North Carolina declared 'gun free zone' in anticipation of Hurricane Earl

[littletommy]

Bill

Perhaps I didn't choose my words carefully enough in my previous post, and I'll be the first to admit, I was extremely angry when I posted last night, after reading the original post. In no way was I condoning the shooting or killing of anyone, but merely stating that in an extreme emergency situation, I would defend what is mine. Hopefully, that type of thing never happens to any of us, and honestly, I don't think cops or anyone else will have time to go door to door in that situation. I understand your position as moderator, and apologize for causing a problem.

 

[PatriotPride]

It seems to me that intent is the key factor in determining the conspiracy of a crime. Indeed without intent, there can be no conspiracy.

That being said, I certainly hope that is is your intent to protect your rights, just as I hope it is not the intent of any governing body to deny us of said rights. If any group conspires to deny me my rights, I fully intend to prevent such and I feel that it was the intent of the Founders that we do so.

Which is all fine and dandy. HOWEVER, I'd say that the main point here is that these things should not be discussed on an open forum. There ARE enemies of freedom who read this forum, and they MAY jump at any chance to shut it down. Even an UNSUCCESSFUL charge/lawsuit against you for "conspiracy" can have vast consequences. Likewise, why hand a police officer OR ANYONE, for that matter, a loaded firearm? The potential for destruction is simply too great.

There is a time, and a place. This is not the place.

 

[RichardR]

I am not an attorney & I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night but I don't believe a person discussing a hypothetical course of action in a hypothetical scenario, counts as a criminal conspiracy.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[jedi]

Does anyone have a link to this bill once it was codified as an IC Code. This would be a handy piece of legislation to have a copy of

duh.... should have read the entire thread IC 10-14-3-33.5

Okay back to the topic @ hand since the "intent stuff" is just bogging my mind.

The IC code above "somewhere" in it states that the STATE (of Indiana) along with it's sub-units can not take away firearms during an emergency.

I recall reading somewhere else (on this boad) that the governor had the ability to temp. suspect firearm sales and take firearms "off the street".

Is this now wrong? outdated? Supressed by this new law?
:confused:

BTW the "laws" can say whatever they want but at the end of the day if you have another Katrina and society breaks down like it did then. Laws are meaningless at that moment in time.

 

[PatriotPride]

I am not an attorney & I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night but I don't believe a person discussing a hypothetical course of action in a hypothetical scenario, counts as a criminal conspiracy.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Since WHEN has our legal system TRULY favored the defendant? What is LAWFUL and what is DONE in our legal system are two entirely different things

 

[Bill of Rights]

It seems to me that intent is the key factor in determining the conspiracy of a crime. Indeed without intent, there can be no conspiracy.

That being said, I certainly hope that is is your intent to protect your rights, just as I hope it is not the intent of any governing body to deny us of said rights. If any group conspires to deny me my rights, I fully intend to prevent such and I feel that it was the intent of the Founders that we do so.

I intend to follow the Founders' intent, as best I can interpret it. They were faced with a terrible choice: subjugation to the Crown or treason with risk of life, limb, family, and property. Considering that to burn a man's home to the ground in a time when there was no such thing as "insurance" quite literally not only took away all his possessions but also deprived the family of its breadwinner. They fought a war, we teach at Appleseed, not for their own sakes but for the sake of their posterity: Their children, their childrens' grandchildren, and their grandchildren, etc. Their goal was to provide a better life, which is to say, to provide a third choice, a third response to tyranny-its removal by the vote. By direct, personal involvement in our government, our Founders' intent was that we would have an alternative that lay outside of "war or submission".

Bill

Perhaps I didn't choose my words carefully enough in my previous post, and I'll be the first to admit, I was extremely angry when I posted last night, after reading the original post. In no way was I condoning the shooting or killing of anyone, but merely stating that in an extreme emergency situation, I would defend what is mine. Hopefully, that type of thing never happens to any of us, and honestly, I don't think cops or anyone else will have time to go door to door in that situation. I understand your position as moderator, and apologize for causing a problem.

Thank you. It was not your post nor any one person's post that got the other thread closed and the post I made in this thread was just a "heads-up". As I said, there have been no warnings, no infractions, no bans, and as of now, I intend not to issue any. Re-routing discussion to topics that are not as fraught with peril, or in the case of this thread, back to the original topic, is far preferable to me to ending discussion or even giving the perception of attempting to control thought.

