By David Rogers. January 12, 2012. BLOWING ROCK --  A new state law aiming to create statewide uniformity in the rights of legally permitted carriers of concealed hand guns has instead resulted in a hodgepodge of interpretation and passionate community divisions.  On Tuesday night, Blowing Rock was at the center of the firestorm.

Large Turnout Expected, Realized

An estimated 170 people turned out to the Town Council meeting Tuesday evening. Anticipating a large turnout for the public hearing on weapons control, town managers moved the meeting from the diminutive Town Hall chambers to the much larger “Community Room” at the Blowing Rock Art & History Museum (BRAHM).

BRAHM business manager David Harwood told Blowing Rock News after the nearly 4-hour meeting was adjourned that museum staff had set up chairs for 137 people.  When Mayor J.B. Lawrence’s gavel fell to call the Town Council meeting to order, nearly every chair had somebody in it and some three dozen more people lined the walls and spilled into the second floor deck of the atrium and an adjacent conference room.

Passion on Both Sides

“This was a tough issue,” Lawrence told Blowing Rock News in a Wednesday morning interview. “And it is still a tough issue,” he said, after Town Commissioners had heard and articulated heartfelt arguments for and against a proposal for weapons regulation prepared by Town staff.  Endorsed by the Planning Board with only minor modifications, the staff’s proposal intended to bring town ordinances into compliance with House Bill 650, passed by the North Carolina General Assembly in June and which went into effect on December 1, 2011.

Hearing the responses from at least one of the legislation's architects, many questions still remain as to whether compliance was achieved by the Council in drawing circles around Memorial Park, Davant Field, and the Robbins Swimming Pool and saying you can carry legally permitted, concealed hand guns anywhere except in those three areas.

Headlined “Freedom Betrayed in Blowing Rock,” a missive penned by one of House Bill 650’s self-described architects, Paul Valone, President of Raleigh-based advocacy group Grass Roots North Carolina (GRNC), declares to members on the organization’s website, “Unfortunately, the Blowing Rock Town Council sided with anti-gun hysteria over your safety in city parks. They passed on the opportunity to make their parks safer from criminals and instead voted to adopt the proposed ordinance banning guns in selected areas by a 3 to 2 vote.

“…of the antis, mostly all were Blowing Rock residents.  Those (commissioners) voting against freedom appeared to be afraid of their anti-gun constituents.”

It should be noted that if Valone was present at the Town Council meeting, he did not make himself known, neither to Blowing Rock News nor to the Council proceedings, so his personally expressed observations are most likely based on reports from one or more of the several GRNC members that were present.

The prevailing side for more restrictions on guns was not without reaction.  A Thursday email received by Blowing Rock News from the Durham-based advocacy group, North Carolinians Against Gun Violence, concludes, “With this vote, Blowing Rock joins the more than 20 local governments that have decided that guns and playgrounds don’t mix.”

Historical Backdrop

The Town’s legacy ordinances, dating back to their adoption in 1995, prohibited anyone other than law enforcement officers from carrying weapons on any town property.  The restricted areas included not only town buildings, but also Town-owned parks and recreation areas.

House Bill 650 disallows restrictions on concealed carry except in what the bill architects intended to be narrowly-defined exceptions, specifically identifying playgrounds, athletic fields, swimming pools and athletic facilities. Consequently, the bill’s passage rendered Blowing Rock’s legacy ordinances unenforceable, requiring extensive revisions if any permitted restrictions were to apply.

Public comments at Tuesday night’s meeting, both by citizens as well as by Town Commissioners, reflected how deeply divisive this issue is, especially in Blowing Rock.  Mayor Lawrence reported that (not counting commissioners) 15 people spoke in favor of the more restrictive proposal offered to the Board of Commissioners, while 14 people spoke on behalf of gun rights. Blowing Rock News estimates that 55% of the Community Room were pro-restrictions, 45% were against restrictions. And if those numbers were not evidence enough of how evenly divided people are on the issue, the Commissioners vote was 3-2 in favor of adopting the proposal prepared by Town staff, with counsel from the Town Attorney and endorsement from the Planning Board with only minor modification.

“You have to be proud of Blowing Rock,” Mayor Lawrence observed in the interview. “People were civil and respectful, and there are strong, very legitimate feelings on both sides. I was proud of how our people articulated their beliefs and let their opinions be known.”

A Statewide Hodgepodge Has Resulted

While House Bill 650 was intended to create uniformity in gun rights, it has not achieved that objective. Research provided by Blowing Rock Planning Director Kevin Rothrock to the Town Commissioners shows that at least 22 North Carolina municipalities have so far passed revised ordinances in response to the new law, with at least six more still considering the legislation’s requirements and ramifications for their particular jurisdictions. Of the 22, only three municipalities voted not to regulate the concealed carry of weapons by legally permitted owners, while 19 have chosen to impose restrictions according to their respective interpretations of the new law within the context of a jurisdiction’s circumstances. Some have only imposed modest restrictions, others have imposed what the GRNC has described as "over-reaching" restrictions.

On December 14^th, Blowing Rock News invited and published a guest editorial by the GRNC’s Mr. Valone to further explain the objectives of House Bill 650 in advancing gun rights.

In his editorial, as well as in subsequent telephone conversations, Valone asserted that the legislation language was straightforward, and that the amendment to the bill only permits municipalities to restrict concealed carry in very specific recreation areas: playgrounds, athletic fields, swimming pools and athletic facilities.

In an Editor’s Response to his editorial (the full text of the editorial and response can be found HERE) and in subsequent telephone communications with Mr. Valone, Blowing Rock News maintained that not all sides are likely to agree with the GRNC position.

Regardless of what was in the mind of the bill architects and sponsors (which included the High Country’s State Senator Dan Soucek) when they wrote the legislation, the text of the bill is still going to be interpreted differently by different people.  It is a reality of the human condition.  Different people, with different values, different experiences, and operating under different sets of circumstances, are going to arrive at different conclusions.   Two people can look at the same graphic image and see different things. Three people can look at the same text and interpret what it means in three different ways.

Each municipality in North Carolina reserves the right to interpret new laws and apply them based on those interpretations. Where differences occur among different constituent interests, the court system is available to adjudicate, or to render a “final” interpretation. It is a power of judicial review that can be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

What Did Blowing Rock Decide?

The majority of Blowing Rock’s decision-makers, some of whom are card-carrying, legally permitted carriers of concealed weapons, determined that the parks and athletic fields in the central district are playgrounds in their entirety.

After the period set aside for public comments (which consumed almost an hour and 45 minutes), Mayor Lawrence turned to the audience and thanked everyone in attendance. “This (being heard) is what government is all about.”

In an atmosphere filled with tension and anticipation, Mr. Lawrence then entertained a motion for action by the Board outlining, “There are three things that you can do. You can pass the ordinance as presented. You can disallow the ordinance as presented. Or you can modify the ordinance as presented (and pass it with the modifications).”

Council newcomer Dan Phillips was in his first full Town Council meeting since his election in November, but that did not stop him from being the first to speak, bringing laughter and smiles from commissioners and onlookers on both sides of the issue when he asked rhetorically, “Does anybody have any Advil?”

Phillips then moved to disallow the proposal. After his motion was seconded by Tommy Klutz, Phillips shared, “Being the freshman (on the Council), I have thought about this issue a great deal, (including) a lot of sleepless nights. I don’t have all the answers. All I know what to do is to tell the truth and speak from the heart.

“I’m not an NRA member,” Phillips continued. “I am not a concealed weapons carrier, but I have done a lot of research…and a lot of you have called me or spoken to me at Food Lion or on the street. I have listened to everybody. I read all the emails…but in the past month’s packet (to Town Commissioners), I also read  a Police Department report that said we had two forcible burglary entries and six drug violations…and in October when the DOT was repaving downtown, we had six unsupervised (prison) inmates.  I called the DOT in Boone and asked where did those inmates come from? They said Caldwell County. I asked what were (the inmates’) background? They (the DOT) said they didn’t know.  Those inmates were 300 feet from the park.  They were 300 feet from the elementary school.

“I think that we need to take into consideration these kinds of things,” Phillips advanced. “A year ago we had a very mentally unbalanced guy running around downtown, running in and out of the stores and churches. He was actually banned from a church. The town is not immune from danger… There is not a barrier around these parks….If anyone (threatened) one of my grandchildren or family members and someone with a concealed weapon stepped up to protect them, I would be grateful….When I lay my head on my pillow tonight, I want to feel like what I voted for was to protect the citizens and their children and our visitors...

“We can agree or disagree,” the freshman commissioner concluded, “but that is how I feel. My background runs deep in the police...half of my family was in FBI or SBI and I served in the police force as a reservist in Charlotte. I respect the police like no one does…I respect and understand people wanting to take care of their children.”

Phillips suggested that the new state law is forcing people to take sides on this issue. “I have to decide, and the rest of us have to decide, how we feel about it.  This is how I feel, and I wanted to explain why I made the motion (to reject the proposal)."

Doug Matheson

The first to speak in opposition to Phillips' motion, Doug Matheson said that there are a lot of responsibilities that come with the Town Commissioner position, pointing out that the restrictions in place since 1995 had worked in making the downtown parks safe. “I feel one of those responsibilities …is to protect and promote the health and safety of all the citizens of Blowing Rock, including our children.  I have a different viewpoint. By doing away (with restrictions on guns in town parks), it is against how I feel we are protecting ourselves. I am sympathetic to the other side, but I feel that when the Second Amendment was written, in the back of (the authors’) minds there would come a time when restrictions were necessary.”

Tommy Klutz

The other Commissioner coming down on the side of gun rights and less restrictions was Tommy Klutz. “I stand on the Second Amendment (granting rights to U.S. citizens to keep and bear arms). I don’t see any reason to change it…I choose the Second Amendment.”

Jim Steele

With another dissenting view to Mr. Phillips' motion, Jim Steele said, “I quite agree with both sides of the issue….but the oaths that we took (in taking office) were to defend the state and federal constitutions and the laws of our town…We also took an oath to do what is right for the citizens of our town in protecting their health and safety.

“Wouldn’t it be nice if all of those were in concert with one another?” Steele asked, rhetorically. “But in this particular situation, maybe they are not…The concealed carry person I think has enough common sense to know when to use their gun, at least legally, or not.  What bothers me the most is that a child, who isn’t an adult…gets a hold of a firearm because somebody made a mistake…and took it off their person for some reason and the (child) picked it up thinking it was a play thing and by accident hurt somebody...

“…The evidence that I got this week,” said Steele, “it was seven to one among the people who called me saying that they do not want guns in the park.  The people that fund these parks are primarily from our town. Yes, we get money from the county or the state, but primarily it comes from our own citizens. And they don’t want guns (in the park).

“…This proposal actually represents a compromise,” Steele continued.  “The staff has determined that we cannot prohibit guns in these parks ( pointing to Annie Cannon Gardens, Glen Burney Trail, and Broyhill Park at Mayview Lake), where there may be a greater likelihood of a wild animal or something, but in these parks (Memorial Park, Davant Field, Robbins Swimming Pool), you don’t really need to have a concealed carry.  Is it too much to ask for someone to go to their car and put that concealed carry away when you go to a recreation area in Blowing Rock  -- forget about any other town – is it too much to ask that you put that away?  If it is that much of an inconvenience, I’m sorry.  I’m really sorry, because that is the way we want to live.

“And I have a concealed carry permit,” Mr. Steele concluded.  “…There is a whole list of places that I am denied the right to carry (my concealed gun). To add (to that list) three little places in the center of town where children can be hurt from an accident, I just don’t think it is worth it.  If somewhere down the line our village is getting more dangerous, then let’s revisit this issue.”

Albert Yount

“Do I know about violence?” asked the final commissioner, Albert Yount, in positioning himself against Phillips' motion. “Yes. My father for many years was a deputy sheriff in Catawba County. It’s a rough place. He lost his life during a domestic violence arrest that went terribly bad. I myself was a North Carolina probation officer, for 10 years in Hickory. Hickory is a rough town…(None) of the more than 200 men that I called on as a probation officer were ever mad at me because they knew that they had done something on their own that warranted incarceration. But mamas and daddys and aunts and uncles and drinkin’ buddies of those men were something else. I carried a gun every single day of that job. It wasn’t concealed. A Smith & Wesson 38. I was kicked, spit on, threatened. One 300-pound woman tried to take my eyes out with a Bobby pin. Someone else sicced two German Shepherd dogs on me. All that even with me standing there, and with a gun clearly visible.

“In all my years with the Hickory Police Department,” Yount concluded, “I never pulled that gun on anybody. You shoot somebody, and your life changes.”

A Final Vote

With a 3-2 vote, the Board rejected Phillips motion, then with the same 3-2 vote, the Board passed a motion by Yount (seconded by Matheson) that the staff proposal be adopted as the revised Town ordinance.

One Blowing Rock resident that did not speak in the public hearing but who spoke with Blowing Rock News on condition of anonymity said, “Had the Commissioners voted to modify the proposal so that it permitted concealed carry in some parts of Memorial Park or Davant Field and not in others, such as at the gazebo or restrooms, or in the Rotary Pavilion, it would have created a patchwork of permissibility.  It even may have been more frustrating for concealed carry permit holders than an outright ban, and probably next to impossible to enforce.  From that standpoint alone, drawing lines around the Memorial and Davant parks, as well as the grounds of the Robbins Swimming Pool, is the right thing to do.

“But beyond that,” he continued, “the architects of this legislation have not really spent any meaningful time in Blowing Rock.  If they have, they haven't paid much attention.  Many of our kids leave school in the afternoon and go around the corner to play in Memorial Park and Davant Field. They always have. My family members who grew up here, have told me stories about their escapades in and around town and the fun they used to have in the central parks.  Our tourists’ children play in these parks, too. One minute they may be swinging or sliding or whatever in the more clearly defined playground areas, but the next minute they are playing hide-and-seek or tag at the gazebo or along the benches that line the street, or near the horseshoe pits.  The entire park is a playground.  Similarly, they play ball at the baseball field and cool off in the shade of the Rotary Pavilion.  They use the restrooms while they are playing.  The entire park, in each case, is their playground.

“I am a concealed carry permit holder, too. I have the utmost faith that my fellow permit holders are sane, sober, and law-abiding people.  In one of our downtown parks that are heavily used by children playing in the late afternoons and on weekends and holidays, the odds may very well be five million to one against a concealed carry permit holder’s firearm discharging, even by accident. But I am not willing to risk the impact of that potential accident on even one child’s life. This is not Hickory nor is it any other municipality that has been described as ‘rough’ and dangerous to be in public recreation areas.  This is Blowing Rock.  If our circumstances change so that our Town parks are no longer safe places in which our children can play, then I will be first in line to revisit these restrictions. But not now.”

Comments: