Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 94

Thread: Another Open Carry Arrest Pending!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    While it is not illegal to carry an assault rifle, it is against the law to use the gun to alarm people, Gallichant said.

    "I think it is important that people understand that although he may not be specifically charged with carrying a weapon out in the open like that, just the act of doing so can cause public alarm, which is covered by disorderly conduct," Gallichant said.
    http://www.al.com/news/press-registe...amp;thispage=1

    Mobile, Alabama

  2. #2
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    What proof do they have that it was his intent to alarm people? This sets a dangerous trend for those who carry firearms.

  3. #3
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    While it is not illegal to carry an assault rifle, it is against the law to use the gun to alarm people, Gallichant said.

    Yah, well, that's gonna be the tactic to deal with the guys who want to go walking around in public with an EBR.

    Luckily there ain't too many of them. When I read the above, I immediately thought of one of our youngster members who was insisting that it was a good idea to "educate" people at Wal-Mart on the legality of walking around with a loaded AR. Luckily, he cooled on the idea. But it was touch and go there for a few days. This could have been him in Virginia Beach. (Andstill might be...he's not the most adaptable of persons...)



    From the linked article:

    Larry McCoy, owner of Larry's Gun Shop ..."It is not socially acceptable," McCoy said. "You just don't do that."

    I can go along with that statement. It makes a lot of sense to me. Common sense is what needs to be imbued in the characters who want to walk around residential or populated public places with loaded assault rifles.

    I recently purchased an AR, a very nice pre-ban Colt HBAR, andhave absolutely no desire to walk around my neighborhood with the dman thing. I think anybody who does have such a desire is kind of, well, you know...

    Worse, thoseopen rifle carry "educators" in populated areasare gonna hurt my gun rights in some way, I just know it. And I don't really like that.

    I agree with Larry. It ain't socially acceptable.

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    While it is not illegal to carry an assault rifle, it is against the law to use the gun to alarm people, Gallichant said.
    From the linked article:

    Larry McCoy, owner of Larry's Gun Shop ..."It is not socially acceptable," McCoy said. "You just don't do that."

    I agree with Larry. It ain't socially acceptable.
    HankT, you never fail to astound me.........
    While it may not be "socially acceptable", it is NOT aginst the law and therefor not an arrestable offense.....if we use the "SA test", we will never be able to OC in Alabama even though it is legal.
    The law is very clear on what is and is not "Disorderly Conduct" as well(see below)....they will have to show intent or recklessness.
    IMHO, the DC charge was only to allow the LEO to confiscate the weapon...without a charge, he would have had to return it. (see below)
    What if they guy was taking the weapon to have it repaired or to sell it and has no other mode of transport?....even the LEO said that "he never pointed it at anyone" etc....what was the just cause for the arrest?.....anyone else notice that the warrant had to be signed by the person who made the complaint?....again, IMHO, without more information to go on, Gallichant is a sheep tending idiot with no regard for RIGHTS....
    I hope the guy has a competent lawyer so he can sue the hell out of'em.
    All that I have to add is that I'm sure glad that we don't have "opinion police".....

    Section 13A-11-7 Disorderly conduct.
    (a) A person commits the crime of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
    (1) Engages in fighting or in violent tumultuous or threatening behavior; or
    (2) Makes unreasonable noise; or
    (3) In a public place uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or
    (4) Without lawful authority, disturbs any lawful assembly or meeting of persons; or
    (5) Obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or a transportation facility; or
    (6) Congregates with other person in a public place and refuses to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse.
    (b) Disorderly conduct is a Class C misdemeanor.
    Section 15-5-31 Search for dangerous weapon; procedure if weapon or other thing found.
    When a sheriff or other officer acting as sheriff, his deputy or any constable, acting within their respective counties, any marshal, deputy marshal or policeman of any incorporated city or town within the limits of the county or any highway patrolman or state trooper has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this article and reasonably suspects that he is in danger of life or limb, he may search such person for a dangerous weapon. If such officer finds such a weapon or any other thing, the possession of which may constitute a crime, he may take and keep it until the completion of the questioning, at which time he shall either return it, if lawfully possessed, or arrest such person.


  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    Costello said Monday that he did not see the man, but two of his neighbors and his gardener did. He said that although no one saw the man point the rifle at anyone, people were frightened. He said the gardener, who had just started cutting the grass, was so frightened that he fled without finishing the job.

    Costello said the whole incident frightened his 4-year-old daughter.

    Even though the man didn't threaten anyone or point the rifle at them, such incidents can lead to violence, Costello said.

    "When you've got someone walking up and down the street with a loaded assault rifle ... there is always the possibility that it can get out of hand, and people can get hurt," he said.

    Larry McCoy, owner of Larry's Gun Shop in the 2700 block of Pleasant Valley Road just off Government Boulevard, said Monday that he sells a Romanian-made, AK-47-style weapon for $400.

    McCoy said federal law states that a person 18 or older who is not a convicted felon can legally purchase a semiautomatic assault rifle.

