Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Walmart employee brings gun to work to kill

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    199

    Post imported post

    http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...506threat.html

    We cant be charged for carrying a weapon into a place that is liscensed to sell alcohol can we.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    208

    Post imported post

    No. It has to be a place where alcohol is sold to be consumed in the same premises.
    The Dogs of War are nothing compared to the Cats

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    burninsteeda04 wrote:
    http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...506threat.html

    We cant be charged for carrying a weapon into a place that is liscensed to sell alcohol can we.
    Why would you even post this in the NC section? This happened in Texas. Moderator, please move this to the correct section.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    He was charged with UCW, which means he didn't have a CHL. Carrying a firearm into any TABC licensed premises (even a grocery store) raises UCW from a misdemeanor to a felony.



  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    199

    Post imported post



  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    burninsteeda04 wrote:
    http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...506threat.html

    We cant be charged for carrying a weapon into a place that is liscensed to sell alcohol can we.

    This is the EXACT reason WHY I carry at Walmart.

    When Seconds counts...Who is Minutes away?


    TJ

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    burninsteeda04 wrote:
    http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...506threat.html

    We cant be charged for carrying a weapon into a place that is liscensed to sell alcohol can we.
    Good work by the police, if true.

    I havea big problem with his note being charged as a terroristic threat. He clearly wasn't threatening anybody by leaving that notefor his wife. Its not like its a "give in tomy political demands or I will...." He wasn't trying to scare anybody by way of his note. If he was going to threaten somebody, he could easily have just come outand said what he was going to do. Even then, it wouldn't be a terroristic threat. Murderous threat, maybe,butnot terroristic. If he was trying to scare someone, hewould havesent it to the police or the company orwhoever he wanted to scare.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    SNIP This is the EXACT reason WHY I carry at Walmart.

    When Seconds counts...Who is Minutes away?
    Yeah.

    Glad his wife got home in time to find the note.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    I have some serious problems with this story. From what I can tell from the article he never said that he planned to kill or harm anyone. The only thing he said was that he was going to prison and the UCW charge sends him there. If he had just gotten a permit then they woyld have nothing to charge him on. I can't go along with the terrorist charges and 10 years for carrying a gun into Wal-Mart without a permit. Give me abreak that is BS.

    And just what is an unreasonable amount of ammunition. There are a bunch on this board that most people would consider their everyday carry an unreasonable amount of ammo. I mean a primary weapon, two BUGS and at least 3 reloads for each one is not common but many people carry that.

    I think the fellow is getting screwed.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    And just what is an unreasonable amount of ammunition. There are a bunch on this board that most people would consider their everyday carry an unreasonable amount of ammo. I mean a primary weapon, two BUGS and at least 3 reloads for each one is not common but many people carry that.
    No doubt.

    Hey, TJ, how much are you carrying on a daily basis these days? Seems like it was well over 100 rounds. Then again, in WV that might not be enough

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    swillden wrote:
    PT111 wrote:
    And just what is an unreasonable amount of ammunition. There are a bunch on this board that most people would consider their everyday carry an unreasonable amount of ammo. I mean a primary weapon, two BUGS and at least 3 reloads for each one is not common but many people carry that.
    No doubt.

    Hey, TJ, how much are you carrying on a daily basis these days? Seems like it was well over 100 rounds. Then again, in WV that might not be enough
    Yeah, about 100+:celebrate. Rememeber that the 3 WVC PD officers saw me with my Kimber in the Serpa and the S&W in the Dould and Goodrich shoulder rig.:celebrate

    What they SAW was 4 mags total, what they DIDN'T SEE was the rest.:celebrate

    TJ

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    I have some serious problems with this story. From what I can tell from the article he never said that he planned to kill or harm anyone. The only thing he said was that he was going to prison and the UCW charge sends him there. If he had just gotten a permit then they woyld have nothing to charge him on. I can't go along with the terrorist charges and 10 years for carrying a gun into Wal-Mart without a permit. Give me abreak that is BS.

    And just what is an unreasonable amount of ammunition. There are a bunch on this board that most people would consider their everyday carry an unreasonable amount of ammo. I mean a primary weapon, two BUGS and at least 3 reloads for each one is not common but many people carry that.
    I think the fellow is getting screwed.
    Good catch, PT111.

    It looks like they're twisting the note in order to add to the charges.

    Of course, you can't trust news stories. He may have said something to the police at the arrest. Or while he was in the store prior to their arrival. Its interesting that he was reported to have been in the store for some period but hadn't shot anyone--I'm sure the purveyors of alarm (news media) would not have omitted to include it if he had shot someone. Or if he had his gun out while walking around inside.

    Take notice that the police tookapproximately an hour to get to the WalMart.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Graham, Texas
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    He was charged with UCW, which means he didn't have a CHL. Carrying a firearm into any TABC licensed premises (even a grocery store) raises UCW from a misdemeanor to a felony.

    I think you're mistaken, I believe it's only a crime if the establishment draws 51%+ of it's revenues from alcohol consumed on premises. I'll try to find the law.

    Yeah, I was right, I'd copy the text but it's PDF format and I can't. Look at this link:
    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis...ithchanges.pdf

    Page numbered 28 (34 of the PDF file). Just wanted to clarify that.

    I'd also like to urge any texan who's looking to find a website with great links and great people in relation to firearms in texas to come to TexasGunTalk.com Some fantastic people from across our state on this website.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    DopaVash wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    He was charged with UCW, which means he didn't have a CHL. Carrying a firearm into any TABC licensed premises (even a grocery store) raises UCW from a misdemeanor to a felony.

    I think you're mistaken, I believe it's only a crime if the establishment draws 51%+ of it's revenues from alcohol consumed on premises. I'll try to find the law.

    Yeah, I was right, I'd copy the text but it's PDF format and I can't. Look at this link:
    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis...ithchanges.pdf

    Page numbered 28 (34 of the PDF file). Just wanted to clarify that.

    I'd also like to urge any texan who's looking to find a website with great links and great people in relation to firearms in texas to come to TexasGunTalk.com Some fantastic people from across our state on this website.
    I think I'm missing part of the information.

    The section quoted in the .pdf about 51% sales only says the store must post a sign. It doesn't seem to otherwisemake an exemption for unlicensedcarryinto a business that forgot or didn't postthe sign. Is theresuch an exemption explicit or implied in another section oftheCode?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    300

    Post imported post

    DopaVash wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    He was charged with UCW, which means he didn't have a CHL. Carrying a firearm into any TABC licensed premises (even a grocery store) raises UCW from a misdemeanor to a felony.

    I think you're mistaken, I believe it's only a crime if the establishment draws 51%+ of it's revenues from alcohol consumed on premises. I'll try to find the law.

    Yeah, I was right, I'd copy the text but it's PDF format and I can't. Look at this link:
    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis...ithchanges.pdf

    Page numbered 28 (34 of the PDF file). Just wanted to clarify that.

    I'd also like to urge any texan who's looking to find a website with great links and great people in relation to firearms in texas to come to TexasGunTalk.com Some fantastic people from across our state on this website.


    DopaVash,

    KBCraig is actually correct in his statement, you have misunderstood thepoint being discussed.

    KBCraig pointed out that the man was charged with Unlawful Carrying Weapons (PC46.02), which is the charge for carrying a handgun without a license in Texas. The second point KBCraig was makingis that if the offense of UCW occurs on premises licensed by the TABC to sell alcohol (no matter what type of TABC license it is), the offense is escalated from a class A misdemeanorto a 3rd degree felony (PC46.02(c)).

    In short, the discussion KBCraig was addressing and the point he was making is that due to the charge being UCW, that alone indicated that the man did not have a CHL and that it was a felony in this case because the place he unlawfully carried was a TABC licensed establishment. (All points covered by Texas Penal code 46.02)

    You are correct that a CHL holder can carry in a TABC licensed establishment as long as it does not derive 51% or more of itsincome from the sell of alcohol for on premises consumption, but in this case, the discussion was directed at the fact that theguy did not have a CHL.

    Incidentally, the section you referred to (Government Code 411.204) deals with the posting of signs by certain establishments, not the carry of weapons in these establishments. The section you were actually looking for is Penal Code 46.035 which covers Unlawful Carry of Handgun by a License Holder, and more precisely 46.035(b)(1), which addresses carry in a 51% establishment.

    All easy mistakes to make.

    Take care,

    Doc

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    300

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    DopaVash wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    He was charged with UCW, which means he didn't have a CHL. Carrying a firearm into any TABC licensed premises (even a grocery store) raises UCW from a misdemeanor to a felony.

    I think you're mistaken, I believe it's only a crime if the establishment draws 51%+ of it's revenues from alcohol consumed on premises. I'll try to find the law.

    Yeah, I was right, I'd copy the text but it's PDF format and I can't. Look at this link:
    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis...ithchanges.pdf

    Page numbered 28 (34 of the PDF file). Just wanted to clarify that.

    I'd also like to urge any texan who's looking to find a website with great links and great people in relation to firearms in texas to come to TexasGunTalk.com Some fantastic people from across our state on this website.
    I think I'm missing part of the information.

    The section quoted in the .pdf about 51% sales only says the store must post a sign. It doesn't seem to otherwisemake an exemption for unlicensedcarryinto a business that forgot or didn't postthe sign. Is theresuch an exemption explicit or implied in another section oftheCode?
    No there is not.

    These are actually two separate offenses, in that, PC 46.035(b)(1) prohibits a license holder from carrying in a licensed establishment that derives 51% or more of it income from the sell of alcohol for on premises consumption. There is no exemption allowed for carry in non-posted establishments. However, 46.02(b) does require that in order to be an offense under that section, the person must intentionally, knowingly or recklessly carry there. This offers some protection for non-posted establishment, but it is typically clear once you enter such an establishment that you are in a 51% bar versus a restaurant that has a bar inside. Just becausea 51%bar is not posted does not make it legal to carry there if it is clear to the average person that the place is a 51% bar. If you know it is or if you should have known, you are in violation by carrying there regardless of whether it is posted or not.

    The provision established by GC411.204 is a separate offense directed at the establishment in which they are required to post 51% signs and they are in violation no matter if someone is carrying there at the time or not. In short, one offense does not exempt or effect the other.

    Take care,

    Doc

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    300

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    I have some serious problems with this story. From what I can tell from the article he never said that he planned to kill or harm anyone. The only thing he said was that he was going to prison and the UCW charge sends him there. If he had just gotten a permit then they woyld have nothing to charge him on. I can't go along with the terrorist charges and 10 years for carrying a gun into Wal-Mart without a permit. Give me abreak that is BS.

    And just what is an unreasonable amount of ammunition. There are a bunch on this board that most people would consider their everyday carry an unreasonable amount of ammo. I mean a primary weapon, two BUGS and at least 3 reloads for each one is not common but many people carry that.

    I think the fellow is getting screwed.
    PT111,

    While I understand the position you have taken as you see it, I feel you have based your position on too many assumptions that are not supported by the information.

    First off, the article is just that, a compiled story that includes only what the writer wanted to put in it. While you are correct that it does not quote him as say he intended to hurt, kill or otherwise harm people, it did not say otherwise either. Without knowing the content of the entire note and the emails it is hard to say for sure. However, he did state that he planned to be a criminal and the wife did say he owned a handgun that was missing. Couple this with the email statement of turn on your TVs is enough circumstantial evidence to establish a risk if not intent. The fact that he felt his actions would be on the TV immediately says he intended a spectacular, out of the ordinary event. Then top this off by catching him loitering inside the store that he was recently terminated from illegally carrying a firearm pretty much ices the cake for establishing reasonable suspicion that he intended to commit a violent and horrific act in that store.

    Second, you state that "ifhe hadjust gotten a permit then they woyld have nothing to charge him on". If he had a permit, 1.) he probably would not be doing this; 2.) he would still be in violation due to the implied threat of violence and the intent to commit a crime as stated in his note. The fact that they charged him with UCW says he did not have a CHL.

    Finally, you state "I can't go along with the terrorist charges and 10 years for carrying a gun into Wal-Mart without a permit". The charge is actually Making a Terroristic Threat, not to be confused withthe federal terrorism laws. Terroristic threat is located in PC22.07 and refers toa person whothreatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property (whether it is actually followed through on or not). As for the 10 years for UCW in Wal-Mart, that is the maximum possible jail time for UCW in a TABC licensed establishment, no matter if it is a bar, aliquor store or a Wal-Mart licensed to sell beer and wine. The offense carries a max penalty of a $10,000 fine and/or 10 years imprisonment (or anything in between).

    Personally, I feel this guy is probably a few bricks shy of a load, which his defense attorney will surely exploit to his advantage. I seriously doubt he will spend much time inside (not that I agree). I applaud the APD for acting on this information and for catching him before he committed anything more serious, but I must question why it took them an hour to send officers to the Wal-Mart store in the first place? I realize they were making sure the note and emails were legit, but they knew they were already playing catchup and should have sent officers to the store immediately to watch for him while checking out the information. If the call turned out to be a prank, then the caller could be charged with that crime, but don't delay a potential lifesaving response just to confirm the report is legitimate.

    With the preponderance of the evidence in this case and the risk it posed, immediate action was warranted. If the guy turned out to be legit or simply misunderstood, thenthey can simplylet him go. I had rather them apologize to him for the misunderstanding of his rants than for themto have to apologize to dozens of families for not acting quick enough to stop him from killing their loved ones. As for the "unreasonable amount of ammunition" statement, I have to agree that I would probably fall in that category by most peoples standards, especially law enforcement, but it is just a media thing to help build their story with the public and the case against the guy.

    Fortunately, no one was hurt and the guy will get his day in court to explain any misunderstanding that might have occurred. Even if he can show that his notes were not intended to cause alarm or that his carrying the handgun was not intended to be used to commit a crime, he still broke the law by carrying it and should be charged with that offense.

    Just my take on it.

    Take care,

    Doc

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    Let me just add that making terroristic threats is a very hard charge to prove in Texas. It almost requires that you make explicit threats in your own handwriting, which this knucklehead apparently did.

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Graham, Texas
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    A bit late but I just wanted to thank Doc for clearing up what was said.

Posting Permissions

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