Wednesday, January 18, 2012

It should come as no surprise that the Boone Town Council is apparently following Blowing Rock's lead in banning handguns from as many public places as possible. Under the new state law however, they are restricted somewhat and cannot ban handguns in public areas other than in buildings and in "playgrounds, athletic fields, swimming pools, and athletic facilities.”  ".
I suppose we should be thankful that our county commissioners have not jumped on this anti-handgun bandwagon!

Thanks for your report! (CLICK HERE)


G.I.G said...

Does this surprise anyone here? Boone has been a leader in the nanny state, we know whats best for you model of governing for as long as i can remember.

They have battled to control what you can drink at what level music can be played and what business will be allowed in town and what will be kept out.

NewGuy said...

Don't forget GIG that they are also telling adults that they can't ride a bicycle in town limits without wearing a helmet! After all, we can't let grown ups make their own decisions on matters involving their own safety!

G.I.G said...

I am just waiting for them to get in to food regulation. You know that greasy chicken or doughnut is not good for you.

I will not be surprised at all when they try to attempt to regulate the foods sold in town.

That is unless your a chain then you will be given incentives to come and displace sole proprietors or family owned business's.

guy faulkes said...

It will do no good for an outpouring of support for the most efficient ability to use self defense (especially for women, the sick, or the elderly), just as it did no good in Blowing Rock, because all the Council people approve of violating our civil rights.I hope these council people realize that when a rape or mugging occurs in a town park, they will be equally as responsible for the crime as the perpetrator because they took away the means to defend yourself. This is despicable.

However, the bright spot is that the county seems to be in favor of supporting citizens over criminals, unlike the towns of Boone and Blowing Rock. Maybe the county can respond as they did over the appointment of ETJ representative issue and adjust the amount of county monies that go to municipal recreation accordingly.

Reader said...

Until we elect a person that's not afraid of their own shadow...we'll continue to have dictators. The rebels among us will continue to carry wherever they choose.

Johnny Rico said...

If Boone had the power, you can bet they would ban guns in every place possible. Good thing state law pre-empts them from doing that. If Hussein Obama is re-elected, your 2nd Amendment Rights are gone. Although I won't vote for RINO Romney who is also a gun grabber, I know that Hussein Obama is holding off on the issue until after the election. If he is re-elected, I give it 6 months or less until the first anti-2nd Amendment laws are passed.

Wolf's Head said...

The left hates independent people. They hate anyone who wants to protect themselves from aggression.

Making it illegal to protect yourself and your family is immoral and un-Constitutional, and only leads to more crime, and more oppression by the politicians.

An example is this gem from the Fiefdom of Bloomberg:

I'm sure that the Blowing Rock and Boone Town Councils wish they could run their towns like King Bloomberg runs his.

guy faulkes said...

From an email I received:

Some words to the wise. Shooting Advice from various Concealed Carry

If you own a gun, you will appreciate this. If not, you should get one and learn how to use it:

A: Guns have only two enemies rust and politicians.

B: Its always better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

C: Cops carry guns to protect themselves, not you.

D: Never let someone or something that threatens you get inside arms length.

E: Never say "Ive got a gun." If you need to use deadly force, the first sound they hear should be the safety clicking off.

F: The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes, the response time of a .357 is 1400 feet per second.

G: The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win - cheat if necessary.

H: Make your attacker advance through a wall of bullets . . . You may get killed with your own gun, but he'll have to beat you to death with it, cause it'll be

I: If you're in a gun fight:
1/ If you're not shooting, you should be loading.
2/ If you're not loading, you should be movin,
3/ If you're not movin', you're dead.

J: In a life and death situation, do something . . . It may be wrong, but do something!

K: If you carry a gun, people call you paranoid. Nonsense! If you have a gun, what do you have to be paranoid about?

L: You can say 'stop' or 'alto' or any other word, but a large bore muzzle pointed at someone's head is pretty much a universal language.

M: You cannot save the planet with that friendly weight in your pocket, but you may be able to save yourself and your family.

Anonymous said...

From another blog

I just talked with a friend that is trying to find out the particulars of how Boone is going to handle this. So far all he has got is the run around from the Town Clerk. It looks like they may be going to pass this without even holding a public hearing.