Which is all fine and dandy. HOWEVER, I'd say that the main point here is that these things should not be discussed on an open forum. There ARE enemies of freedom who read this forum, and they MAY jump at any chance to shut it down. Even an UNSUCCESSFUL charge/lawsuit against you for "conspiracy" can have vast consequences. Likewise, why hand a police officer OR ANYONE, for that matter, a loaded firearm? The potential for destruction is simply too great.

There is a time, and a place. This is not the place.

Very well said. I'm told by those with access to such information that we are often read by folks on government servers. Speaking for myself, I welcome them. INGO is a place of discussion, not of insurrection, and I know our mod team works da*n hard to make sure that stays true. We don't catch every post; those days are long, LONG past, but we do have members who read and report when a post is of concern to them, for mod review. There are nine of us with access to do so, and there will be differences in how we handle things. I try to strike a balance that makes allowances for errors while still respecting the rules Fenway has put in place. I do so with as little personal bias as possible. That means that if a member who is my friend was to issue a personal insult to someone, he/she would be as likely as anyone else to have his post deleted and be issued an infraction. Conversely, if I've infracted someone for a post that violated the rules of the site, it's not personal, and if that person was to post that he (or she) was a new parent the next day, that person would likely get (at a minimum) a congratulatory reply from me.

OK, I think this threadjack has gone far enough... Let's get back to the issue of the NC governor and her shallow, kittens-and-unicorn-farts belief that her action will actually have any effect on criminals.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[PatriotPride]

^^Thank you. Where would a gentleman, such as myself, be able to acquire a concoction of kittens-and-unicorn-farts? I've been searching quite diligently for some time now and just can't seem to find any

One question I saw addressed earlier---what happens when the government forces them to relocate? They are effectively barred at present from removing a firearm from their home...would the order to leave the home and LEAVE the firearm(s) be considered unConstitutional at that time?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Okay back to the topic @ hand since the "intent stuff" is just bogging my mind.

The IC code above "somewhere" in it states that the STATE (of Indiana) along with it's sub-units can not take away firearms during an emergency.

I recall reading somewhere else (on this boad) that the governor had the ability to temp. suspect firearm sales and take firearms "off the street".

Is this now wrong? outdated? Supressed by this new law?
:confused:

My understanding of it, and as noted, I'm not a lawyer, is that yes, this is a power the state government, including the governor who signed off on it, has removed from itself. Until I saw the quoted section of the IC, I was of the understanding that the law was solely applicable to "units" (counties, cities, and townships), but 10-14-3-33.5 is pretty specific:

IC 10-14-3-33.5
Regulation of firearms
Sec. 33.5. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), the state, a political subdivision, or any other person may not prohibit or restrict the lawful possession, transfer, sale, transportation, storage, display, or use of firearms or ammunition during:
(1) a disaster emergency;
(2) an energy emergency; or
(3) a local disaster emergency;
declared under this chapter.
(b) Subsection (a) does not authorize the possession, transfer, sale, transportation, storage, display, or use of firearms or ammunition during an emergency described in subsection (a):
(1) in or on school property, in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function, or on a school bus in violation of IC 20-33-8-16 or IC 35-47-9-2;
(2) on the property of:
(A) a child caring institution;
(B) an emergency shelter care child caring institution;
(C) a private secure facility;
(D) a group home; or
(E) an emergency shelter care group home;
in violation of 465 IAC 2-9-80, 465 IAC 2-10-79, 465 IAC 2-11-80, 465 IAC 2-12-78, or 465 IAC 2-13-77; (3) on the property of a penal facility (as defined in IC 35-41-1-21);
(4) in violation of federal law;
(5) in or on property belonging to an approved postsecondary educational institution (as defined in IC 21-7-13-6(b));
(6) on the property of a domestic violence shelter;
(7) at a person's residence; or
(8) on property owned, operated, controlled, or used by an entity that:
(A) is required to:
(i) conduct a vulnerability assessment; and
(ii) develop and implement a site security plan;
under the United States Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards issued April 9, 2007; or
(B) is required to have a security plan under the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-295.
As added by P.L.90-2010, SEC.2.

in that it specifies that the
"state, a political subdivision, or any other person" may not use a disaster or other emergency as an excuse to disarm or otherwise control firearms or ammunition in any way they do not under more normal circumstances, but it also doesn't give the people any special permission to take guns to school properties, etc.
[/QUOTE]

BTW the "laws" can say whatever they want but at the end of the day if you have another Katrina and society breaks down like it did then. Laws are meaningless at that moment in time.[/quote]

True. At that time, someone shows up at your door to collect your guns, you can point to the IC all you want, but there's no judge there to tell them they can't do that. The advice you get from them will be to comply and seek redress later.
I do recall hearing that during Katrina, those people who did successfully defend themselves were not further troubled by attempts to disarm them. I'm not sure what those people did in their own defense; If they set up a good, solid defense, it may have been too manpower-intensive to attempt to go any further or it might have been that there were enough oath-keepers (or the people whose mindset formed that group) around to go elsewhere and focus on doing the job they were there to do.

May such people always be around when they are needed.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[calcot7]

I was gonna say something but remembered that, "We the People" have already lost our first ammendment rights.

 

[Prometheus]

Absolutely disgraceful!

Where in the 'f do these people get off thinking this is something that is acceptable?!?!?!?!

Anyone who voted for it, enacted it, just declared it and tries to enforce this should be thrown in PRISON for TREASON!

Second Amendment Foundation Online are sueing the Gov.

Wish them luck!

Tagging for a couple months from now when the nra starts circulating dvd's and claiming they single handed stopped the NC gun ban of 2010...

Common, you now it's coming they did it in naw'lins and they'll do it again.

 

[Bill of Rights]

^^Thank you. Where would a gentleman, such as myself, be able to acquire a concoction of kittens-and-unicorn-farts? I've been searching quite diligently for some time now and just can't seem to find any

Ask any Democrat. They have a surfeit of them.

One question I saw addressed earlier---what happens when the government forces them to relocate? They are effectively barred at present from removing a firearm from their home...would the order to leave the home and LEAVE the firearm(s) be considered unConstitutional at that time?

Interesting question. I can see how it would be, but before a court, it would likely be what they call a "case of first impression", meaning nothing similar has been heard before. It also means it could go either way and set precedent (not legally binding precedent, but such that the second time such a case presented itself, it would no longer be a case of first impression.) The court could still rule in opposition to the first court's decision, but it would be less likely to do so.

The above is my guess. I do not hold a law degree and don't want to portray myself as something I'm not.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Eddie]

The above is my guess. I do not hold a law degree and don't want to portray myself as something I'm not.

Blessings,
Bill

You mean you don't look like your avatar?

 

[jedi]

The above is my guess. I do not hold a law degree and don't want to portray myself as something I'm not.

Blessings,
Bill

You mean you don't look like your avatar?

Eddie what he really means to say is that it's above his pay grade.

 

[cosermann]

Unfortunately, the Democrat Gov. of NC is NOT up for re-election in November. I hope the people of NC remember this when the next election rolls around.

 

[ddenny5]

I thought this applies everywhere when a state of emergency is invoked. Even in Indiana during a flood when they declare it a "state of emergency". Seems like a good idea to me. A simple declaration and the government is in total control, no silly problems with some "bill of rights".

Indiana fixed this a few years ago. Not the case here anymore.

 

[Bill of Rights]

You mean you don't look like your avatar?

I'm not a law, just a gun Bill.

Eddie what he really means to say is that it's above his pay grade.

B'zackly. That said, though, if someone who DOES have a law degree wants to double-check my guess and verify it, I would not object to that at all. Either they'll tell me I'm correct or I'll learn something new. Win/win.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[mrjarrell]

Paul Valone, the Charlotte Gun Rights Examiner take a long hard look at the situation in NC. The governor there is either a liar or clueless. Maybe both. North Carolinian's are hosed while this state of emergency is still ongoing. Hunters in other parts of the state could be arrested starting today.

Is Governor Perdue lying about North Carolina State of Emergency? - Charlotte gun rights | Examiner.com

 

[jedi]

I'm not a law, just a gun Bill.



B'zackly. That said, though, if someone who DOES have a law degree wants to double-check my guess and verify it, I would not object to that at all. Either they'll tell me I'm correct or I'll learn something new. Win/win.

Blessings,
Bill

& thus why you will never beat the anti-2A liberal army. The CORRECT line of thinking is. I'm correct or I'll change the law and make myself correct!

come on bill you should know this.

 

[IndyJeff]

I'm in NC on vacation right now and all of the businesses still have signs on their doors stating that you cannot carry a concealed weapon due to the storm approaching. I rented a house on the beach and the last time I checked the nearest "storm" was a thunderstorm coming from the west. I talked with a resident here and he says everyone just carries anyway.

 

[Lucas156]

I'm in NC on vacation right now and all of the businesses still have signs on their doors stating that you cannot carry a concealed weapon due to the storm approaching.

Makes perfect sense