The North Carolina Senate Judiciary Committee voted Tuesday to approve a bill allowing gun owners to carry concealed handguns without obtaining a permit, sending it to another panel.
Senate Bill 50, which bears the title “Freedom to Carry NC,” would authorize permitless concealed carry for individuals who are U.S. citizens, at least 18 years of age, and not otherwise prohibited by law, according to the bill’s text.
Its primary sponsors are Sens. Danny Britt (R-Hoke, Robeson, Scotland), Warren Daniel (R-Buncombe, Burke, McDowell), and Eddie Settle (R-Alexander, Surry, Wilkes, Yadkin). Britt and Daniel are two of the Judiciary Committee’s co-chairs.
Senate leader Phil Berger is backing the measure, he shared when sponsors filed it in February.
North Carolina law currently requires gun owners to obtain permits from their local sheriff’s office in order to carry a concealed handgun. Concealed carry also requires a minimum of eight hours of training.
“We believe that our constitution is clear that law abiding citizens should be allowed to constitutionally carry,” Britt said. “We believe they should be able to constitutionally carry without having to jump through the hoops that you do for a concealed carry permit.”
If passed into law, North Carolina would become the 30th state to allow what proponents call “constitutional carry” — meaning concealed carry without a permit. The legislation would still allow concealed carry permits to be issued “for the purpose of reciprocity when traveling in another state.”
This isn’t just smoke. While NC has an awful, terrible, no good, very bad governor, like we almost always do, the senate and house is controlled enough by conservatives that they can override a veto.
So you’ll have to watch the entire video in order to understand. I did, and I do. In fact, I knew where he was headed by half way through the video or even less.
BLUF. This either stops with the appeals court, in which case it may be cited in the future by other courts, or it may be ignored by other courts, or it goes to the supreme court for a final ruling in Range.
In order for it to go to the supreme court, the U.S. government must have an interest, i.e., have standing. In order to have standing, they must pursue the case as is.
Then it’s possible to switch their position during final submittals to the court. This is what Mark recommends. The whole thing is a bit twisted, but these are the rules.
So don’t be surprised when you see the U.S. appeal the Range decision to the supreme court rather than let it die at appeals court.
“A militia when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, and render regular troops in great measure unnecessary. The powers to form and arm the militia, to appoint their officers, and to command their services, are very important; nor ought they in a confederated republic to be lodged, solely, in any one member of the government. First, the constitution ought to secure a genuine [ ] and guard against a select militia, by providing that the militia shall always be kept well organized, armed, and disciplined, and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms; and that all regulations tending to render this general militia ― useless and defenceless, by establishing select corps of militia, or distinct bodies of military men, not having permament interests and attachments in the community is to be avoided. …To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them….”
Then he quite rhetorically asks, “What about well regulated?”
Go read David’s piece.
Here’s what well regulated means from the Oxford English Dictionary.
“The equation of time … is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial.”
Because by design the unorganized militia isn’t under the control of the FedGov (as intended by the founders), and totalitarians and tyrants want everything to be under the control of centralized governments. That’s why. They always have wanted this, and still want it today. The controller mentality hasn’t changed in the entire history of the world.
They fear armed, trained Americans. Therefore, never give up your firearms, and stay trained.
These are the people who would presume to rule you, knowing nothing whatsoever about either firearms or the law. It’s truly remarkable how ignorant judges can be.
On another note, I know I’ve mentioned this before, but it bears repeating, that arguing for semi-automatic firearms because they aren’t fully automatic firearms and thus not in military use is the wrong tactic. One of these days, some bright, inspired, progressive lawyer is going to make hay out of that tactic.
First of all, it runs contrary to the purpose of the second amendment, which is to ameliorate tyranny, or in other words, self defense against both individuals and the state. The only reason for taking firearms is that the government intends to do something to you that wouldn’t be possible if you were armed.
Second, this tactic is just factually false. Pistols are semi-automatic weapons, as are the Benelli M4 shotguns the Marines used to clear Now Zad, Afghanistan, of the Taliban. Designated Marksmen still use both bolt action rifles and AR pattern rifles, and shooting fully automatic as a designated marksman makes no sense. Sniper rifles are virtually universally bolt action rifles due to the bolt lockup and chamber dimensions as compared to gas guns. Many times I have conveyed that my youngest son used both the SAW and the M4 in Fallujah, and he never used the M4 in full auto mode. None of the Marines did. The “military use” mantra is a distinction without a difference.
Third, we are poisoning the court record with all of this language about semi-automatic versus automatic and how one is for civilian use and one is for military use. This could come back to harm the second amendment community when all of the examples of semi-automatic firearms usage is cataloged by some enterprising controller.
Just stop doing it. I understand all about winning the case before you, but these records could become very important down the road.
Well, it is Illinois, and the circuit court may ride roughshod over this decision like they did Judge McGlynn’s earlier decision. Here is the decision.
For all the good I think is in here, I still think he (and virtually all other judges and justices) miss the point about the second amendment existing for the amelioration of tyranny. Personal self defense is a cleaned up, sanitized version of the 2A meant to make the 2A more palatable for the inside-the-beltway types.
Self-defense must include defense against the tyranny of the state to be complete.
Sadly, a lot of gun owners will believe her, especially 60+ year old Fudd upland bird hunters who only believe you have the right to own an over-under. Don’t get me wrong. I love a good over-under. That just has nothing at all to do with the RKBA.
Silence from the Harris campaign on this blockbuster. She wants to ban handguns entirely. Thats how much she "respects the Second Amendment." pic.twitter.com/bekCTnQZQ0
30 years ago, President Clinton signed the federal Assault Weapons Ban into law. During the 10 years it was in effect, people across our nation were far less likely to die in a mass shooting.
Kamala: “Just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked home doesn't mean that we're not going to walk into that home and check to see if you're being responsible.”pic.twitter.com/PpFivXGzp8
2 months, 3 weeks ago
