LOL, very brave of you. I lived in NC for a short time and figure you wouldn’t make it to trial. I’ve never lived in a place, exc perhaps WA, that was so corrupt. From top to bottom the place is a cesspool of corruption. The voters seem not to care all that much either.
Ah, thank you; I certainly don’t see myself as ‘brave’ though... I’m more of an ‘avoider’ when it comes to confrontation.
That said, I’m probably going to have* to violate some laws in order to challenge their validity as they contradict the State Constitution.
(*Every time I bring it up to someone in a position of authority they pass the buck to someone else and/or justify the contradictions by citing other contradictions.)
The issue is that the State Constitution says this:
Article II – Bill of Rights
Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security
and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful
purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed
weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the
right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)
Yet there are multiple laws “on the books” which contradict/violate this section:
1 — 30-7-2.4. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises; notice; penalty.
http://www.conwaygreene.com/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=6c1804dd.55b72e94.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2730-7-2.4%27%5D
2 — 30-7-2.2. Unlawful possession of a handgun by a person*; exceptions; penalty.
[* “Person” is defined, in this statute, as someone under 19 years of age.]
http://www.conwaygreene.com/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=6c1804dd.55b72e94.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2730-7-2.2%27%5D
3 — The prohibitions of weapons from Municipal and County courts.
4 — City ordinances prohibiting firearms in city-parks.
Now,I’d rather challenge these from the position of strength of not having violated them; given the buck-passing from officials though that is becoming a vanishingly small possibility. This leaves me with the option of attacking these laws from a position of weakness: challenging their validity in court as my defense for breaking them.
Right now I’m torn between the University statute and the city-park ordinance:the upside against the city-ordinance is that it violates both sentences of the cited section of the State Constitution; whereas the upside of violating the State Statute is that the penalty for violating it is [should my defense fail] only a misdemeanor.
Which do you think would be the better route?