Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Ruling on Portland OR limit on open carry | Main | MA gun ban for permanent resident aliens stricken »

SAF win against NC emergency regulations

Posted by David Hardy · 29 March 2012 11:33 AM

SAF and Alan Gura scored a win today in Bateman v. Perdue, E.D.N.C..

At issue were North Carolina statutes prohibiting carrying a firearm off one's own land during a declared emergency (which can be declared by the governor, or county, or city). The district court followed the 4th Cir. standard, which is (1) is the activity within the traditional right to arms, and (2) if so, apply the proper standard of review.

The ruling is significant in several ways. First, it recognizes that the right to arms is not limited to in-home possession. "Although considerable uncertainty exists regarding the scope of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, it undoubtedly is not limited to the confines of the home." Second it recognizes that when the core right -- possession in the home -- is involved, strict scrutiny applies. Third, it applies strict scrutiny here because of the statute's breadth and the fact that it indirectly impacts possession in the home.

· Chicago aftermath

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Brerarnold | March 29, 2012 6:45 PM | Reply

As an NC resident in the coastal area, where we frequently have states of emergency due to hurricanes etc., it has always seemed backwards to me. At a time when police are busiest, and have the most trouble getting around (flooding, trees down, etc.), all of a sudden you were restricted from carrying a tool that made self defense possible. This is a well-written decision and long overdue.

Now, on to restaurant carry.

Rich | March 30, 2012 6:57 AM | Reply

Brerarnold:

makes perfect sense as only the police and the authorities are capable of protecting you don't you know? If you figure out you can protect yourself that will upset all their nice little plans

Leave a comment