Sacramento- Man Arrested for Loaded Concealed Carry in Front of School

ConditionThree · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28059452/

Police: Dad Had Gun In Car With Kids

Man Faces Several Charges

theKCRAchannel.com
updated 7:17 a.m. PT, Sun., Dec. 7, 2008

function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) {
var n = document.getElementById("udtD");
if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) {
var dt = new DateTime();
pdt = dt.T2D(pdt);
if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));}
}
}
UpdateTimeStamp('633642598210000000');

FOLSOM, Calif. - The father of a Folsom elementary school student was arrested on suspicion of possessing a loaded firearm while driving his 4-year-old son to school.

Leo Duane Warner, 42 of Mather, was taken into custody without incident and booked into county jail in downtown Sacramento, Sgt. Eric Heichlinger said in a news release.

Folsom police investigators were notified by staff at the Folsom Hills Elementary School that they believed Warner was in possession of a handgun while dropping off and picking up his son.

Officers on Thursday morning contacted Warner in his vehicle in the

100 block of Manseau Drive

, in front of Elvie Parrazo Briggs Park and about a half-mile from the school.

A loaded .9 mm handgun was found in a pocket behind the front passenger seat, within the reach of the 4-year-old boy.

Shortly after noon, Warner was arrested. Warner's 2-year-old daughter was also in the vehicle.

None of the students at the school were in danger and there is nothing to indicate that Warner had any ill intent towards the students or school staff, Heichlinger added.

Warner was booked on charges of possessing a loaded firearm within a vehicle, felony child endangerment, possession a firearm on a school campus and storage of a firearm accessible to children.

A report of this investigation will be forwarded to Sacramento County Child Protective Services.

At Warner's request, the children were released at the scene into the custody of their maternal uncle.

var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+'
');if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}

URL: [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28059452/[/url]

MSN Privacy . Legal
© 2008 MSNBC.com

camsoup · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

The fact that a man droping off his kids at school would be charged with such crimes tells me this country (or at least this state) may be to far gone from saving.

Felony child endangerment? A four year old would be strapped into a car seat and have no way of reaching into a map pocket of the passenger seat.

What type of father is he??? Having a gun AND a 2 year old child in the same vehicle? He should be hung....:quirky

ConditionThree · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

I dont think we are too far gone to save... We havent slipped so far as England, Canada or Australia. We ought to continue our struggles so long as we draw breath, we will only fail if we quit.

The thing that strikes me about this story is that this man is doing what should be a natural and righteous thing- protecting himself and his children. And the media- mind you the national media- has latched onto this publishing his mug shot as if he was a rapist, a burglar or a car theif.

Granted, I dont know this man and I dont know his intent- for all I know he might have intended to go postal on the school- but the media doesnt give the benefit of the doubt.They just keepbuilding the story on the crime, the illegallity, the safety of the children.This is the sort of thing that is motivating me to continue trying to change perceptions about gun owners and I'm not sure I'm doing enough.

cccook · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

I applaud Mr. Warner for arming himself to protect his family, if indeed that was his purpose for having the gun. I question his carry option with regard to defensive readiness and safe storage. And how on earth did the staff of the Folsom Hills E.S. suspect he had a gun? By what authority did police have to stop him and search his vehicle? Or did he admit to possession and consent to the search?

ConditionThree · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

cccook wrote:

I applaud Mr. Warner for arming himself to protect his family, if indeed that was his purpose for having the gun. I question his carry option with regard to defensive readiness and safe storage. And how on earth did the staff of the Folsom Hills E.S. suspect he had a gun? By what authority did police have to stop him and search his vehicle? Or did he admit to possession and consent to the search?

If the pistol was in the map pocket on the rear of the passenger seat, it may have 'printed'. Having seen this and been reported by the school staffto the authorities, they too could have observed the 'printed' firearm in the map pocket without conducting a search, but by making an observation from outside the vehicle.

Flyer22 · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

ConditionThree wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28059452/

A loaded .9 mm handgun was found in a pocket behind the front passenger seat, within the reach of the 4-year-old boy.

Click to expand...

If that is true, then this man is an idiot and deserves to be jailed for a long time. The whole purpose of having a weapon for defense is to have it READILY accessible! Just how did he think he would be able to safely reach his gun while driving? And to compound that by putting it in reach of a very young child is just insane. The article doesn't specifically say whether or not the children were in child seats, but from the charges, I would guess not.

cato · Dec 7, 2008

imported post

Or the gun was put their toallow the police report to justify the end result. I suspect the mans kids said something while at school. And I'll bet there was no warrant.

Don't be fooled by the media. I read this knowing that the truth may never be known.

Michigander · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

camsoup wrote:

The fact that a man droping off his kids at school would be charged with such crimes tells me this country (or at least this state) may be to far gone from saving.

You guys have your work cut out for you, that is for sure. But do NOT underestimate the power of a well organized grassroots effort. Given what I have seen happen in Michigan, I believe that in time, even California has a chance.

Theseus · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

ConditionThree wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28059452/

A half-mile from the school.

A loaded .9 mm handgun was found in a pocket behind the front passenger seat, within the reach of the 4-year-old boy.

Warner was booked on charges of possessing a loaded firearm within a vehicle, felony child endangerment, possession a firearm on a school campus and storage of a firearm accessible to children.

A report of this investigation will be forwarded to Sacramento County Child Protective Services.

Click to expand...

Firstly, half-mile from a school is not 626.9 violation! A mile is 5280' meaning a half mile is 2640' from school zone. 626.9 still requires WITHIN 1000'. Since they do not have any proof that he was previously within the school zone with the gun (unless the idiot said something to incriminate himself) he can not be charged with a 626.9 violation.

And I know that my HSC was a while ago, but I only remember it being illegal if a child DID get a hold of it, not if they COULD get a hold of it.

And for child endangerment? For who's child, his? Just because the gun WAS accessible to me does not make this a child endangerment issue and seems to be being used to crucify this guy.

The only one that should stick or even been filed was the loaded charge.

CA_Libertarian · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

I think you're right that it has to be accessed by the child, not simply accessible, to be a crime. (I don't have time to look up a citation on my lunch hour, but I read up on this fairly recently.) Beyond that, there is an exemption to the statute if the firearm is within your 'immediate control.' IIRC, the statute even states that the firearm doesn't have to be on your person to be considered under your control. I'd say that charge isn't going to stick.

Sounds to me like they got him on 12031, 12025, and probably 626.9. Even though he was stopped 1/2 mile from the school, it's very possible the cops were following him from within the 1,000' school zone. It stands to reason they would do this to avoid the possibility of a shootout right next to the school.

The rest of the charges are probably stacked on to scare the guy into plea bargaining down to the real charges.

It's sad that our society punishes people who aren't hurting anybody. While I disagree with the way the gun was allegedly stored, I don't think it should be illegal.

Robin47 · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

Yes this guy messed up, HOWEVER I believe that whats happening with this

BAD LAW of School Zones, is really a questiojn of "Thought Crimes" and not of anymore possibility of something really happening. Good or Bad.

This is what our country has now become, through bad laws being pushed upon all people. However this can be stopped by the people themselfs, through the jurys.

Its we the people who have the controling power to stop bad laws in there tracks. If people could be Informed of their rights and power in the courtrooms.

The Jury has more power then the law makers, and the judge, because they can say "NOT GUILTY" in the face of the law, there by setting the pace for other cases.

In the "Republic for which we stand" and are guranteed, we have 3 votes, (1) is the vote for our legislators and Pres, (2) is for laws they let us vote on and (3) is our jury

vote to get rid of bad laws ! But most people are NOT fully Informed of their right to vote not only of the FACTS of a case, but also the LAW on the case. If its a bad law vote "Not Guilty" !

When we think about it, this guy could get off, and that law of School Zones is highly unconstitutional with many rights being taken away, through "possible thought crimes" I think baseball bats should be banned from schools, as "They MIGHT be a weapon " and COULD be used to mash some kids head in, or many kids. Its really policeing thoughts, like George Orwells 1984 book.

This School Ban Zones didn't stop the last 2 school shooting, where all were unarmed. All the gun bans in England and Austraila crimes have got worse, more gang violance ETC ! Fully Informed juries, and exersizing our rights can change these bad laws and do away with them.

Robin47

Robin47 · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

I ment to say "Grand Jury" is our #2 vote or safeguard, which is the citizens who can find unconsitutionality of the laws being processed as to wheather they are legal laws. As the Grand Jury is also a constitutional intity of citizens. And a safeguard to protect us from a police state and unconstitutional laws being inforced on the people.

Robin47

Mokarov_9mm · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

I don't know if Mr Warner is a member or not but WHERE THE HELL IS NRA WHEN YOU NEED EM? (out to lunch as usual)

Decoligny · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

I think you're right that it has to be accessed by the child, not simply accessible, to be a crime. (I don't have time to look up a citation on my lunch hour, but I read up on this fairly recently.) Beyond that, there is an exemption to the statute if the firearm is within your 'immediate control.' IIRC, the statute even states that the firearm doesn't have to be on your person to be considered under your control. I'd say that charge isn't going to stick.

Sounds to me like they got him on 12031, 12025, and probably 626.9. Even though he was stopped 1/2 mile from the school, it's very possible the cops were following him from within the 1,000' school zone. It stands to reason they would do this to avoid the possibility of a shootout right next to the school.

The rest of the charges are probably stacked on to scare the guy into plea bargaining down to the real charges.

It's sad that our society punishes people who aren't hurting anybody. While I disagree with the way the gun was allegedly stored, I don't think it should be illegal.

Not only does it have to be accessible, it has to be accessed, and it has to be used to kill or cause great bodily injury.

12035. (b) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (c), a person commits the crime of "criminal storage of a firearm of the first degree" if he or she keeps any loaded firearm within any premises that are under his or her custody or control and he or she knows or reasonably should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or legal guardian and the child obtains access to the firearm and thereby causes death or great bodily injury to himself, herself, or any other person.

trailblazer2003 · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

So this guy is trying to protect his family, no one hurt, and gets hung up. Anyone remember Enrique Chavez, the officer who got shot by his 3 yr old kid? He was the guy tyring to take Glock, the gun dealer, and the holster manufactuter to court for a weapon that performed correctly. Did he ever face any charges in that accident? Doubt it.

Theseus · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

Robin47 wrote:

I ment to say "Grand Jury" is our #2 vote or safeguard, which is the citizens who can find unconsitutionality of the laws being processed as to wheather they are legal laws. As the Grand Jury is also a constitutional intity of citizens. And a safeguard to protect us from a police state and unconstitutional laws being inforced on the people.

Robin47

I don't know that this will work for him, but the argument I always intended to use to argue down 626.9 was the exemption for CCW holders. It obviously isn't a safety issue if they don't ban all guns and the creation of a 2nd class citizen.

I could not determine if the guy was pulled going to school or coming from school. The information is a little vague, probably intentionally.

I might also argue that even though it might have been "concealed" one might argue that it was obviously readily identifiable as a firearm...and therefore was not that concealed, obviously!

camsoup · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

Michigander wrote:

camsoup wrote:

The fact that a man droping off his kids at school would be charged with such crimes tells me this country (or at least this state) may be to far gone from saving.

Click to expand...

You guys have your work cut out for you, that is for sure. But do NOT underestimate the power of a well organized grassroots effort. Given what I have seen happen in Michigan, I believe that in time, even California has a chance.

Trust me, I do not underestimate the power of grass roots efforts.

And I was in no way saying I wont be here to try to change the way things are.

Time to buy more guns,ammo, and a nice level 2 retention holster to UOC anywhere I can! :celebrate

camsoup · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

ConditionThree wrote:

I dont think we are too far gone to save...

I don't think we are either....just close, which is why now is the time to stand up and try to change things for the better.

ConditionThree · Dec 8, 2008

imported post

camsoup wrote:

Trust me, I do not underestimate the power of grass roots efforts.

And I was in no way saying I wont be here to try to change the way things are.

Time to buy more guns,ammo, and a nice level 2 retention holster to UOC anywhere I can! :celebrate

Let me know when you want to take it to Tehama County- or whereever for that matter.

bigtoe416 · Dec 9, 2008

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

Not only does it have to be accessible, it has to be accessed, and it has to be used to kill or cause great bodily injury.

12035. (b) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (c), a person commits the crime of "criminal storage of a firearm of the first degree" if he or she keeps any loaded firearm within any premises that are under his or her custody or control and he or she knows or reasonably should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child's parent or legal guardian and the child obtains access to the firearm and thereby causes death or great bodily injury to himself, herself, or any other person.

You forgot about the section following that one which says the child just needs to injure somebody with the firearm or to bring the firearm into a public place. I guess if the minor drops the gun on his toe then this section is violated since an injury has occurred. Also interesting to note is that a child can get access to the firearm and shoot a building, an animal, or a car and these sections will not have been violated.

Code:

12035 (b) (2) Except as provided in subdivision (c), a person commits the
crime of "criminal storage of a firearm of the second degree" if he
or she keeps any loaded firearm within any premises that are under
his or her custody or control and he or she knows or reasonably
should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm
without the permission of the child's parent or legal guardian and
the child obtains access to the firearm and thereby causes injury,
other than great bodily injury, to himself, herself, or any other
person, or carries the firearm either to a public place or in
violation of Section 417.

Sacramento- Man Arrested for Loaded Concealed Carry in Front of School

State Pioneer

Regular Member

State Pioneer

Founder's Club Member

State Pioneer

Regular Member

Newbie

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

State Researcher

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Pioneer

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter