Respectfull, I disagree.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/assault
Are you confusing "assault" with the actual impermissive touch of "battery"?
stay safe.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Brandishing
- Thread starter rev.david
- Start date
Respectfull, I disagree.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/assault
Are you confusing "assault" with the actual impermissive touch of "battery"?
stay safe.
OC for ME
Regular Member
You are correct, the tools used are irrelevant, academically speaking.Nay, nay. The 2A includes such instruments.
IMHO - dueling was never a 2A thing. Dueling is not about the right to "keep and bear Arms." Dueling is about using those Arms in a manner not intended - to settle an argument. That is precisely of what some anti's try to hang about our necks.
Dueling is an aggressive act, not a defensive one. It is not "necessary to the security of a free State...."
Dueling, with pistols, was a agreement between two gentlemen, free citizens, to resolve a dispute in a mutually agreed manner. There was no legal prohibition against dueling at one point in our history. But, the state stepped in, and made the act of two free citizens resolving a dispute in a manner of their choosing unlawful. The state mandates that two free citizens must use the state to resolve disputes. There is nothing liberty centric about this conflict resolution technique, academically speaking that is.
Fortunately we have "evolved" beyond dueling with arms.
Fortunately we have "evolved" beyond dueling with arms.
In the words of one well known Gun Rights President.
"Who is this we white man":lol:
I had apparently missed the above the first time around and so just got the chance to read it. Man, I just love reading your briefs and pleadings -- and I mean that seriously. I think that this is one of those "must" reads for anyone seriously interested in understanding the current brandishing laws and those problems.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Fortunately we have "evolved" beyond dueling with arms.
No need for the scare quotes IMO.
Remember that dueling continued for some time after it was outlawed. The famous (and awesome) Burr-Hamilton duel was illegal, yet that did not stop the participants (who took elaborate precautions to avoid the law).
It seems to me that, as usual, the law followed (and took credit for) a social shift which was already underway, rather than forcing such a change.
Prohibitions which do not have the support of society at large are doomed to failure. See, for instance, prohibition of drugs.
Very few drugs are prohibited, and even those that are considered such can be purchased legally at mom & pop operations, giant retail chains, even at Wal-Mart.
We call them Drug Stores.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Very few drugs are prohibited, and even those that are considered such can be purchased legally at mom & pop operations, giant retail chains, even at Wal-Mart.
We call them Drug Stores.
Sure, but "prohibition of some drugs" is too long-winded.
Usually I just stick with "prohibition". I felt the need to be specific here, but I suppose a reference to alcohol prohibition would have been equally useful.
OC for ME
Regular Member
Well stated.
JoeSparky
Centurion
KEEP AND BEAR ARMS---- Nothing specific about the TYPE of arms!:monkey
JoeSparky
Centurion
Nope, please re-read my post. Was not making ANY argument about whether placing ones hand on the butt of their holstered firearm was appropriate or legal or a crime of any sort--- just that it is patently unfair to have the exact same action a crime for one and not for another based upon who employs them.
Or for example, if it isn't to insensitive---- a uniformed officer or officer of the court points a finger at a retiredperson without repurcussions during a discussion compared to a retired individual "person" pointing a finger at a uniformed officer and gets arrested, charged, drug through a court proceeding with all of its associated costs and expenses....
I know in my example the citizen was eventually found to have not violated the law but he may have beat the charge but not the ride.....
Last edited:
user
Accomplished Advocate
Hey! Interesting Brandishing Case in Pr. Wm. Cir. Ct. Coming Up!
There's a really interesting brandishing case coming up, it's a public hearing, and we can use all the support we can get! August McCarthy will be arguing a motion to dismiss on Friday, April 11, at 9 o'clock a.m., and the jury trial is set for Wednesday, April 16 at 10 o'clock. Both hearings will be of great interest.
