Defensive Carry banner

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,161 Posts
I absolutely agree with you. It is not the gov'mint's business what one does in his own home. However, no Constitutional right is absolute; there have to be a few common sense limitations. And one of those is when someone is intoxicated in his home w/ a firearm resulting in impaired judgment and he is engaging in behavior that puts others at immediate risk.

Here is a real-life example that if it had occurred in the idiot's house, would have been just as wrong:

Larry decides to get drunk and sit in a lawn chair in his front yard w/ a .270 Winchester randomly firing at nothing in particular; his home being located along a reasonably busy State Highway. As Larry was located in the country, he was not (except for being intoxicated w/ a firearm) doing anything wrong. Should I have waited at his property line until he perforated a neighbor's house, car, or person driving past? If Larry had been sober, he would not have acted in this manner; but his excessive alcohol intake had impaired his judgement.
Brother, with all due respect, if you had called your Game Wardens they would have handled that for you without you breaking a sweat.

I have no earthly idea why you don't have breach of the peace and menacing laws in Ohio. Most states have such laws on the books and regularly enforce them. Do you not have state laws already on the books about someone being drunk and discharging a weapon across a highway or at neighbors homes? If you don't know about those, I'll be willing to bet the Game Wardens do.

However, in this example, your proposed law before your Supreme Court wouldn't help at all because it isn't about someone outside on their property, it is about someone inside their home. Your previous example is covered by aggravated assault or domestic violence laws, are they not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sister and msgt/ret

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,323 Posts
Considering laws against firearm usage while drinking I don't find it rediculous. Matter of fact I asked about drinking and home defense here.
In Virginia it is perfectly legal to drink in a public venue, think restaurant, while armed as long as your sidearm is openly carried. If you conceal carry it becomes illegal to do this, unless you are the attorney general or a member of his staff. I have taken a small glass of wine and even a single shot scotch on occasion when armed but as a general rule I refrain from imbibing when carrying. Now in my home, as was said it's none of any government's business whether I drink or not and whether I do this when firearms are present or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
...However, no Constitutional right is absolute; there have to be a few common sense limitations...
Those "common sense" limitations must, themselves, be limited.

"Government exists only to smooth the intercourse among its people" (or something very close to that). To that end, we have our Constitution, which attempts to limit the power of government. Essentially, the Constitution tells our government what it may not do.

In your example of "drunken Larry" and his rifle, the government's intervention is permitted only because Larry is interfering with the lives and property of other people, and not merely because he's drunk and shooting at things.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
968 Posts
Brother, with all due respect, if you had called your Game Wardens they would have handled that for you without you breaking a sweat.

I have no earthly idea why you don't have breach of the peace and menacing laws in Ohio. Most states have such laws on the books and regularly enforce them. Do you not have state laws already on the books about someone being drunk and discharging a weapon across a highway or at neighbors homes? If you don't know about those, I'll be willing to bet the Game Wardens do.

However, in this example, your proposed law before your Supreme Court wouldn't help at all because it isn't about someone outside on their property, it is about someone inside their home. Your previous example is covered by aggravated assault or domestic violence laws, are they not?
People need to read for understanding as it makes intelligent discussion possible.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
968 Posts
Those "common sense" limitations must, themselves, be limited.

"Government exists only to smooth the intercourse among its people" (or something very close to that). To that end, we have our Constitution, which attempts to limit the power of government. Essentially, the Constitution tells our government what it may not do.

In your example of "drunken Larry" and his rifle, the government's intervention is permitted only because Larry is interfering with the lives and property of other people, and not merely because he's drunk and shooting at things.
Agree w/ your first two paragraphs. As for the third, because he is drunk his judgment is impaired and he is engaging in dangerous, illegal activity, which our law seeks to prevent before someone gets hurt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
Laws are simply pieces of paper. In the end, if someone wants to ignore it, they will. They do all the time here in the US. It's illegal to drink and drive, and that happens almost everywhere and every day. It's illegal to murder people, and that happens daily too. Then there is all the theft occurs too... the list goes on and on.

This laws goes far beyond anything that should be on the books in the US. Anywhere really, but most specifically not in the US. This nation was founded so the people could be FREE FROM the government.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,542 Posts
In Virginia it is perfectly legal to drink in a public venue, think restaurant, while armed as long as your sidearm is openly carried. If you conceal carry it becomes illegal to do this, unless you are the attorney general of a member of his staff. I have taken a small glass of wine and even a single shot scotch on occasion when armed but as a general rule I refrain from imbibing when carrying. Now in my home, as was said it's none of any government's business whether I drink or not and whether I do this when firearms are present or not.
I heard from someone in the VCDL, it might have even been PVC, that there is a term for doing the following: You CC into a restaurant, you order a drink. Before the drink comes, you subtlety hike your concealment garment up over the gun so it is OC'ed. You have your drink, have the glass taken away, then re-conceal the gun. The term was something like, "The Virginia Slide," but I may have that wrong.

One thing I worry about though, is Virginia law criminalizes the carrying of a legally concealed handgun while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. (18.2-308.012). This is a Class 1 misdemeanor offense punished by up to a year in jail, a $2,500 fine, and revocation of a concealed handgun permit. It might well make you a prohibited person for owning a gun, but I am not sure about that. The problem is that law does not define a blood alcohol content for "under the influence," like the driving laws do.

I actually got one of the attorneys from Arsenal Attorneys who taught the SD law classes I took to research that for me. She said potentially, if they wanted to, they could charge you under that law if you had any provable blood alcohol content, however small. To me, that's a bit ominous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,323 Posts
I heard from someone in the VCDL, it might have even been PVC, that there is a term for doing the following: You CC into a restaurant, you order a drink. Before the drink comes, you subtlety hike your concealment garment up over the gun so it is OC'ed. You have your drink, have the glass taken away, then re-conceal the gun. The term was something like, "The Virginia Slide," but I may have that wrong.

One thing I worry about though, is Virginia law criminalizes the carrying of a legally concealed handgun while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. (18.2-308.012). This is a Class 1 misdemeanor offense punished by up to a year in jail, a $2,500 fine, and revocation of a concealed handgun permit. It might well make you a prohibited person for owning a gun, but I am not sure about that. The problem is that law does not define a blood alcohol content for "under the influence," like the driving laws do.

I actually got one of the attorneys from Arsenal Attorneys who taught the SD law classes I took to research that for me. She said potentially, if they wanted to, they could charge you under that law if you had any provable blood alcohol content, however small. To me, that's a bit ominous.
Yes it is a bit, perhaps more than a bit ominous. As for "the slide", I have never heard that term but have done this myself. What I do is sit in a booth with my strong side to the wall of the booth. Then I uncover my sidearm. Before leaving, I cover up again. This is not illegal but I have gotten flak about doing this on another site in the past. As I said, I prefer not to imbibe when carrying. And it's not because I fear having my reflexes or judgement dimmed but rather for the negative message it may send if my sidearm is seen. One small glass of wine or one single shot of scotch is not going to have any noticeable or practical affect on me. But as you said, you just never know what could come of it. A zealous prosecutor who wants to make an example of you for doing something like this could make your life hell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,542 Posts
@SouthernBoyVA: I was also thinking that when this might most likely come up is if, heaven forbid, you actually had to use your gun. That could have some additional ramifications.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,021 Posts
I do not understand the VA law about CC vs OC when drinking in public. What does it accomplish?
I have a simple rule. If I am going out for drinks I do not carry and I do not drive. Solves all problems.
If I am at home, none of your business what I do inside my 4 walls.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,180 Posts
As long as we're talking about hypothetical situations, it seems to me the law would obviate one's legitimate right to self-defense inside his own home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,161 Posts
People need to read for understanding as it makes intelligent discussion possible.
You're the one who posted the hypotheticals. Maybe you shouldn't try to concoct situations to support your arguments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,826 Posts
People need to read for understanding as it makes intelligent discussion possible.
Here’s the problem that I see in what you said; People usually don’t read anything they are not interested in and most do not think intelligently.

IMO this has nothing to do with the gubment making any decisions about what you do in your home and nobody invited them in, this has to do with “control” and nothing more.

What is going to be done if a drunk person stumbles falls on a heavy object that kills someone at their home ~ will they then make it illegal to drink again?

We could “what if” this to death; bottom line is that this is America and we have rights one of which is we drink all we want in the privacy of our home. If your scared of a drunk then stay away that’s a persons right too. I rarely drink, but if I wanted to drink a lot then I don’t give a puppy’s behind what somebody else thinks!

‘Merica! 🇺🇸
:danceban: :para:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,323 Posts
I do not understand the VA law about CC vs OC when drinking in public. What does it accomplish?
I have a simple rule. If I am going out for drinks I do not carry and I do not drive. Solves all problems.
If I am at home, none of your business what I do inside my 4 walls.
It's really pretty simple. Open carry is the normal mode of carrying a sidearm and has never required a permit. Concealed carry does require a permit and the laws that come with that permit. Drinking while openly carrying a firearm is not illegal, however being intoxicated while carrying can get you in some serious trouble, open or concealed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,323 Posts
@SouthernBoyVA: I was also thinking that when this might most likely come up is if, heaven forbid, you actually had to use your gun. That could have some additional ramifications.
It may if there is any sort of cloudiness in your decision to use deadly force. But if your reasons are clear and fall within the parameters of justifiable use of deadly force, I suspect you'd be okay. Would I bet my life on it? Nope. But if your actions are clear to the jury under the situation in which you were forced to defend yourself, I would doubt you would have any problems. Of course, we are talking about not being under the influence here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
...because [Larry] is drunk his judgment is impaired and he is engaging in dangerous, illegal activity, which our law seeks to prevent before someone gets hurt. [emphasis added]
...But doesn't this put the state into the position of making someone a criminal before he has committed any crime?
Somehow, that seems pretty darn unconstitutional.

(I'm defining "crime" here exactly as you seem to see it: Something the state sees as potentially dangerous, even if it has not yet impacted anyone else.)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
968 Posts
You're the one who posted the hypotheticals. Maybe you shouldn't try to concoct situations to support your arguments.
No "hypothetical" as it happened as I stated. Once again, please read for understanding.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
968 Posts
Here’s the problem that I see in what you said; People usually don’t read anything they are not interested in and most do not think intelligently.
I certainly agree w/ this, especially on this site. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rock and Glock
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top