Anti Gun Senator (R.C. Soles) Shoots Intruder (merged threads)
- Thread starter zombienerd
- Start date
- Status
hammerklavier
Member
Is he anti-gun?
zombienerd
Member
Grassroots NC gave him One star in Firearms Friendly.
http://grnc.org/remember_november/nc_senate_race.htm
I'm looking for his voting record, but coming up short handed
Here's another site with more detail and annotations:
http://johnjacobh.wordpress.com/200...un-control-Democrat-rc-soles-shoots-intruder/
http://grnc.org/remember_november/nc_senate_race.htm
I'm looking for his voting record, but coming up short handed
Here's another site with more detail and annotations:
http://johnjacobh.wordpress.com/200...un-control-Democrat-rc-soles-shoots-intruder/
NC is a fairly gun-friendly state, and it is surprising that a state senator from Tabor City (not a big town in this state) would be an anti. But, perhaps Sen. Stoles' position on gun legislation may take a different turn after this incident...heck, he might even have an epiphany...
He lives armed and votes anti... More than anything else, politicians like being re-elected, and last cycle, Dem = re-elected, ...and Dem = vote anti.
He's a self-serving poser playing the suckers. Politicians will never change. We just need to educate the suckers.
Les
He's a self-serving poser playing the suckers. Politicians will never change. We just need to educate the suckers.
Les
LubeckTech
Member
Term limits - the founders never envisioned "career politicians" and they didn't seem to envision the current crop of parasites either.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
Don't count on it. Just because HE likes being armed doesn't mean he likes YOU being armed.
"Gun control isn't about guns. It's about control."
NC is a red state but with blue cities which have grown to the point where iirc NC went with Obama last election. I've gotten the impression cities like Charlotte pull in financial types from farther up the east cost.
Edit: Apparently there is a little more to this. link
I thought someone in his circumstance could not legally shoot until the door had been kicked and until then he's not legally deemed in sufficient danger to justify lethal force. Perhaps NC has the relativity rule though, where an old timer can shoot where a young dude couldn't?
Edit: Apparently there is a little more to this. link
Last edited:
Yes, NC went blue for Obama. Hell, I'm in extreme northern Iredell County, and even every Iredell precinct but mine in this traditionally Republican County went for Obama. But that's only unusual for national office. Statewide offices have been held by a majority of Democrats, albeit conservative Democrats, since the civil war. They've kept all the infrastructure money down East for a century and a half while all the growth is happening in the Piedmont... it was an agriculture thing. ...But it's changing... for the worse... Now we have so many Liberal Northern refugees here that they're voting to turn NC into the same cesspools they fled.
Go figure.
Les
Go figure.
Les
AirForceShooter
Member
Clearly you don't understand the term "anti-gun".
It doesn't mean no guns.
It means I can have a gun, if I'm politically connected, and no one else can.
It's that simple.
AFS
It doesn't mean no guns.
It means I can have a gun, if I'm politically connected, and no one else can.
It's that simple.
AFS
A politician's public stance usually has very little to do with his/her own beliefs. Hell, they'll sell out Christ incarnate if it gets them greenbacks and votes. You don't get to be in the senate for 30+ years by sticking up for your ideals. "It's nothing personal, just business"
mgkdrgn
Member
Hear Hear! Return the government OF the people TO the people. No more incumbents ... forever. Return national/state political office to the "public service" it was meant to be.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Not as far as the legal code goes. NC's gun laws are middle of the road to slightly anti; NC tries hard to be the Massachusetts of the South, in so many ways.
NC's quirky version of the Castle Doctrine allows shooting to stop a forced entry DURING the entry attempt, but not after the bad guy successfully enters your home; once he completes the forced entry (i.e., comes crashing through the door), the Castle Doctrine protections vanish and you're back to reasonable fear of imminent death, serious bodily harm, or a forcible felony, just as if you were attacked on the sidewalk instead of in your own living room.
Sav .250
Member
wrs840:
"Do as I say not as I do" ........ would fit nicely with your comment.
"Do as I say not as I do" ........ would fit nicely with your comment.
Shung
Member
This is beyond any understandable logic...
Ohio Gun Guy
Member
To quote a bumper sticker...."Politicians prefer un-armed SUBJECTS"
I agree with the previous comments, and add that around the world where there is "Gun control", the government still manages to have guns.........
I agree with the previous comments, and add that around the world where there is "Gun control", the government still manages to have guns.........
Whoa, there is a lot of misleading information floating around in this thread regarding NC's Castle Doctrine Law. Per North Carolina General Statutes §14-51.1:
Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.
(a) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using any degree of force that the occupant reasonably believes is necessary, including deadly force, against an intruder to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruder's unlawful entry (i) if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the occupant or others in the home or residence, or (ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.
(b) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section.
I don't know where this "has to be coming through the door" interpretation came from, but it is not correct. Unlawful entry (which the law clearly states can be terminated) is established when the intruder is in your home, not coming through the door. The prevention of unlawful entry is covered in the first part of para (a). Also, since NC has a reciprical CCW statute and a Castle Doctrine law, it is clearly in the quasi gun-friendly state category. Those states that lack one or both of these provisions would be classified otherwise.
Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.
(a) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using any degree of force that the occupant reasonably believes is necessary, including deadly force, against an intruder to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruder's unlawful entry (i) if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the occupant or others in the home or residence, or (ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.
(b) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section.
I don't know where this "has to be coming through the door" interpretation came from, but it is not correct. Unlawful entry (which the law clearly states can be terminated) is established when the intruder is in your home, not coming through the door. The prevention of unlawful entry is covered in the first part of para (a). Also, since NC has a reciprical CCW statute and a Castle Doctrine law, it is clearly in the quasi gun-friendly state category. Those states that lack one or both of these provisions would be classified otherwise.
Last edited:
hammerklavier
Member
Thanks for that, I live here and didn't know you could shoot them before they break in the door given a reasonable fear...
The no retreat, of course, means you don't have to warn them, either.
The no retreat, of course, means you don't have to warn them, either.
I don't think this is true. Considering the visibility that this incident is getting in NC, voters will hold Soles' feet to the fire. After the recession hit and the housing market froze up, there has been a precipitous drop in immigration from liberal states like NJ and NY; there is actually a swing more towards conservative Dems and Centrist Republicans.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
It is my understanding that the "unlawful entry" is widely interpreted as the act of entering, rather than the continued presence in the house; prevention of the entry may occur as the entry is initiated, and termination of the entry can occur while the entry is in progress, but if you do not witness the entry, you are back to square one. That is not to say you cannot defend yourself, just that there is no presumption of justifiability to the degree that there is with most Castle Doctrine statutes. That is the interpretation we were given in the self-defense-law portion of the CHL class, at least, and I believe the state-produced training video addressed that issue specifically, though it's been a while. I'd like to see case law on this, personally. I think the intent was good, but I think the statute was badly written.
As to NC's gun friendliness, it is better than the bottom dozen states, but that's about it. The Brady Campaign rates North Carolina's gun laws as 13th strictest in the nation, and I have to say that overall that's a pretty fair assessment.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/scorecard/2008/2008_scorecard_rankings.pdf
Having lived in Florida, it was a bit of a shock to move back here and deal with the myriad carry restrictions and whatnot.
I agree that the law is badly written and hopefully it will get amended for clarity in the future. I also agree that North Carolina is not Florida regarding firearms laws (I, too, used to live in the Sunshine State). I also used to live up in the mid-Atlantic area where the gun laws were draconian at best. I suppose our perceptions of states' gun policies are relative to our previous exposure and whether they are more liberal or restrictive than before. In this case, NC is much, much better than many states I have lived in previously, but if I had my druthers, I would rather live in Vermont or Utah.
Last edited:
hammerklavier
Member
- Status
