going armed in terror of the public
This is a discussion on going armed in terror of the public within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; For all Nc open carry proponents that fail to understand 2D Amndt
rights vs how it will be dealt with by overzealous authorities.
Please look ...
April 26th, 2010 04:59 PM
going armed in terror of the public
For all Nc open carry proponents that fail to understand 2D Amndt
rights vs how it will be dealt with by overzealous authorities.
Please look at the link below. It does not matter to an overzealous authority what the 2D Amndt has in it, if they do not like open carry or do not understand the law you could be charged with going armed in terror of the public.
I realize the President was involved in the case in the link, but, in the long run they used the "going armed in terror of the public" because they could not think of any other statute.
My point be careful with open carry and be sure it is worth it if you run into such an authority.
Joseph Sean McVey Arrested Near President Barack Obama's Plane - AOL News
April 26th, 2010 05:09 PM
Read State v Huntley. You can be CHARGED with anything. That is not new. CONVICTED is a whole new ballgame. Unless threats were made this was a misuse of GATTTOTP. And the City of Asheville may pay dearly for it, unless there is more info. Or my post on the other thread is right. That the parking lot was offlimits to firearms.
STATE v. ROBERT S. HUNTLEY.
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.
And I could care less about the 2A in relation to NC OC. It's section 30 of the state constitution that allows us to OC in NC. Per State v Kerner and State v Speller.
STATE v. KERNER. (No. 345.)
STATE v. L. R. SPELLER.
I prefer to live dangerously free than safely caged!
"Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun. And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son." Josh Thompson "Way Out Here"
April 26th, 2010 05:16 PM
I didn't bother to read the article... I got the jest of it from the post.
It is one of the reasons in the post that I do not personally open carry. There are other reasons as well, but there's no doubt not wanting to be harassed by the police when irrational and uneducated people complain is one of them.
I'm not opposed to open carry, and I totally support it for those who wish. As I've posted before, Tn_Mike has been an excellent proponent and steward of open carry and has done an equally excellent job of educating those who take the time to ask him about it.
However, those who do prefer open carry should not be surprised or become incredulous when they frighten the sheep and there is sometimes a negative response from the sheep herder (police) when that happens. It's something OC'ers are going to have to deal with from time to time and to act surprised at such a thing happening I think is a bit disingenuous at best.
"The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."
April 26th, 2010 10:00 PM
There is a more objective way to word the law in order to criminalize the acts they are after. I have to believe North Carolina has it this way so that it can be used at the authority's whim. Open carry is simply not safe with this verbiage. Concealed carry too for that matter if a concealed carry weapon should accidentally become exposed.
Originally Posted by nn
A scenario that I posted in a related thread:
If I am in the grocery store and lean over to get something off the bottom shelf and my gun gets exposed and some lady with a six year old sees it and freaks "He's got a gun!!!!", store is evacuated, police are called in - Have I terrorized the public? Am I at the mercy of who knows what to defend myself legally.
April 27th, 2010 03:25 AM
I don't know about this...look at where this man is, and what he has going. Scope formulas? Is he insane? Why is his car all tricked out? Who is he or who does he want to be? I just don't know about it. I understand why the Secret Service wants to question him...he didn't use sound judgment at all. IMHO. IANAL.
April 27th, 2010 07:21 AM
I wish they had chosen another state to meet in. Why in my house? Our luck in North Carolina to get another out of state whack job for a tourism promotion.
What if the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about?
April 27th, 2010 08:42 AM
Latest from Asheville Citizen Times
Arrestee at Obama’s Asheville exit had earlier handgun issue | citizen-times.com | Asheville Citizen-Times
OK, I have come full circle on this. I initially took this kid as a whack job. In the article there are some key points:
1. "McVey told police he was parked near a gate at the end of the terminal that led to the runway as Air Force One was taxiing because he wanted to see the president."
From my personal observations the entire town was filled with people wanting to "see" the President. (streets were lined with people, parking lots along Interstate 26 with views of the presidential motorcade were filled with people, etc.)
2. "Taken individually, none of things McVey did was against the law, including carrying the gun, Airport Police Chief Jeff Augram said. It was the combination of McVey’s behavior and the things he had that drew the charge, Augram said."
Good thing he wasn't wearing dark glasses
3. "Going armed to the terror of the public, means carrying a gun, “for the purpose of terrifying others,” according to a firearms law manual from the N.C. Attorney General’s Office."
He was legally carrying a firearm in an Open Carry state.
4. "The airport has a civil regulation against carrying guns that it can impose penalties for, though it is not a crime to carry a loaded gun on airport property."
Let the airport take care of this then.
5. "His strobe lights were similar in some ways to police lights, but turned out to be different enough to be legal, he said."
6. "An initial check of his license came back as invalid, but that was because of an error in how it was entered. A later check showed his license was valid, he said."
This is irrelevant to the gun issue, but sure made him seem suspicious from the start.
Come on now, this kid did nothing wrong and needs to be left alone. North Carolina Handgunners are at risk here. Regardless of what happens, this is all bad news for us and the Authorities have opened up a can of worms that can't be put back.
April 27th, 2010 08:51 AM
Originally Posted by SigDaddy
YOU can support him and claim he's "helping" us all day long. There are certain times, (like with this wannabe idiot who is NOT helping us) where we.....must say, "Kid, sit the hell down, you are NOT helping us."
Let's all get a "look alike cop car", have previous instances, BS our way around our driver's license, and tell the Feds we want to see the president as a WANNABE with a gun at an airport.....and hope that works out well for our "cause". Honestly, I don't think you're getting the "big picture" here, brother...Our "rights" are one thing, but we certainly jeapordize them by supporting an idiot like this.
HE...is the problem here.
This is the President, not a mayor in some small NC town. This KID was asking for trouble acting like his wannabe ass was somehow providing security or something. Absolutely ridiculous.
Stop acting like we're fightin' for "freedom". We are ALREADY....free.
April 27th, 2010 08:57 AM
It would be child's play to counter the claim of "going in terror." A reasonable person who goes armed does so in simple preparation for potential crime, not because a person lives "in terror" of anything. Still, the claim would need to be made, and that's on the far side of damage to one's reputation, damage to more than that if certain people in our lives find out the arrest/charges have occurred, and possibly on the far side of some fair-sized checks being written to an attorney to assist with a defense.
Originally Posted by nn
In the current climate, one should expect overreaching in such a situation. One should expect to lose, on the instant. It'll be a rare day when all precautions are not taken. Because one can see the writing on the wall, with such a VIP's visit, it's hard to support this guy's actions as benefiting any of us, "the cause" or the future impressions of sanity and rationality we're all trying to show when legislation is considered.
I realize the President was involved in the case in the link, but ...
... be careful with open carry and be sure it is worth it if you run into such an authority.
Personally, I think legislation is the way to take down such zealotry in the law. So long as the law supports security folks taking these steps, then anyone daring to present a clear potential threat to a VIP will be seen as a threat, simple as that. The only way it's going to change in the long run is via legislative change. Forcing it, particularly with this specific VIP, is taking the most difficult path, one in which there is 10x the chance for failure and worsening of relations with the rest of the public who are beginning to listen to "the message" being preached about upstanding carriers of firearms.
None of which mattered. His actions were in line with someone seeking to get a glimpse of somebody others care about. If someone with power and force in their corner (the security folks charged with protecting that VIP) decides you're a threat or are to be used as an example to dissuade others, then you'll be taken down. It doesn't take much more than that, in reality, as this situation shows. A VIP was near; their security rules existed; your problem with that is secondary.
"Taken individually, none of things McVey did was against the law, including carrying the gun
, Airport Police Chief Jeff Augram said. It was the combination of McVey’s behavior and the things he had that drew the charge, Augram said."
"The airport has a civil regulation against carrying guns that it can impose penalties for, though it is not a crime to carry a loaded gun on airport property
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
April 27th, 2010 09:21 AM
If no laws were broken as the chief said, why was he arrested?? For what he might be thinking of doing? Today it is still illegal to arrest somebody for what they "might" do. Until they perfect that "Minority Report" gizmo...
They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Previously known as "cjm5874"
April 27th, 2010 09:26 AM
Yours is the most intelligent post I have seen yet. I think I understand it and agree. I do feel extraordinary measures were indeed called for in this situation seeing as how the president was in the area. As I said in another post, I deliberately chose not to carry this past weekend so as not to run the risk of running across the President by chance and getting into this situation and also out of respect for his being present and any problems I might cause. I think McVey should have been quietly removed from the area until everything was over and then released. Whether this would have been a legal move by the Authorities does not matter. The President's safety was of higher importance. I am just saying, McVey is not a criminal - He was stupid, but not a criminal.
April 27th, 2010 09:44 AM
re; sig daddy
Per the news articles posted, he had a prior arrest and conviction in Ohio for pulling a stunt in which he displayed a gun inappropriately.
Originally Posted by SigDaddy
It is difficult to arm chair exactly what charge is appropriate here, but there seems to be no doubt that the over all behavior would make a circumstantial case, and jury would need to decide.
Perfect justice? We don't know. Stupid kid instead of a criminal? Maybe. Short a few between the ears? Likely.
Who in their right mind would do what he did in Ohio, pull up to people stopped at the side of the road, offer assistance, and when ignored, go to your car and retrieve a gun instead of just leaving?
Everything about this young fellow's actions screams of derangement. Criminal? Maybe not quite. In need of help, it seems likely.
I have floated around our planet for 67 years without ever coming to the attention of the police except for a citation for an improper turn.
This kid has twice been arrested. What are the odds the he really was just an innocent arrested twice by mistake and confusion while trying to do good deeds. If he indeed wanted to do good deeds, he sure needs to find a more acceptable way to accomplish that goal.
Overcharged? Maybe. Completely innocent and an unjust arrest, no!!!
April 27th, 2010 11:06 AM
Sometimes you place any charge to hold a nut. Tough call. Joseph vs Timothy Mcvey, who knows. Does an attempt really need to be made.
S&W 642 (no-lock) with .38 Spl +P 135 GR Gold GDHP
Glock G31 & G33 with .357 Sig 125 GR. SXT Winchester Ranger
April 27th, 2010 11:09 AM
Don't expect the NRA to take this case. They stay away from morons as poster boys.
April 27th, 2010 11:12 AM
the car thing is not uncommon around here alot of young react/vf types have these type of lights and scanners and such. Not my thing but to each there owne . I will bet there is some one on this site that has this same type of set up?????????? think i seen a car in an old post with the same stuff?
ps. i live 10 min away from this kid
Guns dont kill people. people kill people
By chiefjason in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: August 25th, 2010, 09:32 AM
By rmilchman in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: October 7th, 2008, 12:08 AM
By chuckE in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: September 1st, 2008, 04:44 AM
By goawayfarm in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: November 29th, 2007, 05:49 PM
By Scott in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: May 25th, 2005, 08:22 AM
Search tags for this page
go armed to terror of people
go armed to terror of people nc
go armed to terror of public
going armed to the terror of the people
going armed to the terror of the public
going armed to the terror of the public nc
going armed to the terror of the public nc statute
going armed to the terror of the public north carolina
nc general statute going armed to the terror of the public
nc going armed to the terror of the public
nc law going armed terror public
north carolina going armed to the terror of the public
Click on a term to search for related topics.