• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Guns and Alcohol Do Not Mix

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

It was an accident! No, It was self-defense. No, it was insanity. No, it was ingratitude. No, the guy was drinking my vodka!

A cautionary tale here -- booze and shooting guns do not mix. And a million excuses don't change that.

I can't figure out why the SA is asserting premeditation. There must be some general rationale motivating that.


Too bad they don't havebreathalyzers on guns...




Nov 28, 2007
In trial, riveting recording of friend's murder

By John Curran Associated Press

WHITE RIVER JUNCTION — They grew up together, went to grade school together and remained best friends into adulthood.

On Aug. 1, 2006, Matthew Stevens decided to throw a birthday party for his friend, Carl Ackley. They stocked up on booze and barbecue fixings and started drinking in the backyard of Stevens' trailer about 4 p.m.

Five hours later, police say, Stevens rushed into the trailer in South Reading, grabbed a .357 Magnum from under a mattress and shot Ackley to death on the front steps of the trailer before tearfully admitting what he'd done in a 911 call.

"He's dead. I killed my best friend," Stevens said on the tape-recorded call. "Oh, my God."

Jurors heard the recording Tuesday as the trial of Stevens, 47, got under way with a prosecutor telling jurors it was premeditated murder and Stevens' lawyer insisting it was a drunken accident that doesn't meet the legal definition of first-degree murder.

Ackley's blood alcohol content when he died was .31, almost four times the legal limit for drivers in Vermont; Stevens' was .26 or .27 at the time, according to defense attorney David Sleigh. According to an affidavit filed in the case, it was .16 when measured later.

"In this trial, there's not a shred of evidence that can support a finding of premeditation," he told the jury in Vermont District Court during his opening statement.

Deputy Windsor County State's Attorney Heidi Woessner gave a decidedly different view, saying Stevens was irate because he didn't want people drinking his vodka, because Ackley was pressuring him to serve dinner and because he thought Ackley didn't appreciate him throwing the party.

He told his live-in girlfriend as he pulled out the pistol in his bedroom that he was going to shoot Ackley.

"If anyone was spoiling for a confrontation that night it was the defendant, not Carl Ackley," she said.

Ackley, 44, was shot in the neck on the threshold of the trailer. He died at the scene.

In a chaotic 911 call made moments later by girlfriend Deborah Marcotte, 50, and another longer one made by Stevens himself, Stevens could be heard pleading for help, apologizing for what he'd done and saying he didn't know the gun was loaded.

In the second call, made by Stevens, he rambled, slurred his speech and cried to Capt. Kevin Anderson of the Vermont State Police, who was trying to keep him on the line until police arrived.

"It was an accident!" he said at one point. "I can't believe this even happened. This is a nightmare," he said at another point on the call.

He also told Anderson he wanted to be taken to Waterbury, meaning the Vermont State Hospital psychiatric facility.

Stevens sat quietly at the defense table as the recordings were played, while the 10-woman, six-man jury — 12 jurors and four alternates — listened and followed along reading from printed transcripts of the call.

Noting Stevens' stated remorse on the call, Woessner repeatedly told jurors "You can't apologize for murder."

"Despite his excuses — accidental, self defense, insanity — this case was murder," she said.

Sleigh said Ackley pursued Stevens from the back yard of the trailer around to the front door, where arriving police found him slumped on his knees, in a pool of blood.

He said the two friends had had at least one prior physical altercation, and suggested that Stevens' use of force was justified because Ackley was trying to attack him and that it appeared as though Ackley chased Stevens into the trailer.

"This came out of the blue, between two extremely intoxicated people," said Sleigh, who contended it wasn't a willful or deliberate killing.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071128/NEWS02/711280313/1003/NEWS02
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

This is why I always disagree with people that think it's ok to drink while you're carrying a gun. I think it's a bad idea, and I'm sure the defendant in this case would agree.

The defense needs to figure out what they are doing. Was he insane? Was he just too drunk? Was it an accident? Was it self defense? Can we just pick one please? Must be a public defender.


BTW, "I didn't know it was loaded" is not a good excuse, ever. Forget the 4 rules for a minute, not everyone was taught them. The fact of the matter is that you don't point guns at people. Period. You especially don't pull the damn trigger! WTH was he thinking? I mean 1.6 is a high BAC, but it's not THAT high.
 

bayboy42

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
897
Location
Gloucester Point, Virginia, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
This is why I always disagree with people that think it's ok to drink while you're carrying a gun. I think it's a bad idea, and I'm sure the defendant in this case would agree.

The defense needs to figure out what they are doing. Was he insane? Was he just too drunk? Was it an accident? Was it self defense? Can we just pick one please? Must be a public defender.


BTW, "I didn't know it was loaded" is not a good excuse, ever. Forget the 4 rules for a minute, not everyone was taught them. The fact of the matter is that you don't point guns at people. Period. You especially don't pull the damn trigger! WTH was he thinking? I mean 1.6 is a high BAC, but it's not THAT high.
Try again exp:lol:
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

bayboy42 wrote:
expvideo wrote:
This is why I always disagree with people that think it's ok to drink while you're carrying a gun. I think it's a bad idea, and I'm sure the defendant in this case would agree.

The defense needs to figure out what they are doing. Was he insane? Was he just too drunk? Was it an accident? Was it self defense? Can we just pick one please? Must be a public defender.


BTW, "I didn't know it was loaded" is not a good excuse, ever. Forget the 4 rules for a minute, not everyone was taught them. The fact of the matter is that you don't point guns at people. Period. You especially don't pull the damn trigger! WTH was he thinking? I mean 1.6 is a high BAC, but it's not THAT high.
Try again exp:lol:
I meant .16. I'm pretty sure 1.6 is morgue material :D
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
bayboy42 wrote:
expvideo wrote:
This is why I always disagree with people that think it's ok to drink while you're carrying a gun. I think it's a bad idea, and I'm sure the defendant in this case would agree.

The defense needs to figure out what they are doing. Was he insane? Was he just too drunk? Was it an accident? Was it self defense? Can we just pick one please? Must be a public defender.


BTW, "I didn't know it was loaded" is not a good excuse, ever. Forget the 4 rules for a minute, not everyone was taught them. The fact of the matter is that you don't point guns at people. Period. You especially don't pull the damn trigger! WTH was he thinking? I mean 1.6 is a high BAC, but it's not THAT high.
Try again exp:lol:
I meant .16. I'm pretty sure 1.6 is morgue material :D
Well, back in my wilder college days... :uhoh:


I'll add my own twist... guns and intoxication don't mix.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
This is why I always disagree with people that think it's ok to drink while you're carrying a gun. I think it's a bad idea ...

imperialism2024 wrote:
...I'll add my own twist... guns and intoxication don't mix.
I agree with Imperialism2024 here. Having 1 or 2 beers isn't detrimental to your capacity to reason. Getting drunk is another thing.

I consider carrying a gun the same as driving. If you're gonna get drunk, I don't recommend either. However, if you're drinking in a manner so as not to get drunk, there's no problem doing both.

For instance, I went to dinner with some buddies from school a month or so back. I had dinner and 2 beers over the course of about 4 hours. (I had the food before I started drinking, which reduces alcohol absorbtion.) I then drove home. I wasn't drunk, I didn't get in an accident, and I didn't shoot anybody.

Another example: knowing I was going to be at a going-away-party, I opted to leave the gun and car at home. I got pretty drunk and staggered home that night with no problems.

My point is that it's all about using proper judgement. The gun didn't kill Mr Ackley; a drunk Mr. Stevens (allegedly) did. If he didn't own a gun he could have just as easily grabbed a kitchen knife.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

+1

I see no mention of responsibility nor understanding of its meaning, here in this thread or in others.

The Cartridge Brothers, Clique and Claque, would be petty tyrants determining what is reasonable and who is responsible.

As to alcohol; there is good evidence that alcohol, within a limit, improves shooting - reduces tremors and speeds reaction time.

Clique and Claque, the conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
As to alcohol; there is good evidence that alcohol, within a limit, improves shooting - reduces tremors and speeds reaction time.

What is the limit, Doug?

Is this good evidencethe result of formalized research or is it anecdotal? Or something else?

What are the particulars of the good evidence you refer to?
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Remember, "Google is your friend"?
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_t...4&highlight="google+is+your+friend"

And
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_Internet:
someone who intentionally posts [ ... ] messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the singular intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.
Doing your research relieves me of no burden when you won't read/understand/remember the citation. If I thought you were other than "invincibly ignorant" (G. G. Liddy, various) then it would give me great pleasure to think that you were following along. Alas.

The situation reminds me of my daughter while she was a child, "but Dad, what if...? What if?" My response was and is, "the road to hell is paved with 'what ifs.'"

Learn some freekin' responsibility.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will with wits and guns and the truth. LAB/NRA/GOP KMA$$
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
HankT wrote:
Doug Huffman wrote:
As to alcohol; there is good evidence that alcohol, within a limit, improves shooting - reduces tremors and speeds reaction time.


