'd bet they would expect us to value liberty just as much as they did and be willing to exercise it, even though it may be "uncomfortable" or God forbid, "risky".
Discussions like this make me think of those that came before us round about 250 years ago...knowing full well the consequences for their defiance, they chose to stand and the punishment they faced was far worse than anything we would be looking at.
Were they here, wonder what they'd do? Think they'd roll over and say, "Well...that's just they way it is and we don't like it, but we just have to deal with it"?
Hell no, they wouldn't. Furthermore, I'd bet they would expect us to value liberty just as much as they did and be willing to exercise it, even though it may be "uncomfortable" or God forbid, "risky".
drypowder
Les Deplorables
They will know before long. The TSA already has vehicles that can scan passing vehicles for some of their content. Eventually local police departments will have this tech.
Also, if someone carrying with 2A as their permit actually has to use that gun for self-defense, they will be prosecuted.
I'm not saying don't do it if push comes to shove, I'm just saying that it's much better for this to be legal, and we can make that happen.
Last edited:
T
trcubed
Guest
Are you flipping me off or was that just a coincidence?
As a young buck I should've worried about that, but I didn't. And as an oldman I'm only pushable so far.
Last edited:
What would the point of CCing be in this scenario? If you don't have a CHP and you want to carry, then open carry. Then when the officer pulls you over and asks whether there are weapons in the car, you can choose whether or not you want to answer that question.
Obviously I didn't read the whole bill. Is there a requirement that you must disclose like CWP?? IMO the all disclosure requirements should be removed as it does nothing to keep LEO safer.
-R
disclosure has never helped an officer actually if you think on it as anyone who is willingly disclosing he has guns then you'd think off the bat he's not gonna try anything. The ones anyone period has to worry about is the damn criminal he doesn't let anyone know anything and you have these little smartass thug types who think they can do as they please flash and go on. If I hadn't seen it I'd thought it was bullshit but today I don't doubt anything would happen
Never mind Illinois that has NO constitutional carry and very very strict CCw laws, yet their popping folks off by the bus load ever weekend in Chicago!
You put it in sight before the LEO gets near. You do not get in trouble unless you are not legally allowed to own a firearm.
You could tell them you have a concealed weapon and no permit. That may get you in a bit of trouble.
You can tell them you do not have a concealed handgun and risk getting into a lot more trouble if they find out you do.
Is there anything that keeps you from getting a concealed carry permit? Is there anything that keeps you from legally owning a firearm? There will be if you play around too much breaking the firearms laws that are still on the books.
I agree that the 2A gives us the right, but the lawmakers have infringed upon that right for a long time without many test cases running through the courts to strike the laws down as being unconstitutional. If you get caught breaking the laws on the books, you can do us all a favor by becoming the test case that will, hopefully, reestablish the 2A rights.
If you have a CHP, there should be no problem for you.
Your post asked about what should be done if you, or someone else, was not following laws that are presently on the books. Hopefully these laws will be declared to be unconstitutional one of these days.
my guess is if it does pass then you hope you don't run into one of those officers that are terrified he's gonna get popped by his next traffic stop.....myself I've never ran into an officer that acted in anyway crappy or otherwise toward me because I was carrying a gun.
Well said Patriot......How many here ever carried concealed before CCW was passed in NC?
Sure I have to play along with the rules to a degree as we all do but I have said it here before ...I believe in "Constitutional, I do what the Fu#k I want to do"!
All these so call laws are an infringement on our rights period.
Last edited:
Response to my email ............classic RINO BS
Representative Linda Hunt Williams
NC House District 37
Thank you for your note. Good to hear from you. I hope all is well with you and your family.
I have been involved in watching HB 746 move through the legislature and have supported that process. Anyone who knows me knows that I am a strong supporter of gun rights (the 2nd Amendment) and a NRA member. I believe that people have the right to protect themselves, their families, and others with a gun, if that is the only means available. Supporting a person’s right to protect their life and the lives of others is paramount to my belief system. My concerns for this bill are quite simple.
The final product of this bill did not address my primary concerns relative to the growing proliferation of handguns on the streets today with people who should not have handguns or who are not qualified or trained to use a handgun. It is irresponsible for me to say it is okay to put a handgun in the hands of an untrained person and more particularly one as young as 18 years old.
