gun control

In August of 2019, Paul Steber was arrested on High Point University's campus. He was found to be in possession of two firearms and ammunition. He was promptly arrested but released on a $250,000 bail posted by his parents.  In late July of 2020, Steber has officially received his sentencing. He was charged with three counts: two felony counts of weapons on campus and communicating a threat of mass violence on educational property. Steber pled guilty to a negotiated plea to possession of firearms on campus. In return he is only serving 24 months of probation. In the first year of probation, he is to commit 100 hours of community service. It is only if he were to violate the terms of his parole would he receive possible jail time (5-15 months). This sentencing is unacceptable. During the investigation it became clear that Steber had clearly intended to cause mass violence. He had started his plan in December of his senior year of high school. He investigated mass shootings, showing a particular interest with Dylann Roof and the tragedy he committed in a Charleston church. Steber had been found to have a clear timeline for his crimes, as well as intent for murder. He specifically chose to attend High Point University because it was located in North Carolina, which has fewer gun regulations than his hometown of Boston, Massachusetts.  The High Point Police Department specifically called Steber a "threat to society". This highlights clear discrepancies in our justice system based on privilege. The lack of comprehensive sentencing does not show a desire for Steber's rehabilitation, but rather a desire to get him out of the system. The High Point University student body feels extreme unease regarding this current sentencing, and feels as if more time and resources should be directed towards rehabilitation. This petition is not limited to the community of High Point University, but rather hopes to set a precedent that focuses on rehabilitative therapy, and does not make exceptions based on privilege. 

OVERVIEW: House Bill 652 would allow a person who holds a concealed handgun permit to possess and carry a handgun on an educational property that serves as a religious place of worship. CURRENT LAW: G.S. 14-269.2 generally prohibits any person from possessing or carrying any firearm on educational property or to a curricular or extracurricular activity sponsored by a school. BILL ANALYSIS: The PCS to House Bill 652 would allow a concealed carry handgun permittee, or someone exempt from needing a handgun permit, to possess and carry a handgun at a religious place of worship that is the location of a school if: • The educational property is not a university, college, or community college. • The educational property is not owned by a local board of education or county commission. • The weapon is a handgun. • The handgun is possessed and carried outside of any time when any curricular or extracurricular activities are taking place. • The owner has not posted signs prohibiting the carrying of handguns on the premises. We the people of North Carolina, petition the veto of H.B. 652 second amendment protection act - freedom to worship safely. We petition on the grounds that Governor Roy Cooper’s statement “this bill allows guns on school property which threatens the safety of the students and teachers. Therefore, I veto the bill“ The language used by Governor Roy Cooper is not within the context of the bill. This bill is not allowing concealed carry on a public school or even community college property or even in the facilities. On the contrary to the context that governor Cooper exerts in his statement of a safety issue, The intended purpose of a concealed carry permit is to provide and to afford an individual personal safety and that of his or her family. Any persons that have been properly trained and have met the requirements of the state to possess a concealed firearm should not be considered as a threat as governor Roy Cooper suggests in his veto statement. We should not allow him to veto this bill on the grounds of safety because the sole purpose of this bill is to afford a safer environment at a place of worship. Nowhere in this bill does it state during school hours or at any school sponsored event. This bill is only concerning the hours of operation of the church or house of worship and to deny a law abiding citizen that holds a concealed carry permit Is a direct infringement on his or her individual second amendment right. We ask as the constituents of North Carolina, please reconsider and override the veto of H.B. 652 second amendment protection act - freedom to worship safely. In recent years church shootings have been more prevalent and there exists a need to defend and assemble a security team. We have concealed carry in North Carolina to afford and provide an individual right to protect oneself and family. Why are we allowing the infringement of some churchgoers' right that a legal concealed carry holder is not able to legally conceal carry in their place of worship just because it has an educational facility on the premises? Should not all churches be afforded the right to protect themselves and the church family? All churches should be on the same level ground, and should have the individual right to make the choice to allow Concealed Carry or not to allow Concealed Carry, it should not be up to Governor Roy Cooper to have the power to deny, disarm, infringe, or to take away the right of a legal conceal carry holder which he or she has a constitutionally protected right to protect themself and his or her family while at his or her house of worship.

On 06/03/20 men armed with handguns and long guns that appear to be AR-15's were on the Santa Fe Plaza. The Plaza is a smaller, enclosed area that is usually heavily trafficked with many businesses, hotels etc. in close proximity where people congregate. Open carry of firearms is not only intimidating to persons on the Plaza, impacting quality of life and our city's image but extremely dangerous. Intentional or accidental discharge of a weapon of this style in an area such as this poses an incredible risk of bodily harm or death to innocent bystanders. There is no reason any private citizen needs to have an AR-15 on the Plaza other than to incite fear and intimidation. Even if this weapon was used in "self-defense" the collateral damage it would cause in such a confined, frequently trafficked area would be catastrophic. Open carrying in the manner that was done on Wednesday night invites conflict into our community. New Mexico is an open carry state however, there are restrictions on places where open carry is permitted. Open carry should not be permitted on the Santa Fe Plaza. 

As it stands there are only 2 legal ways to open carry in Texas.  First is on ones hip and second is a shoulder holster.  There are many other available methods for open carry none more or less dangerous than the current approved methods.  In short there is no difference in how one carries so why restrict it.