We've been working for some time on identifying the problems with the brandishing statute, both with an eye to legislative reform, as well as criminal defense, and the motion to dismiss will be attacking the statute on a number of fronts. If that motion is unsuccessful, the trial will be one of those cases in which the defendant did, in fact, hold a gun, but it was in self-defense against a much larger guy who was approaching him in an aggressive manner and making threats. And he never held the gun other than at "ready position", muzzle pointed at the ground. The other guy was road-enraged - in a case similar to that of our Liverpudlian friend, he thought the client should have gotten out of his way.
Prince William County Circuit Court, 9311 Lee Avenue Manassas, VA 20110
There are security scanners operated by the sheriff's office at the entrance; weapons, cameras and recording devices prohibited, and court-room-appropriate attire is required. Best to leave everything other than car keys, emergency medicines, and Id. in the car. If you feel like wearing shooting glasses, that's ok.
There's a really interesting brandishing case coming up, it's a public hearing, and we can use all the support we can get! August McCarthy will be arguing a motion to dismiss on Friday, April 11, at 9 o'clock a.m., and the jury trial is set for Wednesday, April 16 at 10 o'clock. Both hearings will be of great interest.
We've been working for some time on identifying the problems with the brandishing statute, both with an eye to legislative reform, as well as criminal defense, and the motion to dismiss will be attacking the statute on a number of fronts. If that motion is unsuccessful, the trial will be one of those cases in which the defendant did, in fact, hold a gun, but it was in self-defense against a much larger guy who was approaching him in an aggressive manner and making threats. And he never held the gun other than at "ready position", muzzle pointed at the ground. The other guy was road-enraged - in a case similar to that of our Liverpudlian friend, he thought the client should have gotten out of his way.
Prince William County Circuit Court, 9311 Lee Avenue Manassas, VA 20110
There are security scanners operated by the sheriff's office at the entrance; weapons, cameras and recording devices prohibited, and court-room-appropriate attire is required. Best to leave everything other than car keys, emergency medicines, and Id. in the car. If you feel like wearing shooting glasses, that's ok.
Last edited:
That would be worth crossing the Ni river!
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
Every state has laws to cover assault with a weapon. The brandishing and in NC GATTTOP charge are absolutely unnecessary. Unwarranted handling of a firearm in a non threatening manner but one to cause alarm the reckless conduct charge can be used.
To be on the safe side though, I keep my hands off my holstered weapon.
To be on the safe side though, I keep my hands off my holstered weapon.
User,
I'd like to be there on Friday. How long do you expect the hearing to last? When I get into the courthouse will there be a sign that has a listing of cases and the associated rooms? Or is there only one courtroom? Sorry, if this seems like an ignorant question, but I have never been to a court proceeding before. Just one more reason for me to go! Thank you for posting.
I'd like to be there on Friday. How long do you expect the hearing to last? When I get into the courthouse will there be a sign that has a listing of cases and the associated rooms? Or is there only one courtroom? Sorry, if this seems like an ignorant question, but I have never been to a court proceeding before. Just one more reason for me to go! Thank you for posting.
user
Accomplished Advocate
The case number is CR13002711-00; the Defendant's name is Raul Linares.
It will be in one of the Circuit Court courtrooms, probably on the third floor.
The docket will be posted, but will also be lying on the counter at the information desk.
No specific courtroom has yet been assigned.
There will be a number of cases heard on that same motions docket, but when it comes up it will take a half-hour or less. It starts at 9, and I generally figure I'll be out by lunchtime.
It will be in one of the Circuit Court courtrooms, probably on the third floor.
The docket will be posted, but will also be lying on the counter at the information desk.
No specific courtroom has yet been assigned.
There will be a number of cases heard on that same motions docket, but when it comes up it will take a half-hour or less. It starts at 9, and I generally figure I'll be out by lunchtime.
Fify - Fat fingers be damned. :lol:
Last edited:
JoeSparky
Centurion
Maybe he DID really intend for the "F" to be an "F"!:shocker: