Rescue workers and equipment have already moved to Leland in preparation for the storm. (Photo: Leland)
In a last-minute decision, the North Carolina town Leland reversed their temporary ban on the “transportation or possession, or the sale or purchase of any dangerous weapon or substance, while off one’s own premises.”
The weapons ban was supposed to go into effect for the duration of hurricane Florence. Although initial projections have varied, weather experts expect hurricane Florence to strike land as a Category 2 storm, with winds over 100 miles per hour.
It may have been softer weather predictions that influenced the town leadership, or it may have been the threat of litigation. Shortly after announcing the emergency protocol the Firearms Policy Coalition and Firearms Policy Foundation filed a demand letter to repeal the likely illegal gun ban.
“Disasters and potential disasters are ‘prima facia’ reasons to protect the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for all lawful purposes, including self-defense and hunting,” said legal council Ray DiGuiseppe (.pdf). “They are not political opportunities to restrict these crucial constitutional rights.
“Leland’s State of Emergency Notice should immediately be amended to strike the offending language creating this unlawful and unconstitutional weapons prohibition,” he added.
North Carolina law allows local municipalities to enact restrictions such as curfews during emergencies and natural disasters. But the law specifically prohibits towns from placing restrictions on “lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition.”
As a result, the town of Leland revised the policy, saying “the transportation or possession, or the sale or purchase of dangerous weapons or substances, while off one’s own premises, is prohibited. This prohibition and restriction does not apply to lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition.”
“So, due the hurricane, unlawfully possessed firearms and ammunition are now doubly-unlawful,” asked one person on the Leland Facebook page. “Brilliant.”
See Also: 10 Lessons Bugging Out Ahead of Irma
It would seem that yes, the possession of unlawfully possessed dangerous weapons and substances is prohibited for the duration of the storm. This policy does not affect those who have the responsibility for the preservation of the public’s health, safety, or welfare.
Other restrictions include a 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew, mandatory evacuation for mobile and substandard homes and properties in low-lying and flood-prone areas and a ban against the consumption of alcohol outside the home, all in effect now.
Full details about the declared state of emergency can be found on the town of Leland website.
Carry them anyway. Its your life!
Well, I’m willing to bet that a vast majority of lawful gun owners said to heck with that. Anarchy and looting is the natural next step after a bad storm and you want me to lock up my firearms? Probably as close to a life and death scenario many of those folks will face. No way. I would take my take my chances with the prosecutor before a violent looter.
If there were a presumed need to reverse the Leland, NC gun ban prior to a hurricane, why was the ban ever initiated in the first place? The reason for always carrying a gun is in case an emergency calls for it’s need. It appears that the Leland power brokers had a problem with recognizing what constitutes an emergency. If a hurricane qualifies, so do the other reasons why people carry guns, the primary reason being that of the right of self protection as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to The Constitution of The United of America. That amendment makes no mention of hurricanes or other natural disasters.
The UnitedStates Of America is a Republic governed by the guidelines set forth in The Constitution and deviations are allowed only by properly initiated and sanctioned legal amendments. In my opinion, Leland’s ban was illegal from the outset, just like all other laws that are contrary to to the guarantees of the Second Amendment.
Not that it matters but in Tennessee your vehicle is an extension of your home, therefore there is no need to possess a permit to have a loaded firearm in your vehicle.
Ditto in New Mexico
The way of the leftard is enough to make your head explode. A conservative judge dated a under girl when was a young man and he must drop from a senate race. A former president has record of raping women and flies Lolita express to pedo island, deafening silence from the leftards. Got it!
The new revised ban prohibits the “the transportation or possession…of dangerous weapons…while off one’s own premises….” If I haven’t my mark it seems that the revised ban STILL violates the US Constitution as well as North Carolina law. That looks like a “restriction on lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition,” which is prohibited by NC law. And what is one supposed to do when evacuating with a gun collection? Leave it to the mercy of hurricane flood waters? And what about concealed carry? If I have a NC permit and attempt to possess and transport under the legal authority of that permit while evacuating does that mean I get arrested when driving through Leland, NC? Seriously, the new and revised policy doesn’t seem any better than the old one. Both violate state law and the US Constitution. Weapons possession, transport and concealed aren’t just for my “own premises.” What gives?
Of the two groups who filed suit against this unconstitutional law not one was the NRA. No doubt though the NRA will claim credit and use it for fundraising. Where exactly does all that money we send you go, Mr. LaPierre?