    Anyone who meets the federal requirements can be in and out of his shop within 10 minutes, armed with an AK-47-style weapon and bullets.

    McCoy said, however, that he will not sell an assault rifle to anyone under 21 because he does not believe a teenager is mature enough to handle such a weapon. He said the Spring Hill incident disturbs him.

    "It is not socially acceptable," McCoy said. "You just don't do that."



  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    Costello said Monday that he did not see the man, but two of his neighbors and his gardener did. He said that although no one saw the man point the rifle at anyone, people were frightened. He said the gardener, who had just started cutting the grass, was so frightened that he fled without finishing the job.

    Costello said the whole incident frightened his 4-year-old daughter.

    Even though the man didn't threaten anyone or point the rifle at them, such incidents can lead to violence, Costello said.

    "When you've got someone walking up and down the street with a loaded assault rifle ... there is always the possibility that it can get out of hand, and people can get hurt," he said.

    Larry McCoy, owner of Larry's Gun Shop in the 2700 block of Pleasant Valley Road just off Government Boulevard, said Monday that he sells a Romanian-made, AK-47-style weapon for $400.

    McCoy said federal law states that a person 18 or older who is not a convicted felon can legally purchase a semiautomatic assault rifle.

    Anyone who meets the federal requirements can be in and out of his shop within 10 minutes, armed with an AK-47-style weapon and bullets.

    McCoy said, however, that he will not sell an assault rifle to anyone under 21 because he does not believe a teenager is mature enough to handle such a weapon. He said the Spring Hill incident disturbs him.

    "It is not socially acceptable," McCoy said. "You just don't do that."
    Hate to put gun shops on my list of places not to patronize....but this guy earned it.


  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I think being socally acceptable has its place in our lifestyle, but this is too far.

    However, on the other hand, having an assault rifle for personal defense, well that might be a bit much, not to say that it isn't a good choice for defensive carry, but I believe people are probably less alarmed at firearms in holsters, rather than rifles on straps, slings, or just being carried.

    I don't agree with it, it is legal, and he should be able to do what he wants.

    Personally I don't think it was needed for personal defense, but to each their own.



  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    This a*s*s McCoy just mortally insulted a large percentage of the U.S. military, all branches, some of them are MY troops. I would emphatically like to invite him to attempt an airborne self-fornication off a tall cliff.

    If this is a bit to strong for this board, let me know and I'll delete it. But that comment really chaps my fundment.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    He won't sell an AK to anyone under 21 because he presumes that they aren't mature enough??? wtf? My Mauser retread in .30-06 has a bigger punch than his beloved AK and a lot of German (when it was an 8mm) and later Colombian teenagers shed a lot of blood with it in its time.

    -ljp

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    Legba wrote:
    He won't sell an AK to anyone under 21 because he presumes that they aren't mature enough??? wtf? My Mauser retread in .30-06 has a bigger punch than his beloved AK and a lot of German (when it was an 8mm) and later Colombian teenagers shed a lot of blood with it in its time.

    -ljp
    +1
    Not only does it have "bigger punch"....it has it from a hell of a lot farther away.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    This is ridiculous. Also, don't bash anybody carrying an "Assault Rifle" in a neighborhood.

    1. Neighborhoods are quite dangerous...
    2. I doubt it was really an "Assault Rifle"
    3. Most "Assault Rifles" have sub-par calibers when compared to hunting or battle rifles, so it's actually less damaging.
    4. Perhaps he doesn't have a pistol permit, and wishes to protect himself. I find myself in this very situation, and it's not pleasant. I would prefer to carry a pistol, but I cannot legally carry one, so my only choice left is a rifle or shotgun.
    5. Regardless of people "being freaked out" or "scared" by somebody walking around with a rifle, it doesn't make it disorderly conduct. Fact is, it's legal. Just deal with it.

    Unfortunately, I can't find any previous case law concerning people charged with disorderly conduct for carrying weapons. I would assume the prosecution will argue that his behavior was "threatening" or something like that. However, the only cases I have seen in Alabama concerning disorderly conduct of this type, were cases in which a person was actively provoking someone into a fight or somesuch.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    190

    Post imported post

    Unless you believe that openly carrying a rifle is inherently immoral, compared to a handgun, then the only way for it to become socially acceptable [again] is to do it.

    It's obvious there was a time when it was socially acceptable, so it hasn't always been considered immoral to Americans.

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    Booo... McCoy.
    Some of our biggest enemies are from within.



  14. #14
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    JSK333 wrote:
    It's obvious there was a time when it was socially acceptable, so it hasn't always been considered immoral to Americans.
    This is a good point.

    But I think you have to keep going with it, i.e., When it was socially acceptable, what were the circumstances? Are those compatible with today's circumstances?, etc.



  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    JSK333 wrote:
    It's obvious there was a time when it was socially acceptable, so it hasn't always been considered immoral to Americans.
    This is a good point.

    But I think you have to keep going with it, i.e., When it was socially acceptable, what were the circumstances? Are those compatible with today's circumstances?, etc.

    That's the exact same argument people use to throw out the Constitution.


  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Mag-bayonettes!, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,407

    Post imported post

    kurtmax_0 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    JSK333 wrote:
    It's obvious there was a time when it was socially acceptable, so it hasn't always been considered immoral to Americans.
    This is a good¬* point.

    But I think you have to keep going with it, i.e., When it was socially acceptable,¬* what were the circumstances? Are those compatible with today's circumstances?, etc.
    That's the exact same argument people use to throw out the Constitution.
    Good idea kurtmax_0... I think HankT's onto something though, we don't need the 1st anymore... and the 4th should go because we need our leo/mil to be able to weed out the terrorists from the general population. Hell, let's just get rid of them all, afterall, most are 100-200 years old, and don't currently fit with the world we live in today. *rolls eyes*

    Seriously HankT, mouthpoop.
    -Unrequited

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    Is there an Alabama org looking into this and assisting with his legal fees? Does the NRA and SAF and GOA know?

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    Well the main point is: It doesn't matter at all what is socially acceptable. We might as well be a democracy if whatever is right is whatever is socially acceptable at the time.

    I'm sure I don't need to list a bunch of socially acceptable things our country has done in recent and distant past that any person (past or present) who thought logically and/or had any Christian values whatsoever would abhor.

    The fact is, people risked their lives to travel here for the sole fact that they could be socially unacceptable. The argument that we must be socially acceptable is completely contrary to America values at its core.


    EDIT: And no, there is no Alabama org. We hope to start one soon, but we wouldn't have any monetary power for awhile at the very least...

  19. #19
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    unrequited wrote:
    kurtmax_0 wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    JSK333 wrote:
    It's obvious there was a time when it was socially acceptable, so it hasn't always been considered immoral to Americans.
    This is a good point.

    But I think you have to keep going with it, i.e., When it was socially acceptable, what were the circumstances? Are those compatible with today's circumstances?, etc.
    That's the exact same argument people use to throw out the Constitution.
    Good idea kurtmax_0... I think HankT's onto something though, we don't need the 1st anymore... and the 4th should go because we need our leo/mil to be able to weed out the terrorists from the general population. Hell, let's just get rid of them all, afterall, most are 100-200 years old, and don't currently fit with the world we live in today. *rolls eyes*

    Seriously HankT, mouthpoop.
    I didn't say that, un. Maybe it's time for you to try a new approach in comprehending the written word.

    Here's a start for you, mebbe:

    http://secure.hop.com/



  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    56

    Post imported post

    I would be super careful with the socially acceptable arguments. My experience with oc is that it is not socially acceptable unless you are law enforcement. It may be tolerated. My whole family, wife, friends, local police force, business associates consider oc and in some cases cc "socially unacceptable."

    I don't see why anyone who is worried about self-defense would carry anything less than an assault rifle. These weapons are after all preferred by criminals everywhere. That is why we need to ban them. If all the criminals are harming people with assault rifles why would you ever chose to try and stop them with a pistol.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    kurtmax_0 wrote:
    EDIT: And no, there is no Alabama org. We hope to start one soon, but we wouldn't have any monetary power for awhile at the very least...
    No better time than the present. Ask for help on this issue from NRA . . .SAF . . . GOA . . .

    If this issue is not handled correctly on appeal, it could set up a very bad precedent in Alabama for open carry.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    Sorry - double post!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    That's a great point daniel! The problem is that I know criminals don't use 'assault rifles'. Most don't even use 'semi-automatic rifles that aren't assault rifles in any sense but are confused with assault rifles'. Plus I already use 'high-capacity cop-killer assault clips' in my pistol. (I don't know how the 'clip' kills cops or assaults anybody, but apparently it does according to many people! It normally just sits motionless for me.)

    Oh and, I highly doubt the NRA or any other gun rights org, except JPFO maybe, would support a guy carrying a 'ZOMG EVIL RIFLE' through a neighborhood.

    EDIT: I doubt this case will be appealed. This guy will most likely get a public 'defender' and plead guilty. In that case there is no precedent.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    doubts . . . doubts . . .

    A new and underfunded local organization bringing it to their attention is better then doing nothing.



  25. #25
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    daniel.call wrote:
    I would be super careful with the socially acceptable arguments. My experience with oc is that it is not socially acceptable unless you are law enforcement. It may be tolerated.
    I agree. It's very easy to just go off and say anything that a particular person/group doesn't like is socially unacceptable. So it requires some good judgment and restraint to not go overboard. It's very hard to do.


    daniel.call wrote:
    I don't see why anyone who is worried about self-defense would carry anything less than an assault rifle. These weapons are after all preferred by criminals everywhere. That is why we need to ban them. If all the criminals are harming people with assault rifles why would you ever chose to try and stop them with a pistol.
    Your assertion has a huge weak point. Actually, two, and kurtmax caught the second.

    You, essentially, state that those of us who are concerned about self-defense and who do not carry assault rifles are somehow wrong. That's obviously fallacious.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •