NC: Can you be charged for Concealed Carry in a Supermarket?

[DMK]

Apparently so. I'm especially surprised this happened in Western NC. Usually you hear about this stuff happening on the central or eastern side of the state.

Watauga D.A. wantonly misinterprets restaurant carry ban;
COULD YOU BE PROSECUTED FOR CARRYING IN A GROCERY STORE?

At precisely the moment House Bill 111 for concealed carry in restaurants is languishing in the Senate Judiciary II Committee, a western North Carolina man is being prosecuted for carrying a firearm in violation of GS 14-269.3 – a place where “alcohol is sold and consumed” – EVEN THOUGH HE IS CLEARLY INNOCENT.

To be clear: GRNC is not defending the actions of the man in question. He also faces the common law charge of “going armed to the terror of the public” and might well be guilty as charged. But the arrogance of local law enforcement and the district attorney clearly signal that you too might come under the prosecutorial knife, and that we need restaurant carry RIGHT NOW!

Arrested in Burnsville, Larry Dean Hunter is charged with “Going armed to the terror of the public” and violating GS 14-269.3, which bars firearms “where alcoholic beverages are sold and consumed.” The problem? He was arrested for displaying a firearm in an INGLES SUPERMARKET, where alcohol might be sold, but is definitely not “consumed.”

An innocent mistake on the part of law enforcement? Think again. GRNC president Paul Valone actually called the office of District Attorney Jerry Wilson, representing Avery, Madison, Mitchell, Watauga, and Yancey Counties. Here is how the conversation went:

Valone: “I am calling regarding the potential misinterpretation of a pending case regarding our concealed handgun statute in Yancey County. Can you direct me who to talk to?”

D.A. office: “Are you a defendant or a relative in the case?”

Valone: “I don’t want to talk about the case. I want to talk to the District Attorney about GS 14-269.3.”

D.A. office: “I’m terminating this call now.” CLICK.

Given that GRNC had already made attempts to contact the Burnsville Chief of Police, Brian Buchanan, and did contact the town’s mayor, Danny McIntosh, it is safe to say that D.A. Jerry Wilson is aware of the case and dodging questions on a prosecution they clearly intend to continue, despite the fact that GS 14-269.3 clearly does not apply.

http://grnc.org/alerts/alert_8_1_11.htm

[Patriot86]

Isin't it illegal or atleast against department of public health regulations to drink alchahol at a super market?


sold and consumed


And consumed in the keyword and im sorry but in the jeopardy world I do not think "drinking alcohol" would be on the top 10 list of things you do at a super market.



To be fair, did this super market have some kind of a built in restaurant? Was it a "stuckys" or "pigley wigley" type place, or was it a 7/11?


We must be missing something due to the vagueness of the article, if we are not then IMO this is a miscarriage of justice. I think they key here might be the manner in which the firearm was exposed.

[wally626]

I have no clue on the NC laws, but “going armed to the terror of the public” is usually charged against open carriers in NC. Perhaps he printed a little too much or had the gun exposed.

At least in VA some grocery stores do have wine tastings. If they have a special permit to do this I do not know.

[blume357]

I thought open carry was legal in N.C.

so the concealed carry law should not apply if the guy was open carrying...

and yes as far as I know one can open or conceal carry in a grocery store in N.C....

sounds like somebody over stepped.... then again, one never gets even close to the full story on these things.

[Hardcase]

I don't mean to be a wet blanket, but Paul Valone pretty much ruined his chance to talk to the DA when he opened by saying that he wanted to talk about the misinterpretation of the law in regards to the case, then followed up by saying that he wasn't calling to talk about the case. Obviously he was. And, of course, the DA isn't going to discuss a case over the phone.

Assuming that drinking on the premises where beer is sold is illegal (as it is where I live), then it's going to be tough to make GS 14-269.3 stick. The other one...who knows.

I can see a plea deal coming out of this. But I don't know about dodging questions. I wouldn't expect the government agencies concerned to talk to some guy over the phone about the case.

[DMK]

I agree that Paul Valone does tend to add a bit of drama to his reporting, and it does appear that he is using this story to push his agenda of passing the carry in restaurants bill, though overall GRNC does good and I also feel that supporting that bill is a good thing.

I also agree that there appears to be more to this story that appears on the surface. Especially in WNC. That is a very rural area, pretty far away from Asheville and almost everyone around here owns guns. Perhaps this guy was legitimately threatening in some way. Though you think there would be some sort of disturbance charge if that was the case.

However, the DA's charge of violating the CCW regulations due to alcohol being sold is disturbing. I have never seen an Ingles supermarket where alcohol was consumed. In fact, I'm pretty sure that in itself would be illegal, armed or not. Hopefully that charge will get thrown out, just for precedence sake.

[brickeyee]

At least in VA some grocery stores do have wine tastings. If they have a special permit to do this I do not know.

A special permit is required.

A regular ABC permit for a store is for sales ONLY.

NO consumption.

Someone is going to get butt hurt when this gets in front of a judge (like whomever prosecutes it).

The law clearly says "sold AND consumed."

[MLeake]

Was there some sort of tasting going on at the NC store on that date? If so, that could be a loophole the DA is using.

But from what's been reported, it just seems like an abuse of power, so far.

[blume357]

Like I said, there has to be more to the story.... or possibly even less.... since the only news link so far has been the grassroots one....

[zukiphile]

Originally Posted by Hardcase

I don't mean to be a wet blanket,...

Far from it.

All this recording shows is an attorney whose office will not take a call from an adverse party who may be represented by counsel. I've had this happen twice in two decades, and both times got on the phone immediately to opposing counsel to let them know that I did not initiate the contact and that I terminated the call as soon as his client identified himself.

The DA's case may stink, but hanging up was the ethical thing to do.

[youngunz4life]

you can crack a cream soda on the way to the register just like you could a beer though it is much more uncommon for the latter to happen(cream soda looks like a beer bottle anyways and comes in a sixpack and nobody has ever said anything to me).

Not only that, the law as written in an earlier post can be interpreted in different ways, so that can allow the attempted prosecution.

*also many grocery stores(near the beaches as example or tourist areas) have places where people can sit and tip one back. The store probably has the right but doesn't use it(wine as a good example mentioned for tastings).

[AirForceShooter]

My daughter lives in NC.
When it comes to CCW the state sucks.
When I'm there I usually don't carry.

AFS

[Single Six]

I work as a full time LEO in N.C. I can't speak for other jurisdictions, but where I'm at, the "armed to the terror of the public" thing is usually reserved for cases like a guy walking down a city street carrying a rifle or shotgun. We do have CCW laws, but last time I checked, we're also an "open carry" state, and anyone old enough to legally possess a handgun is not prohibited from openly wearing same. I very rarely encounter OC folks when I'm working, and I personally don't favor it...but until such time as OC becomes illegal, I'll leave them be.

[blume357]

So single six, I guess you don't open carry either?

Sorry that will open a different can of worms, we can debate in a different post. (How we sheeple have been brain washed into believing that it's okay for government 'enforcement' agents to open or conceal carry but not regular citizens)

anywho... would not the terror to the public require more than just open carrying of either a long or short gun since doing either is perfectly legal in N.C.?

[MLeake]

Oddly, NC sounds more and more like Connecticut. We've had some Connecticut folk post about a government mindset that if anybody complains, then the Open Carrier is de facto disturbing the peace and should be charged.

The Carolinas are probably the gun (and knife) unfriendliest southern states. At least, they have been in my experience.

Edit: In my mostly vicarious experience. Nothing bad has happened to me, I'm just going by a) newspaper articles; b) difficulties in purchasing firearms (permit required in NC); c) difficulties (actually impossibilities) in obtaining an out-of-state carry for SC, since I don't own any SC real estate.

[Single Six]

Blume: No, I don't OC, I just don't favor it. However, if you're referring to OC while I'm in uniform, then obviously, yes, I do. On my own time, I carry concealed. As I've said before on TFL, I, for one, am all for citizens carrying openly if they so choose. Our laws do not forbid this. I just personally think that CCW is better, and so that's how I go about it. As for your question, no need to debate, because I agree with you. I see what you mean, because I've often wondered the same thing...you'd think OC of a long gun would also be legal since doing likewise with a handgun is okay. To that I can only respond with four words that I find myself using often: "I just work here."

[Single Six]

MLeake: All I can tell you is, in the very few cases along these lines I've had in 22 years, I have never arrested anyone for OC of a handgun. I also must admit confusion on your saying the Carolinas are not gun-friendly. In my LE capacity, I very often encourage the citizens I serve to own, train with, and carry firearms. Of course, I'm just one guy, but in my career thus far, I have yet to encounter any anti-gun types in my profession. I'm sure they exist somewhere, but as yet, they've not crossed my path.

[csmsss]

"to the terror of the public" implies, to me at least, that the bearer of the firearm is not simply carrying it but doing so in a menacing or threatening manner. The simple act of openly carrying a firearm cannot be described as "to the terror of the public", if for no other reason than LEO's do so everywhere, all the time.

The deliberate misapplication of laws, with the implicit collaboration of the judiciary, is one of the most frightening aspects of our criminal justice system, because the remedies to it are so exceedingly difficult to accomplish.

[Single Six]

CS: Here's a recent example I can give you: A year or so back, while on patrol, I heard gunfire in a nearby neighborhood. This was well after midnight. As myself and my colleagues began checking the area we heard several more shots. As I came up to a stop sign, I saw a guy carrying a rifle, directly across the street from where I was. He was holding same in the port of arms position as he strode across somebody's front lawn. When he saw me, he took off running into an adjacent yard, ducking behind the house. I [and my entire squad] confronted this individual at gunpoint a few moments later. He was taken into custody, with no force being necessary on our part [thankfully], and was charged with the aforementioned "terror of the public" statute. Hope this helps.

[Don H]

Originally Posted by Single Six

CS: Here's a recent example I can give you: A year or so back, while on patrol, I heard gunfire in a nearby neighborhood. This was well after midnight. As myself and my colleagues began checking the area we heard several more shots. As I came up to a stop sign, I saw a guy carrying a rifle, directly across the street from where I was. He was holding same in the port of arms position as he strode across somebody's front lawn. When he saw me, he took off running into an adjacent yard, ducking behind the house. I [and my entire squad] confronted this individual at gunpoint a few moments later. He was taken into custody, with no force being necessary on our part [thankfully], and was charged with the aforementioned "terror of the public" statute. Hope this helps.

Based solely on the information given, just what public was "in terror"? Now I can see charges of disturbing the peace, discharging a firearm in a public place or perhaps negligent discharge of a firearm but "terror of the public"? Could you please post the terror of the public statute?

[Single Six]

Don: I know of no links for N.C. General Statutes that I can provide you with, nor do I have any books containing same accessible to me here at my residence...and if I did, I quite honestly wouldn't be inclined to type out a statute, any statute, verbatim, especially given my snail's pace typing skills. I can say that the judge who presided over this case found the man in question guilty as charged. As an aside, I should mention that the guy we arrested that night emphatically denied doing any actual shooting. He claimed that he had heard the shots as well, and, rather than stay indoors and call 911, he chose to arm up and go looking for the shooter himself. Copious ingestion of alcoholic beverages played a role in his decision, by the way. It was later explained to him that, if that was indeed the case, he'd set the stage for very possibly being shot himself by responding law enforcement. He was not charged for any actual shooting; we would not be able to prove that, since none of us actually saw him fire his weapon.

[Hardcase]

Folks, there is no statute in North Carolina regarding "the terror of the people". It is part of the state's common law, that is, case law that has been developed through the courts as opposed to legislation.

The offense originated in an 1843 case (State v. Huntley, 25 N.C. (3 Ired.) 418, 40 Am. Dec. 416 (1843)) and reads as follows:

1. The offence of riding or going armed with unusual or dangerous weapons, to the terror of the people, is an offence at common law, and is indictable in this State.
2. A man may carry a gun for any lawful purpose of business or amusement, but he cannot go about with that or any other dangerous weapon, to terrify and alarm, and in such manner as naturally will terrify and alarm a peaceful people.
3. The declarations of the defendant are admissible in evidence, on the part of the prosecution, as accompanying, explaining, and characterizing the acts charged.

As you can see, simple open carry is not a violation. Being drunk and running around with a rifle seems a likely candidate, at least to me. I suppose that it's a judgement call.

[MLeake]

SingleSix, lest you think I was picking on the LEO's themselves, I wasn't. A couple good friends of mine are NC cops.

However, I find the concept of a "purchase permit" deplorable. You didn't invent it, but your legislature needs to get rid of it.

Also, last I checked, NC was mixed as far as duty to retreat. And your no carrry in restaurants is a major pain.

SC requires ownership of real property in SC, in order for a person to get a non-resident permit. SC won't honor out-of-state permits except for residents of those states, so my FL permit is no good in SC. SC does not have reciprocity with GA, so in SC I am SOL.

To me, that makes the Carolinas the unfriendliest states in the South.

[Single Six]

MLeake: No offense taken, but thanks for being your usual considerate self. Meanwhile, we're in complete agreement on just about everything you said in your last post: The purchase permit thing is a dumb idea, and should be done away with. What gets me is, folks who hold a CCW license in N.C. do NOT have to get a purchase permit to buy a handgun; their CCW license is sufficient. However, my full time LE status does not count when it comes to buying handguns; I have to get a purchase permit like anyone else would. Strange logic, that. Anyhow, sorry that you've found our region to be non-gun friendly; such has not been my experience, but I respect your opinion, as ever.

[ZeroJunk]

It appears that 14-269-3 is revised as of 12-1-11

H650 is ratified and signed.

Not a legal scholar by any stretch so somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions...PDF/H650v5.pdf


http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascript...11&BillID=H650