Sean has a fantastic breakdown of the entire bill over at NC Gun Blog and I won’t duplicate his effort. Suffice it to say that for the most part, HB650 gives North Carolinians the Castle Doctrine and the bill also cleans up a bunch of other antique and misguided gun laws.
It’s not perfect, but it’s a major improvement. There was some question as to whether New Bern Bevvie would sign it, but it apparently the staffers flipped over the Magic Eight Ball and it said “SIGN IT, YOU FOOL!” so she did.
Sadly, the ability to lock your firearm in your car while at work can still be punished by stupid or misguided employers. Most Demonrats and several really stupid Republicans (my own representative, Leo Daughtry, included) voted for the McGrady Amendment. Rumor has it that the stupid Republicans that voted for this asinine amendment did so at the behest of that gun-grabber-in-sheeps-clothing Rephensative Paul Stam for the spurious reasoning of protecting the property rights of businesses.
He doesn’t mention the property rights of automobile owners. Somehow he thinks that the inside of my car is subject to no property rights while the pavement it’s sitting on is. What’s next Stam? Going to authorize firing people because they have a Bible in their car? Or a newspaper? How about a bumper sticker?
There are two other bills out there that this bunch is going to have to vote on next session. HB111 is restaurant carry and HB63 is another parking lot carry bill. That next session will come up right before the next election.
Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel
And I responded thusly:
I don't have a problem with what you suggesting that I read the whole thing but rather with the way you suggested it along with the remarks you made earlier at the working group. I guess an apology is not forthcoming.
G.S. 14-409.40 puts limits on the power of local authorities to put restrictions on firearms. This is not in dispute.
The rest of the section includes certain exceptions. It appears in the referral to G.S. 153A-129 that you do have the authority to regulate some restrictions. I think there's plenty of room to argue that constitutionally, you don't. Those exceptions were put in quite a while ago. The national trend is against allowing local authorities to trump civil rights.
The real question is this: Why are you so determined to find out?
Wouldn't it be better for everyone if you just fixed the problem at hand, namely negligent gunfire, rather than trying to turn all of Johnston County into Cary?
CC: The Usual Suspects
It is not in the nature of politics that the best men should be elected. The best men do not want to govern their fellowmen.
Chairman Mims responded thusly:
As with all citizens of this county you are welcome to your own opinions. The State Statue 14-409.40 that you said had bearing on this ordinance stated in item ( f ) Nothing contained in this section prohibits municipalities or counties from application of their authority under G.S. 153A-129, 160A-198, etc.. 153A-129 Firearms states: a county may by ordinance regulate, restrict, or prohibit the discharge of firearms at any time or place except when used to take birds or animals pursuant to Chapter 113, Subchapter III, when used in defense of person or property, or when used pursuant to lawful directions of law-enforcement officers. A county may also regulate the display of firearms on the public roads, sidewalks, alleys, or other public property. This section does not limit a county's authority to take action under Chapter14, Article 36A.
This is why I said to read the whole thing.
Have a nice day.
Is it just me or does he seem a lot more interested in whether he CAN do this thing than whether he SHOULD?
Fox News reports that the US Senate has voted 63-37 along a largely party-line vote to make Elena Kagan the next US Supreme Court justice. She will be replacing Justice Paul Stevens, another demented idiot, and continue his work of inventing invisible passages in the Constitution.
Because of Steven's far-left ideology, Kagan's presence on the court is not expected to alter the current balance.
It may, however, alter the careers of five Republican senators that
bent crossed over to vote for the far-left-wing-ideologue-with-no-judicial-experience.
Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Dick Lugar of Indiana and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire all signaled that they either plan to retire before they are up for election again or that they've been smoking crack. Have they not noticed that conservatism is on the upswing? And that we don't have much use for the mushy middle? Have they not noticed that 2008's Republican nominee for president is currently having to fight a primary battle? Idiots.
It was something of a surprise that after his disgraceful flip-flopping during the Obamacare disaster and the Cornhusker Kickback scandal that DemonRat Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska voted against Kagan. I guess he hopes that Nebraskans are stupid and have short memories. Don't worry Ben, we'll remind them!
The biggest surprise coming out of the vote is that Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts remembered who brung him to the dance and voted against Ellie the Red. Thanks Scott! Keep up the good work!
There never was much hope of defeating Kagan but that's no excuse for voting for the least qualified person to be nominated in 100 years.