What is the limit, Doug?

Is this good evidencethe result of formalized research or is it anecdotal? Or something else?

What are the particulars of the good evidence you refer to?

Doing your research relieves me of no burden when you won't read/understand/remember the citation. If I thought you were other than "invincibly ignorant" (G. G. Liddy, various) then it would give me great pleasure to think that you were following along. Alas.

The situation reminds me of my daughter while she was a child, "but Dad, what if...? What if?" My response was and is, "the road to hell is paved with 'what ifs.'"

Learn some freekin' responsibility.


You won't say what thebasis for your own assertions is?

You won't even cite any authoritive source? You won't even say if it is research... or anecdote ...personal experience...or SWAG?

Why, that's kind of interesting Doug. Very interesting. You justdon't back up what you say.

We used to have a rule around here at OCDO, at least it was a practice: to cite any source of asserted facts or code or law.

But you seem to be above that practice.
nosmiley.gif
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

They say the BAC of the victim here was .31 ... and that the shooter was .27, and later measured at .16.

If these people were as good of friends as they said they were, and they were truly celebrating the birthday, I would think they were probably keeping up with each other so .31 and .27 is believeable to me.

I have blown above .16 before during a stop (chill out I was walking, not driving)... I would never, ever, even think about carrying a weapon if I had even an inkling of an idea that I might be drinking to this point of intoxication (at above .16 I was still concious as to what was going on, but you reflexes are so blurred and delayed, and become unappropriate).

However, some of you say if you are going out drinking you shouldn't carry a gun... I can agree with that if we have the same definition of "drinking". To me, going out drinking means planting your butt at the bar for a while with the sole intention to reap the uninhibitory effects of alcohol and in excess...

Now going out and "having a beer/drink" to me, is going out to meet a buddy at the bar, to watch a game, shoot the shit, something along those lines, and casually having a drink or a beer while doing so. When I go out to do something along these lines, I might have 2 beers in an hour... keep in mind I am 245 lbs... so my BAC over an hour with 2 beers being the heigh/weight I am... well to say the least is well under the legal limit.

And I do realize that sometimes people go out with the intention of having a beer... or two, and the half hour turns into an hour, and the hour turns into two, and two beers becomes five or six... which I can only offer that you need to be responsible while drinking and planning to drive, or carry a weapon. Set a limit for yourself, follow that limit. When I carry I know my BAC is under the legal limit, the one time I go out to drink every month and a half or two.

Obviously if you know you have a problem with alcohol, you need to evaluate your actions a little more closely. I woulnd't have a hard time believing these two had problems with alcohol in the past either.

But for someone to come out and say, hey -- if you have a beer with dinner, you better leave the gun at home, well, I think that is way out of line, and ridiculous. I am not going to give up my ability to protect myself because I want to have a drink.

Granted, when you see something like this come along, it sends the message, and reinforces that alcohol can be a catalyst for ill-fated judgement and death/murder. However there are plenty of people that drink responsibly and have firearms, and manage to do just fine.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
Remember, "Google is your friend"?
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=5051&forum_id=4&highlight=%26quot%3Bgoogle+is+your+friend%26quot%3B

And
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_Internet:
someone who intentionally posts [ ...] messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the singular intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.
Doing your research relieves me of no burden when you won't read/understand/remember the citation. If I thought you were other than "invincibly ignorant" (G. G. Liddy, various) then it would give me great pleasure to think that you were following along. Alas.

The situation reminds me of my daughter while she was a child, "but Dad, what if...? What if?" My response was and is, "the road to hell is paved with 'what ifs.'"

Learn some freekin' responsibility.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will with wits and guns and the truth. LAB/NRA/GOP KMA$$
You're really annoying sometimes.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
Doug Huffman wrote:
As to alcohol; there is good evidence that alcohol, within a limit, improves shooting - reduces tremors and speeds reaction time.




Doug Huffman wrote:

The real point is that alcohol clouds one's judgment. Whether you are a better gunfighter after one beer is rather irrelevant to this incident.

If your judgment is impaired, then why would you want to carry a firearm any more than you would want to get behind the wheel of a car?

I open carry all the time. I have to open carry in a bar because of a stupid Virginia law. Drunks are not rational people and I had one try to grab my SIG once. A bar (a real bar, not a restaurant that serves alcohol) is one place where I would rather conceal than open carry. I do not drink when I carry and I do not carry when I drink.
 
Top