concealed carry

Uncategorized

Every Picture Tells A Story, Part V

April 7, 2016 by 10 Comments

Idaho Gov. Butch Otter (R-ID) signed “permitless” concealed carry (aka constitutional carry) into law on March 27th. It allows Idaho citizens age 21 and over to carry concealed without a permit within city limits. They already had this right outside city limits. This made Idaho the ninth state to have constitutional carry.

On Tuesday, the Mississippi House of Representatives concurred with the Mississippi Senate on amendments to HB 786. The Senate amendments expanded what was originally just a church carry bill into one that included that and constitutional carry. The amended bill passed both houses with veto proof majorities. The bill now goes to Gov. Phil Bryant (R-MS) who is expected to sign the bill. That would make Mississippi the tenth state to have constitutional carry and the third to pass it this year. Some have criticized the bill as also including “nullification”.  Actually the bill doesn’t include nullification as it merely states that Mississippi officials and law enforcement don’t have an obligation to enforce Federal gun control laws which is in line with existing Supreme Court precedent.

Given that the number of states with constitutional carry has increased to 10, Rob Vance and I concluded it was time to update the graphic showing the spread of freedom. The graphic below shows how the United States has moved from no carry to shall-issue and permitless carry over the last 30 years. As I said a few years ago, shall-issue is the new norm. Maybe one day I’ll be able to change this to constitutional carry is the new norm.

Here are the population statistics that accompany the above graphic:

0.4% No Issue, HI
27.0% May Issue, CA,DC,MD,MA,NJ,NY,RI
65.4% Shall Issue
7.2% Unrestricted, AK,AR,AZ,ID,KS,ME,MS,VT,WV,WY

At the same time that shall-issue and permitless or constitutional carry have expanded, violent crime has decreased. While correlation isn’t causation, I do think this is significant. When this graphic was first developed, Rob noted that there was no positive correlation between carry and violent crime. Unfortunately, he also noted that a negative correlation has not yet been proved. Linoge at Walls of the City has been studying gun ownership and the incidence of violent crime for a number of years. His latest is posted here. He has a similar result. Thus, neither more guns or less restrictive carry means more crime.

Uncategorized

An Update On Virginia Reciprocity From VCDL

February 4, 2016 by 2 Comments

Grass Roots North Carolina received the following from Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League regarding the negotiations between Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D-VA) and gun rights supporters to restore concealed carry reciprocity.

BREAKING NEWS:  *** February 1 cutoff date for dropping recognition of 25 states has been extended to March 1
***


THE
“DEAL”


As
you’ve undoubtedly
heard from the media, there is a package deal in the works between
Governor McAuliffe and the Republicans in the General Assembly dealing
with 1)
concealed handgun permit (CHP) reciprocity, 2) voluntary background
checks at gunshows, and 3) those subject to a permanent domestic
violence
protection order.


To
many CHP holders, CHP
reciprocity is a HUGE deal, especially if they travel out-of-state
regularly and want to be able to carry discretely.  For example, there
is no
solution to carrying in South Carolina if we don’t have an agreement
between our two states.

There is a
lot of misinformation from the media and elsewhere and a lot of people
are
coming to the wrong conclusions about what the deal does and doesn’t do.
 Rumors are flying that gun owners only get back the reciprocity
that was taken away by Herring and the State Police – that is FALSE.  We
have gained important ground!

THE DEAL IS
STILL IN THE WORKS.  Things could still go south as the key bills that
make up the deal work their way through the legislature and onto the
Governor’s desk.  SO, FOR NOW, NOTHING HAS CHANGED.  THERE IS NO
ABSOLUTE GUARANTEE THIS WILL BECOME LAW, BUT A REASONABLY GOOD CHANCE IT
WILL.  If it fails, we may not be able to fix the reciprocity situation
for another two-long-years.


VCDL has been privy to the deal for several days, as was a
national group.  VCDL monitored progress of this potentially
groundbreaking
advancement of our liberty from its genesis, and provided counsel and
discussion points during its evolution.

The final product was given the nod by VCDL, however we will be watching like a hawk for
any changes that negatively affect gun owners.

IMPORTANT DETAILS ON THE “DEAL”

There are three components that make up the deal, each component represented by matching bills in the House and in the
Senate.


#1 – Reciprocity details –
gun owners gain ground!


*
Virginia will honor the carry permits from ALL states!  This is
considerably better than current law and something VCDL has been trying
to get
for at least seven years now.  


*
Because Virginia will honor all other states, Virginia CHPs will be
recognized by all the states we have lost AND we will gain some new
states:
 New Hampshire, Georgia, and Colorado!

*
The State Police and the Attorney General will have NO say in the new
law.  If another state requires a formal
agreement to honor Virginia CHPs, the new law requires the Attorney
General to enter into any such agreement.  If he fails to do this, item
#3,
below, does not go into effect.


*
One other change on the reciprocity law:  If your Virginia CHP is
revoked for cause, you won’t be able to carry on a non-resident permit
from another state.  Not a deal breaker.

NOTE:
 Just because we are honoring all other states, doesn’t mean we can
carry in all those states.  Someone
from New York will be able to carry here, but we won’t be able to carry
in New York unless New York is willing to enter into a reciprocal
agreement with Virginia, for example. 

As more and more states start honoring out-of-state permits, the prospects of our permit being honored by even more states
down the road is bright!


#2 –
Voluntary gun show background checks


*
Background checks for a private sale are COMPLETELY voluntary.

* The State Police shall be at every gun show in Virginia, by law.  (Some gun owners were thinking this was some kind of
a trick – that if the State Police don’t show up, the gun show would be cancelled.  This should put that worry to rest.)


*
The gun show promoter shall notify the State Police of
the location and times of the gun show at least 30 days in advance,
shall provide a free location for the police to set up, and shall have
signs
letting attendees know of the voluntary background checks at the State
Police booth.  (I checked with one of Virginia’s largest gun show
promoters on this to see if any of it was objectionable and was told,
“no.”)

* The State Police may charge a reasonable fee.  (If they charge more than you want to pay, you can
just walk away and do the transaction without the background check.)

*
NO information on the make, model, or serial number of the gun being
sold will be provided to the State Police – i.e. no
federal Form 4473!  The purchaser will have to fill out the Virginia
form, which asks a few questions and has the buyer’s name, address, and
signature.  (If you don’t want to fill out that form, you can just walk
away and do the transaction without the background
check.)


*
There is a carrot: if a
background check is run, the seller receives some special legal
protections that are currently not available for private sales.  If a
background
check is not run, you don’t have any more or any less legal protections
than under current law.

Yes, down
the road inevitably there will be some bills introduced that attempt to
make
the background check mandatory.  We get bills on mandatory background
checks for private sales every year.  We will have to fight and defeat
those bills in the future, just as we fight and defeat similar bills
today.

For those gun owners who
would feel safer selling a gun to someone who has had a background
check, this
provides a new option in addition to the current option of either asking
if the person has a CHP or going through the more laborious and
expensive
route of letting an FFL do the transfer.  It also has no effect on
private sales conducted anywhere outside of gun shows, where this
voluntary
option is not provided.


#3 –
Persons subject to a PERMANENT domestic violence protection order cannot possess firearms until the order expires

* The ONLY permanent protection order this restriction applies to is one for domestic
violence and NOTHING else.


*
The subject of the protection order must have had his day in court along
with any legal counsel.  Temporary protection orders do NOT affect
possession of firearms.


*
If the judge, after hearing the defense, decides to issue a permanent
protection order anyhow, the subject of the protection order will lose
his gun
rights for the duration of the order (MAXIMUM of two years), and
automatically get those gun rights back when the permanent protection
order expires.
 Note:  a new permanent protection order could potentially be issued
when the perament protection order expires if the judge thinks a danger
still exists.


*
The subject of the
permanent protection order will have 24 hours to turn his guns over to a
person of his choice, as long as that person can legally possess
firearms.


*
The above is basically
federal law already, and state law already prohibits a person with such a
permanent protection order from purchasing  or transporting a
firearm.


WHAT’S
NEXT?


* VCDL will be monitoring the deal’s
progress, watching for changes that negatively affect gun owners. 

* If a negative issue arises and is not fixed quickly, I will advise all of you immediately via an Urgent Legislative Action
Alert.  


* I will also be providing
links to the three bills described above as soon as the final language is available online.  That way you can read them for
yourself.


* For now just standby on
this, as I keep you advised of the progress of the deal.

* If you don’t have any absolutely urgent questions, please hold on to them for now as it would be easy to overwhelm me
with emails (I’m already getting over 200 a day as is).

 We interviewed Phil for The Polite Society Podcast yesterday evening. I will put up a link to that interview as soon as it is published. However, in the meantime, Phil said that an appropriations bill had been introduced in the Virginia General Assembly that would restore reciprocity to the way it was before Attorney General Mark Herring (D-VA) went full-Bloomberg. Given it is an appropriations bill, Gov. McAuliffe must either approve it in full or veto the entire bill. There is no line-item veto on appropriations bills.

Needless to say, the gun prohibitionists are having a hissy fit over the compromise between McAuliffe and gun rights supporters. A few days ago the Washington Post reported this:

“Governor McAuliffe should reconsider this dangerous gift to the gun lobby,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, which in the fall poured more than $2 million into two state Senate races at McAuliffe’s request.

Late last night the Post reported that Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors has now started a social media campaign against McAuliffe.

On Wednesday, Everytown launched a social media campaign against McAuliffe, who last week stunned gun-safety advocates by announcing that he had struck a gun deal with Republican legislators and the National Rifle Association. It shows side-by-side photos of McAuliffe and the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre.

“What do VA Gov. Terry McAuliffe and NRA head Wayne LaPierre have in common?” one version reads. “Both Gov McAuliffe and NRA Head Wayne LaPierre support allowing dangerous people to carry hidden loaded weapons in Virginia.”

While clearly a lower-budget affair than last fall’s TV blitz, Everytown’s social media campaign against McAuliffe was a stunner, given how closely he worked with gun-safety groups since his 2013 campaign for governor. He narrowly won the race while bragging about his “F” rating from the NRA.

If I were a Virginia politician, I’d look at what Everytown is doing and realize just how fickle they are in their support. Alternatively, you could say that they just want their bought and paid for politicians to stay bought.

Uncategorized

Evidently Money Talks In Virginia

December 28, 2015 by 6 Comments

There has been a lot written about the ad hoc decision of Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring (D-VA) to drop the recognition of out of state CCW permits from 25 states. The move impacts approximately 6.3 million Americans. I am one of those as Americans as North Carolina’s permit will no longer be recognized in Virginia. However, I can assure my friends in the commonwealth that their permit will be recognized in North Carolina as we have universal recognition of out of state permits.

The non-partisan Virginia Public Access Project takes as its mission the goal of making government data regarding campaign finance disclosure understandable and accessible to the general public. From what I can see, they do a good job of it.

Given how much money Michael Bloomberg has funneled into Virginia both directly and indirectly I thought it would be interesting to see if Attorney General Herring was a recipient of his generosity. As Deep Throat said to Woodward and Bernstein, “Follow the money”.

Lo and behold the top donor to his campaign for Attorney General was none other than Independence USA PAC. They gave $1,292,417 of in-kind donations to his campaign. The money went for media production and advertising buys. To put this into perspective, the next two highest donors gave approximately half this amount each. The only candidate to get more money from that PAC was Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D-VA).

Independence USA PAC is Bloomberg’s personal super-PAC. FactCheck said this about it:

Independence USA is a super PAC that focuses largely on helping to elect candidates who support stricter gun-control laws. It was founded in October 2012 by Michael Bloomberg, and, so far, has been entirely funded by the former New York City mayor.

The race for Attorney General between Herring and Republican St. Senator Mark Obershain was exceedingly close. The final vote tally left Herring winning by little more than 900 votes. Indeed, up until the last poll, Obershain was either in the lead or tied with Herring.

When you owe your elected position to Michael Bloomberg, when he says jump, you say how high. Evidently now was the time that Bloomberg said jump and jump is what Herring did in response.

Uncategorized

Every Picture Tells A Story, Part Four

October 21, 2015 by 5 Comments

I published Every Picture Tells A Story, Part Three last Wednesday. It was an update of the 2011 post that tracked the spread of firearms freedom as evidenced by the growth in shall-issue and constitutional carry. It was released on October 15th to commemorate the effective date of constitutional carry in the state of Maine.

Also published in 2011 was another collaboration with Rob Vance called Every Picture Tells A Story, Part Two which plotted annual FBI violent crime rates against the growth of shall-issue concealed carry. We explicitly stated back then that there wasn’t a positive correlation between violent crime rates and liberalized carry laws. We also said that proving a negative correlation would take more a more rigorous statistical approach. However, we took note of Linoge’s work regarding the negative correlation between crime involving firearms and gun ownership. I would note that Linoge has updated his work and the negative correlation is even stronger in 2015 (-0.8016) than in 2011.

Rob has updated his graph to reflect the changes since 2011 in both crime rates and the growth of shall-issue and constitutional carry.

When Illinois, the fifth largest state in the US, was forced to adopt shall-issue concealed carry, the anti-rights movement predicted blood in the streets of Chicago and elsewhere in Illinois. That is, more blood than is normal in Chicago with its long history of stringent gun control. The graph above normalizes the crime rates as per 100,000. If shall-issue concealed carry would have caused an increase in crime rates in Illinois, it would have shown up in the graph.

Rob notes this about the graph and what it illustrates:

Every time the citizens of our states manage to convince their legislators that individual self-defense via unrestricted or shall issue concealed carry is the best approach, the press repeats the shibboleth that such laws will result in “blood in the streets.” Well, the press has been wrong about that, and they’ve been wrong repeatedly and over many many years. Then again, newspaper circulation is down and this kind of lazy reporting might be one of the reasons why. Violent crime rates, including the murder rates, are down in the United States from a peak in the early 1990’s, but you wouldn’t know it from our press. The diagram below starts with data gathered to demonstrate the change in state laws in favor of no or de minimis regulation of concealed carry of firearms for self-defense (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QxBfs9acTUH8hL1OtkitcivuCzr4IQKjKOQ4_obK61c/pubhtml), and integrates FBI Uniform Crime Reporting data on the national level of violent crime over time.

Concealed carry laws matter because they change the balance of power in the favor of law abiding citizens over violent criminals, increasing both the real and the perceived risk associated with criminal behavior. Over the last 25 plus years the rate of violent crimes in the US has fallen substantially, and this change runs directly counter to the increasing availability of concealed carry as a self-defense option for Americans. We are now experiencing lowered rates of violent crime last seen in the early 1970s and murder rates from the mid-1960s. As John Lott has written (extensively I might add), “More Guns = Less Crime.” Correlation isn’t causality is a truth from statistics; yet it is entirely truthful to say that the normalization of armed self-defense is taking place in a period when the rate of violent crime is falling in the US. Any other conclusion does not follow the data.

Links to our data sources are below:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/17/despite-lower-crime-rates-support-for-gun-rights-increases

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Uncategorized

The Devil Is In The Details

August 7, 2015 by 5 Comments

Yesterday, I reported that Maj. Gen. Max Haston, the Adjutant General of the Tennessee National Guard, had authorized the carry of firearms by Guardsmen and Air Guardsmen while on duty. That, on the face of it, was and is a great leap forward in protecting the men and women of the Tennessee Guard from terrorists of all stripes.