A public hearing would probably do no good because they have all ready made up their mind, but it would be nice to at least be able to speak to the Lords and Masters (as they consider themselves.).

NewGuy said...

anon...I believe that they have already had a couple of Public Hearings and have now put the issue on their agenda for a February vote.

Looks like the council is somewhat divided on the issue -

Anonymous said...

When were these hearings held, New Guy/ I certainly never saw them advertised.

NewGuy said...

Anon..I have not followed this issue very closely, but I do recall reading of a couple of public hearings on the subject as reported in the Democrat...

This recent article:

Refers to some hearings about 6 months ago.

You could probably search previous Democrat articles on their web site.

guy faulkes said...

I am confused, New Guy. I thought Anonymous was talking about the proposed ordinance to ban concealed carry in parks, not the noise ordinance. This was the subject of the preceding posts in the thread.

Reader said...

Just curious, if someone who has a permit can legally carry, would the town not be held liable if that person was hurt if a situation that they could have protected themselves? You would think they would be held liable if that person were injured.

guy faulkes said...

Reader, no the town would not.

When the concealed carry law was first passed, there was a concentrated movement by anti-self defense people (anti-gunners) to have businesses post their property against concealed carry. This was countered by an effort to let these businesses know that as they had elected to take away the best means to protect yourself, they had assumed responsibility for your safety and you would sue them if you were harmed o robbed on their property. This became a very large concern so the Legislature passed a law that says you cannot sue an entity for either posting or not posting it's property against concealed carry.

All one can do is keep tract of those that vote to disarm you on public property and let them know that they are morally considered equally responsible for how your were harmed as was the person that actually harmed you.

Remember the names of Albert Yount, Dough Matheson, and Jim Steele of the Blowing Rock Town Council, as they supported criminals' interests over yours.

NewGuy said...

guy faulkes said...

I am confused, New Guy. I thought Anonymous was talking about the proposed ordinance to ban concealed carry in parks, not the noise ordinance.

guy...I think you are correct!~That's what I get for juggling between threads. My apologies for any confusion I may have caused..

All I can say is, "whoops!"

Reader said...

Thanks Guy. I was reading about Ohio and how Buckeye Firearms Foundation sued the state to make the law uniform across the state of Ohio.

Reader said...

Guy, reading this is why I'm confused.

§ 14‑415.23. Statewide uniformity.

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, their appurtenant premises, and parks. (1995, c. 398, s. 1.)

guy faulkes said...

Reader, the Castle Doctrine as the omnibus gun bill was called, was passed to make gun laws equitable across the state. It basically says that municipalities and counties cannot post public lands other than playgrounds, sports fields, pools, and active recreation facilities. This posting ability was added by an amendment from anti-self defense proponents in both parties. They cannot post parks and walking trails. Buildings can still be posted.

Many municipalities and counties have decided not to post at all because they believe in the right of self defense. This is acceptable under the law because it was set up to limit the power of local government. They can be less strict than the guidelines, but not more so. Thus the term uniformity.

Many others have decided to try to circumvent the law by declaring everything they own as active recreational areas. Blowing Rock, for instance, says that restrooms and picnic areas are such. Boone has asked it attorney to draw up the most restrictive ordinance possible. This goes against both the letter and the spirit of the Castle Doctrine.

In other posts, you have stated you plan to carry in spit of these postings. Be careful of this as a friend was telling me of a lady that was searched by local law enforcement because she was reported to be carrying a gun in a restaurant that served alcohol. She was not. It turned out that the person that claimed she had the gun was a person with which she had argued over the gun issue in letters to the editor. If you become known as a pro-gun activist or even that you will argue the issue in public, you might expect to have people report you even if them have no idea of where you are carrying on not. They are fishing for something to use in the press.

This particular issue may be mute in restaurants shortly as carrying in these places will probably soon be legal because of revised state legislation.

guy faulkes said...

You have to wonder about the timing of the universe. I no sooner mention the CCW permit law being considered by the State Legislature in my preceding post when I receive this.

I am in the process of writing my own letter to those committee members mentioned in the link. It may be no more effective than a cut and paste letter, but it gives me a chance to vent.