No permits for handguns?

Bi-partisan, or bi-polar?

AN ACT to repeal the state law that requires a person to obtain a license or permit to purchase, sell, give away, receive, or otherwise transfer a pistol or crossbow.

I keep looking at my calendar to make sure it's not April 1st. It's not. It's strange enough that a cop would be a primary sponsor of this bill, but when I saw a recent candidate for NCDP Chair had co-sponsored this craziness, my brain just sort of slipped into neutral and revved for a few moments.

Here's what HB 390 would do:

SECTION 1. G.S. 14‑402 is repealed.

SECTION 2. G.S. 14‑403 is repealed.

SECTION 3. G.S. 14‑404 is repealed.

SECTION 4. G.S. 14‑405 is repealed.

SECTION 5. G.S. 14‑406 is repealed.

SECTION 6. G.S. 14‑406.1 is repealed.

SECTION 7. G.S. 14‑407.1 is repealed.

SECTION 8. G.S. 14‑408 is repealed.

And here's what is to be repealed, including:

A permit may not be issued to the following persons:

(1) (Effective until February 1, 2011) One who is under an indictment or information for or has been convicted in any state, or in any court of the United States, of a felony (other than an offense pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, or restraints of trade). However, a person who has been convicted of a felony in a court of any state or in a court of the United States and who is later pardoned may obtain a permit, if the purchase or receipt of a pistol or crossbow permitted in this Article does not violate a condition of the pardon.

(1) (Effective February 1, 2011) One who is under an indictment or information for or has been convicted in any state, or in any court of the United States, of a felony (other than an offense pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, or restraints of trade). However, a person who has been convicted of a felony in a court of any state or in a court of the United States and (i) who is later pardoned, or (ii) whose firearms rights have been restored pursuant to G.S. 14‑415.4, may obtain a permit, if the purchase or receipt of a pistol or crossbow permitted in this Article does not violate a condition of the pardon or restoration of firearms rights.

(2) One who is a fugitive from justice.

Which I guess is really moot, if you're not going to require anybody to obtain a permit...

I guess during our recent live blogging session somebody here should have asked Rep. Faison what his definition of anarchy is, but it really didn't cross my mind at the time. So I'm asking now. WTF is this all about?

Comments

Faison responds

I hope he does respond

I just can't fathom it, and I need to be able to fathom it.

Another "Give a schizophrenic a handgun" bill?

An Iowa GOP legislator referred to a similar bill in that state as the "Give a schizophrenic a handgun" bill. Now, thanks to OUR enlightened GOP legislators, we may have one, too. Heaven help us.

CarolZ

I'm with scharrison. It's unfathomable and making my brain hurt.

The only things that make this make sense to me are assumptions like:

1 - The sponsors must own or invest in stores that sell guns.
2 - The sponsors must invest heavily in manufacturers of guns and ammuntion.
3 - The sponsors must be nihilists.

Assumptions #4-100 are all variations on #3. "The sponsors must be x," where x is an increasingly disparaging and profane set of descriptors.

About the only thing

I can think of that would make any kind of sense is if this was an effort to separate pistols and crossbows, but there doesn't appear to be a companion bill that would put pistols back in the need-a-permit category.

But (unless I'm mistaken) you wouldn't need to repeal statutes to do that anyway, just rewrite them.

By the way, that's a whole lotta wishful thinking on my part.