However, as they say, the devil is in the details. Thanks to a Tennessee blogger who wishes to remain anonymous so as to protect his source I have those details. The key points as he summarized them are:

Here are some of the restrictions:
  • The carried weapon must “meet identical or nearly identical specifications of the M9 Beretta service pistol or smaller”, and the local Commander gets to decide what that means. No revolvers or derringers.
  • .380, 9mm, .40, and .45 only
  • It must be carried in a holster that is “identical or nearly identical to the service-issued holster” worn on either the right or left hip. 
  • While not explicitly stated, it appears that open carry is not allowed.
  • You may only have one.
  • No carry in Government Vehicles or Storefront Recruiting Stations. This basically means that Recruiters–the ones being targeted–are effectively not allowed to carry.
  • You may only carry in ACUs or Class A uniforms. 
    • Class A uniform carry is only allowed if you don’t print and won’t be required or expected to remove the jacket later. 
    • ACU carry is only allowed if blouse remove is not authorized. So if you’re on kitchen duty, you’re not allowed to carry even if you don’t take off your blouse, because blouse removal is authorized in that scenario. Same thing if it’s more than 85 degrees.
  • You are carrying as authorized by the Handgun Carry Permit statutes. As such, you’re not allowed to carry in schools or businesses that post 1359 signage.
The document you are required to sign before being allowed to carry places these additional restrictions:
  • While not in the actual orders, the paper that the soldier is required to sign requires them to carry with no magazine in the weapon. I have confirmed with my source that this is, indeed, the intention of that language.
  • Only allows carry on “authorized Military Department State properties”, ie, not while in uniform (while out) in the general public.

The key document is the Personally Owned Weapons Policy, ver. 4, which I have embedded below. In addition, here is the link to the document that must be signed and to the announcement sent to members of the Tennessee Military Department (NG and ANG).

Uncategorized

Tennessee’s Adjutant General Gets It – Allows Licensed Carry While On Duty

August 6, 2015 by 4 Comments

Maj. Gen. Max Haston, Tennessee’s Adjutant General, gets it. He issued orders today that will allow members of the Tennessee National Guard and Air National Guard to carry while on duty at State armories and facilities if they have a valid Tennessee carry permit. He also announced the selected Guard personnel working at Federal facilities will draw and carry Federally issued firearms for protection. Finally, he has moved Army National Guard recruiters from storefront locations to local armories.

The relevant parts of the news release:

Maj. Gen. Max Haston, Tennessee’s Adjutant General, today announced that the
Military Department has taken steps to increase the security of its personnel and facilities to
include allowing Tennessee Army & Air National Guard members with valid Tennessee State
Handgun Carry Permits to carry handguns at State Armories and facilities.

Haston’s decision follows Governor Bill Haslam’s directive, issued earlier this month in the
aftermath of the deadly shootings in Chattanooga, to review current Guard personnel who are
authorized to be armed in the performance of their duties, and identify and arm Guardsmen
where necessary to protect themselves, citizens and Guard facilities.

“We have been very deliberate in making the decision to arm our Tennessee National Guard,”
said Haston. “This is not a step that we take lightly, but it is apparent that military personnel
have been targeted and the protection of our Soldiers and Airmen is of utmost importance.
Physical security and risk assessment is something that we continually do as part of our day to
day obligations.”

Haston also announced that selected Guard personnel working on Federal facilities would be
allowed to carry federally issued handguns.

“Federal law prohibits carrying a personally owned weapon on a Federal facility,” said Haston.
“Therefore, selected personnel working on Federal property will draw and carry a federally
issued firearm for protection.”

I would hope to see this spread to more states. In the meantime, kudos to Gen. Haston for taking the necessary steps to protect the men and women under his command.

Uncategorized

“I’m Older Now And It’s Very Scary”

July 15, 2015 by

WTSP Channel 10 News did a report a couple of days ago about the growth in Florida senior citizens applying for and getting the concealed carry permits. The report notes that over 350,000 permits holders in Florida are over the age of 66.

I’m glad to see these people taking the responsibility for their own self-defense. With regard to the disparity of force argument, most senior citizens would be at a disadvantage against a younger attacker. I’m not a senior citizen (yet) but I would feel at a severe disadvantage if I were attacked by an attacker in his 20s or 30s.

I like the tone of this story. It isn’t “this is dangerous for Grandma to have a firearm” but rather an honest report on how senior citizens are taking the initiative to protect themselves. I hope the trainers in Florida and elsewhere recognize this and develop classes aimed directly at this demographic.

I would embed the video but I can’t get it not to autoplay. Bummer. Here is the link.

H/T Laura Carno

Uncategorized

Good News Out Of Illinois

June 1, 2015 by

The Illinois Senate today passed SB 836 which contains improvements in the FOID Card Act, the Concealed Carry Act, and the Criminal Code. The vote was 43 yea, 8 nay, and 5 not voting. Included in the nay votes was perennial gun prohibitionist Sen. Dan Kotowski (D-Park Ridge). This is not surprising in that he had been the Executive Director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence (sic) prior to being elected to the Illinois Senate.

The bill had passed the Illinois House on Saturday. The vote there was 84 yea, 23 nay, and 3 not voting. The bill now goes to Gov. Bruce Rauner (R-IL) for his signature. It is expected that he will sign this bill.

The full text of the bill is here. The Illinois State Rifle Association emailed this summary of the main provisions of the bill this evening. They along with Illinois Carry and other gun rights groups in Illinois fought hard for this bill.

After months of working with the Illinois General Assembly on improvements to the Firearms Concealed Carry Act, FOID Act and Criminal Code, SB 836 passed the Illinois Senate with a vote of 43 Yes, 8 No and 5 Present. It is on the way to the Governor’s desk.

SB 836 contains the following changes:

Firearms Concealed Carry Act:

1. Limits the waiver of privacy rights regarding the concealed carry application to only those records pertinent to obtaining a concealed carry license.

2. Clarifies that if a concealed carry licensee presents their ICCL during a law enforcement investigative stop that it is presumed they are carrying a firearm.

3. Clarifies the definition of a “mental disability” as it pertains to persons seeking a concealed carry license.

4. Eliminates the requirement that a licensee unload his or her firearm when storing or retrieving a firearm from the trunk of their vehicle.

5. Provides that Emergency Service personnel may ask anyone lawfully carrying a firearm to secure the firearm for the duration of the contact.

6. Changes mental health reporting requirements.

FOID Act:

7. Allows the use of a concealed carry license when purchasing firearms or ammunition.

8. Allows concealed carry licensees to possess firearms and ammunition without being in physical possession of their FOID card.

9. Changes the FOID Act to ensure that non-resident competitors may purchase firearms and ammunition at events held at the World Shooting Complex.

Criminal Code:

10. Eliminates a contradiction between Concealed Carry Act and the criminal definition of unlawful use of weapon.

Uncategorized

GRNC Alert On First Citizens Bank

February 16, 2015 by 5 Comments

First Citizens Bank is headquartered in North Carolina and has 570 branches in 18 states. The majority of its branches are in the Carolinas and Virginia. First Citizens, while publicly traded, is still controlled by the Holding family. Frank B. Holding, Jr., CEO of First Citzens, is the grandson of the bank’s founder Robert P. Holding. The bank’s Vice Chairman and fellow board member, Hope Holding Bryant, is his sister. Their brother-in-law Peter Bristow is the president of the bank.

Rep. George Holding (R-NC), Frank and Hope’s cousin, represents the 13th Congressional District of North Carolina. He was A-Rated and Endorsed by the NRA-PVF in the 2014 elections and was ranked 4-stars by the GRNC-PVF. According to his last financial disclosure report filed in 2014, he held stock in First Citizens (NC and SC) valued at more than $500,000 and less than $1 million.

The bank’s Board of Directors recently voted to prohibit lawful concealed carry holders from carrying on their premises. As Grass Roots North Carolina notes below in their alert, they did this despite bank robberies being at a 10 year low in North Carolina. Being a non-public entity, they are certainly entitled to do what they want on their own property. However, their customers and potential customers are just as entitled to vote with their feet if they disagree with the board’s action. No state in their markets are lacking in other alternatives.

From GRNC:

FCB Risks the Safety of Banking Customers
In a unified show of ignorant disregard for your safety, First Citizens Bank’s Board of Directors recently decided to disallow concealed carry at their branches. This puts all law abiding citizens at risk and should convince current and potential customers of First Citizens Bank (FCB) to reconsider patronizing this, or any bank, that puts customers in harm’s way.
What problem are they trying to solve with the ban? If it’s bank robberies, the N&O reported in this article that bank robberies hit a 10 year low in 2014 of 91 (as of Nov. 30), down from 267 in 2004. The fact that this correlates perfectly with the exponential growth of CCW in NC suggests that CCW is a large part of that fix. Are they trying to fix the non-existent problems they have with CCW permitholders? Where are those reports?
First Citizens Bank has given its customers a false sense of security inside the bank (criminals will not obey a CCW ban) while enhancing the real and present danger that banning concealed carry presents to its patrons outside the branch doors. Criminals know the best place to find people carrying large amounts of cash is in the parking lot of a bank. A concealed weapons ban means customers will be forced to leave their lawfully carried weapon in their car when they walk into, and out of the bank. None of the bank’s elaborate security will do anything to protect people outside of the front doors. In addition, the parking lots of First Citizens Bank will also become fertile hunting grounds for criminals looking to steal guns from cars.
Until First Citizens Bank revokes this counterproductive ban it is imperative that its customers and patrons understand the risks of banking at an institution that jeopardizes its customers’ safety by banning them from lawfully carrying a gun for self defense.
IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!
It is imperative we express our safety concerns to First Citizens Bank
  • Email first Citizens using their contact page
    linked below.  Copy and paste the message provided under ‘Deliver this Message’
     
  • Phone First Citizens Bank and tell them you will not do business with a bank that disregards its customer’s safety by banning them from lawfully carrying guns for self defense. Use the phone number provided below.
     
CONTACT INFO
You can find contact info for FCB on their web site:https://www.firstcitizens.com/about/contact-us
No email address is supplied but you can send email from a form on the contact page.

The general customer support number is: 1 (888) 323-4742
 
FCB Head of Security

Skip Lee
FCB Board of Directors
John M. Alexander, Jr. Victor E. Bell, III
Peter W. Bristow Hope Holding Bryant
H. Lee Durham, Jr. Daniel L. Heavner
Frank B. Holding, Jr. Robert R. Hoppe
Lucius S. Jones Floyd L. Keels
Robert E. Mason, IV Robert T. Newcomb
James M. Parker
DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Suggested Subject: Revoke Concealed Carry Weapons Ban

Dear First Citizens Bank,

I am writing to voice my strong objection to your Board of Directors’ recent decision to ban lawful concealed carry in the branches of First Citizens Bank. Not only does this create a false sense of security in the branch (criminals will not obey a CCW ban), but customers will have no way of defending themselves in parking lots where criminals await customers they believe are carrying large sums of cash.
Until this policy is fully revoked, I will not risk my safety doing business with First Citizens Bank and will pass my concerns to my friends and family and encourage them do the same.
I will continue to monitor this situation through alerts from Grass Roots North Carolina.
Sincerely,
Uncategorized

There Will Always Be An Exception

February 10, 2015 by 1 Comment

Holders of concealed carry permits have been shown to be more law-abiding than law enforcement officers over the years. That hasn’t stopped groups like the Violence Policy Center from doing everything in their power to portray permit holders as killers and wild cowboys with itchy trigger fingers.

Just as a bad cop is an exception to the norm, so too is a concealed carry holder that commits murder. Unfortunately, we in North Carolina now have one of those exceptions. A 62-year old man who held a NC Concealed Handgun Permit killed one person, wounded another, and killed the wounded woman’s unborn child. He then killed himself. The murder-suicide reportedly stemmed from a business dispute according to local papers.

Sean Sorrentino has much more detail and commentary on the incident. I’d suggest going there to learn more about this story.

All I can say is that it is a sad thing all around but that it is an exceptional one. And being exceptional, it is not reflective on concealed carry holders nor concealed carry in general. Even the Chicago Tribune concedes this point noting that it has been a quiet first year after Illinois finally got shall-issue concealed carry.