Many 18 year olds would be fine, but I am concerned with the many that would not have a skill level and emotional maturity (at that age) to manage the responsibility. Of course, most would say, well they (meaning 18 year olds) can carry a gun in the military, which is true, but in the military they are trained in how to use and handle a gun responsibly and it is usually not a handgun, but a rifle type of gun. I truly believe that training in gun safety saves lives. That does not mean we will not have exceptions where someone who was trained in gun safety will do irresponsible actions, it just sharply reduces the possibility.
During the debate of this bill, I received a lot of feedback from concerned constituents and our police. Our public safety officials’ concern was that allowing open and concealed-carry permit-less handguns on the street makes their jobs a lot harder because it legitimizes open and concealed carry of hand guns for criminals and everyone else in all the areas not listed in the concealed weapon permit areas in the bill (that is a lot of areas!), I also received calls from longtime gun owners and collectors who were concerned that putting no-permit and no-background check handguns into the hands and pockets of untrained and in many cases immature 18 year olds is simply irresponsible and I agree with that supposition.
Because of reasons above and after the expressed concerns of many of my constituents, HB 746 is not a bill that I could support. I would, however, support a handgun bill that would encourage safe handgun use through training, prevent and protect unsupervised children from getting access to handguns, and stop the growth of handguns on the streets (the gun of choice for gang members and criminals). HB 746 does not do that.
Please do not hesitate to contact if you have any further questions or concerns. Also, if you are in Raleigh, please stop by my office for a visit or contact my Legislative Assistant, Kathy Peters, regarding the many services my legislative office has available to you and your family.
Kind Regards,
Kathleen Peters
Legislative Assistant
Representative Linda Hunt Williams
NC House District 37
My Response
Thanks for your response,
I could counter these objections one-by-one with logic and common sense, but it’s better to just say “look at Vermont.” Green Mountain State residents have enjoyed constitutional carry since the Constitution was enacted. According to the FBI’s 2015 stats, Vermont is the safest state in the country, with a violent crime rate of 118 incidents per 100k residents.
That’s not to say Vermont is the safest state in the U.S. because of constitutional carry. But their crime rates show that constitutional carry doesn’t create crime. Why would it? Criminals get guns no matter what the law says (they’re criminals, after all). Constitutional carry makes it easier for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
Some states make getting a permit to carry a firearm cheap and easy (e.g. Washington). Some states make it extremely expensive and time-consuming, to the point of impossibility (e.g. New Jersey, Hawaii). Either way, for our society’s poorest members that don’t have the time or money to jump through all the hoops needed to secure a permit to carry a firearm. What’s more, they lack the ability and/or desire to deal with the bureaucracy in charge of issuing licenses. Constitutional carry makes it possible for all Americans to exercise their natural, civil and constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, regardless of their income or education.
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitutional states “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Just requiring Americans to petition the government to exercise their right to keep and bear arms is as clear an infringement as requiring Americans to pass a literacy test to exercise their right to vote. Clearer even.
Your concerns which are l am sure heartfelt, basically just follow the tired outdated and ill conceived party line used by the Democratic Party, and its sad to see this. I will post your response on several NC firearms related and political forum I am a member of and hope all who read it and remember on election day.
Representative Linda Hunt Williams
NC House District 37
Thank you for your note. Good to hear from you. I hope all is well with you and your family.
I have been involved in watching HB 746 move through the legislature and have supported that process. Anyone who knows me knows that I am a strong supporter of gun rights (the 2nd Amendment) and a NRA member. I believe that people have the right to protect themselves, their families, and others with a gun, if that is the only means available. Supporting a person’s right to protect their life and the lives of others is paramount to my belief system. My concerns for this bill are quite simple.
The final product of this bill did not address my primary concerns relative to the growing proliferation of handguns on the streets today with people who should not have handguns or who are not qualified or trained to use a handgun. It is irresponsible for me to say it is okay to put a handgun in the hands of an untrained person and more particularly one as young as 18 years old.
Many 18 year olds would be fine, but I am concerned with the many that would not have a skill level and emotional maturity (at that age) to manage the responsibility. Of course, most would say, well they (meaning 18 year olds) can carry a gun in the military, which is true, but in the military they are trained in how to use and handle a gun responsibly and it is usually not a handgun, but a rifle type of gun. I truly believe that training in gun safety saves lives. That does not mean we will not have exceptions where someone who was trained in gun safety will do irresponsible actions, it just sharply reduces the possibility.
During the debate of this bill, I received a lot of feedback from concerned constituents and our police. Our public safety officials’ concern was that allowing open and concealed-carry permit-less handguns on the street makes their jobs a lot harder because it legitimizes open and concealed carry of hand guns for criminals and everyone else in all the areas not listed in the concealed weapon permit areas in the bill (that is a lot of areas!), I also received calls from longtime gun owners and collectors who were concerned that putting no-permit and no-background check handguns into the hands and pockets of untrained and in many cases immature 18 year olds is simply irresponsible and I agree with that supposition.
Because of reasons above and after the expressed concerns of many of my constituents, HB 746 is not a bill that I could support. I would, however, support a handgun bill that would encourage safe handgun use through training, prevent and protect unsupervised children from getting access to handguns, and stop the growth of handguns on the streets (the gun of choice for gang members and criminals). HB 746 does not do that.
Please do not hesitate to contact if you have any further questions or concerns. Also, if you are in Raleigh, please stop by my office for a visit or contact my Legislative Assistant, Kathy Peters, regarding the many services my legislative office has available to you and your family.
Kind Regards,
Kathleen Peters
Legislative Assistant
Representative Linda Hunt Williams
NC House District 37
My Response
Thanks for your response,
I could counter these objections one-by-one with logic and common sense, but it’s better to just say “look at Vermont.” Green Mountain State residents have enjoyed constitutional carry since the Constitution was enacted. According to the FBI’s 2015 stats, Vermont is the safest state in the country, with a violent crime rate of 118 incidents per 100k residents.
That’s not to say Vermont is the safest state in the U.S. because of constitutional carry. But their crime rates show that constitutional carry doesn’t create crime. Why would it? Criminals get guns no matter what the law says (they’re criminals, after all). Constitutional carry makes it easier for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
Some states make getting a permit to carry a firearm cheap and easy (e.g. Washington). Some states make it extremely expensive and time-consuming, to the point of impossibility (e.g. New Jersey, Hawaii). Either way, for our society’s poorest members that don’t have the time or money to jump through all the hoops needed to secure a permit to carry a firearm. What’s more, they lack the ability and/or desire to deal with the bureaucracy in charge of issuing licenses. Constitutional carry makes it possible for all Americans to exercise their natural, civil and constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, regardless of their income or education.
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitutional states “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Just requiring Americans to petition the government to exercise their right to keep and bear arms is as clear an infringement as requiring Americans to pass a literacy test to exercise their right to vote. Clearer even.
Your concerns which are l am sure heartfelt, basically just follow the tired outdated and ill conceived party line used by the Democratic Party, and its sad to see this. I will post your response on several NC firearms related and political forum I am a member of and hope all who read it and remember on election day.
Last edited:
It's my constitutional right to break any law that violates it.
In the words of a local freedom loving activist in the USEnet era "You can have all the freedom you can seize". Expect it to be handed to you? Good luck with that. I ignore all sorts of laws that infringe on my freedoms and are of no business to others. I don't feel the least bit guilty in doing so.
Drug tests for welfare handouts? Yep. Outsource it to private industry....
In the words of a local freedom loving activist in the USEnet era "You can have all the freedom you can seize". Expect it to be handed to you? Good luck with that. I ignore all sorts of laws that infringe on my freedoms and are of no business to others. I don't feel the least bit guilty in doing so.
Drug tests for welfare handouts? Yep. Outsource it to private industry....
Last edited:
Agreed!!
Here's the RINOCUKS in convenient copy/paste form
Ted.[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Email away...
Ted.[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Email away...
Last edited:
I've been carrying a pistol for better than 40 years & no law has ever changed that. Been stopped several times years ago but was never asked if I had any firearms in my car. I don't have any duty to disclose that information. You young fellars do what your heart tells you to do. As for me I'll carry on as I always have ignorant unconstitutional laws will not alter what I do.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” This quote from Franklin was my Fathers favorite live by quote & was repeated often to his sons. He also said the only way to stop politicians from taking our god given rights in the future would be bullets. Are we there yet? IMO we were there in the '70's but we were too busy enjoying all the free love & drugs & just farting lazy to do what was required.
I certainly understand losing your ability to provide for your family is a very serious matter. But so is not being allowed to provide them with Freedom. It's a shame my generation has allowed this to happen. But we must step to that line & not allow it to go any further.
Curt
I certainly understand losing your ability to provide for your family is a very serious matter. But so is not being allowed to provide them with Freedom. It's a shame my generation has allowed this to happen. But we must step to that line & not allow it to go any further.
Curt
Burt Gummer
May Have Shorter Meme Posting Times Than U Normies
Staff member
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Vendor
Supporting Member
Salesman of the Year
Multi-Factor Enabled
Dammit old man, stop dropping f bombs in open forums lol
Don't mind him he's senile.
Same here. As my wife says, don't you have something worth living for? Because she knows how it will go down as I've long ago decided this country can take its courts and prisons and go sit in a pile. If it's going to come to that it's not going to be over something trivial.
Last edited:
Burt Gummer
May Have Shorter Meme Posting Times Than U Normies
Staff member
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Vendor
Supporting Member
Salesman of the Year
Multi-Factor Enabled
ApparentlyDon't mind him he's senile.
This has to be quoted as I see/feel the same. I hope a lot more feel the same. Are we at the 'tipping point' (as a coworker loved to say about trivial things, BTW I hated it till now)? I really don't know till the powder starts burning.
-R
Last edited:
I do not call you sheeple. I will call you a slave.
Before you preach to me that we are a "nation of laws," understand that every nation on Earth was and/or is a nation of laws.
Slavery was legal, and in many areas of the world, still legal.
The Holocaust was legal.
You confuse living a legal life with living a moral life; it is not the same thing.
If you're comfortable enough on the plantation, that's your prerogative. But no man is under any moral or ethical obligation for obedience to immoral or unjust law.
Men who are, while they may be good men personally, are responsible for the most reprehensible acts of tyranny and savagery in the history of mankind. It wasn't Hitler who murdered 6 million Jews, or Stalin who starved nearly the entire Ukrainian nation to death.
It was the law-abiding slaves on the Statist plantation that shot, gassed, starved and burned people.
And they did it with the law on their side.
Last edited:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land....
The Supremacy Clause is the only place in the Constitution where this exact term "Law of the Land"was used. Since the 2A is the "Supreme Law of the Land" as laid down in the Constitution I will abide by it. Any other "laws" which came later and restrict firearms or access to firearms to free men are unjust laws IMO.
Tyranny only needs men to blindly follow unjust laws to win.....and it been going on far too long.
The Supremacy Clause is the only place in the Constitution where this exact term "Law of the Land"was used. Since the 2A is the "Supreme Law of the Land" as laid down in the Constitution I will abide by it. Any other "laws" which came later and restrict firearms or access to firearms to free men are unjust laws IMO.
Tyranny only needs men to blindly follow unjust laws to win.....and it been going on far too long.
Last edited:
L
Lawless
Guest
So what is the status of the law? I read on Civitas that Cooper was going to sign it?
"People crushed by law, have no hopes but from power. If laws are their enemies, they will be enemies to laws; and those who have much to hope and nothing to lose, will always be dangerous." -Edmund Burke
T
trcubed
Guest
Sent to the Senate for consideration on 8Jun17. I haven't seen anything that says Cooper will do anything but veto it.
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2017&BillID=H746
Look, I understand this. I have a wife and two young kids, 5 and almost 2 respectively. It's a hell of a choice, choosing between a family's present material and emotional well-being or their future well-being of living free or not.
Our ancestors faced the same choice, only much more permanently and consequential for them than us choosing the same.
There was no life insurance for their widows and children. Women didn't have jobs; almost all of the work to feed, house and supply a family upon the man's shoulders.
Dying then would leave the family cold, hungry and destitute. It would leave them vulnerable to attack. Charging off to fight for Liberty, with the possibility of dying, was then a choice that could doom a family itself.
Equally daunting, being wounded - with no health insurance, no hospitals - could mean a grueling and lingering death as infection and gangrene overtook your body. Even worse, if you survived and we're disabled - now your destitute family must care for you even as it all but scrapes by.
If you survived and we're captured, it meant a diseased existence on a prison ship - the stench of sickness and death all around - and your family still poor and suffering.
Or perhaps you sold goods to the Rebels, were taken captive and subsequently hanged for treason.
That was the choice facing farmers, artisans, shopkeepers, doctors, lawyers and shipwrights. They knew that their choice may cost their families a terrible fate.
And still, they chose Freedom.
And yet here we sit, descendants of those brave and hearty men who made such a choice - terrified to exercise that same God-given Liberty they themselves never hesitated not to defend, but to demand and claw back through fire, sword and bayonet.
What a sad lot we've become.
Land of the "Free." Home of the "Brave."
Terms and Conditions apply.
Shame, gentlemen. Shame and indignity.
Not even willing to exercise a sliver of the Liberty that is ours by the Grace of God because mortal men say we shall not.
For shame.
Last edited:
D
Dadawada
Guest
You do as you like. Carry illegally and when you're caught you will be slapped with a class 2 misdemeanor. Get caught a 2nd or 3rd time it becomes a felony. Good luck with that in getting employed. And while you're at it, thanks for handing the left more to use against us...(so much for law abiding citizens owning guns and wanting gun rights).
You don't see the hypocrisy in your thinking. You want to break laws that don't fit your beliefs but I bet you're the first one to cry foul when an illegal wants to stay in this country because of HIS beliefs. You want to be able to pick and choose what laws you obey and not. Who decides what laws MUST be followed then? What if EVERYONE felt that way. What if the gangbanger in Durham felt he had been held down by "the man" and felt he should have access to your car...right then and there.
So I ask you...who decides then what laws are unjust or unconstitutional and should be followed or not...you?
Last edited:
Dale Gribble
Can't starve us out; Can't make us run
Charter Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Ben Franklin: "You know, Thomas; those words you're putting to parchment will get us both a one-way trip to the gallows if we lose this war that is to come."
Thomas Jefferson: says nothing, as he puts the finishing touches on the document that tells King George to go stuff a stick in his ass.
Balls.
Thomas Jefferson: says nothing, as he puts the finishing touches on the document that tells King George to go stuff a stick in his ass.
Balls.
lol. Jesus Lord, you love those fetters of yours, don't you!
I guess those first Americans should have just bought that damned tea, right?
Accepted those stamps?
Sat idly by as warrantless searches and seizures by corrupt agents of the State?
Thanked King and Country when their sons were pressed into service against their wills, used against their own families?
As their powder and ball was being seized, they should have just contacted Parliament to change the laws and respect their Rights as Englishmen?
Kissed the ring as their own representative governments were dissolved by bureaucrats appointed by the crown?
The State has always used violence or the threat of violence to cow a populace into subservience. It's what government is - force. And it always stands opposed to the People and the Public Liberty.
The difference between the Free Man and the Slave is that Free Men live how they will despite the threats of the State; the Slave is ruled by those same threats.
You explain the punishment the State will exact against any Citizen that exercises his or her Rights without the permission of the State and paying for the privilege, as though anyone here who dares preach such threats as immoral is ignorant of the law.
Most of us ar far more versed in the law, as both written and applied than you think. It's original intent, and how it's been perverted in a systematic design to reduce We, the People into slavery.
If the government can't scare people into behaving a certain way that violates Our Rights, what makes you think your post about the big scary boogeyman and what he'll do if we don't behave is going to accomplish?
And drop that whole "what will the Leftists think" crap. There's no amount of niceness or law-abiding behavior that gun owners could perform that will win them over and stop their unrelenting assault on our Rights. There's nothing we can do that will quench their thirst for control and to have their irrational fears and juvenile feelings accommodated enough to satisfy them.
I will not live my life in a diminished way, as a less Free Man on account of their opinions.
When I think of what it will take to hold what shred of Liberty we have left to us, and realize it may depend on those who are only willing to be as free as the government allows, I tremble for my Country.
Last edited:
Dale Gribble
Can't starve us out; Can't make us run
Charter Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
It's not just his beliefs...it is the supreme law of the land; the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. It is without ambiguity. It clearly states the RIGHT (not the privilege) of free people to not only keep arms, but to BEAR them as well, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Which amendment to the BOR enumerates the right of an invidual to immigrate here?
.gov seems content to do so
Which amendment to the BOR enumerates the right of a citizen to seize the property of another?
Absolutely.
It is up to each individual citizen to exercise his birthright as he/she sees fit and they are 100% righteous in doing so.
I can tell you exactly what taxation is, but instead we can discuss it and I'll let you decide.
Would you agree that taking 100% of what a man or woman earns for their labor would make them a slave? Every penny?
Last edited: