Permit holder charged with "brandishing" over road rage

imported post

Ok we here all know that there is no such thing as "brandishing" in Utah. I expect he was actually charged under 76-10-506, Threatening with a weapon during fight or quarrel. And he claims he never brandished his firearm. Story on KSL.com at http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=5293638.

Regardless, his permit is now suspended and if convicted will be revoked. He has a costly legal fight on his hands. And he has given permit holders and gun owners in general a bad name.

A couple of things to remember here:

1-Don't draw or display a weapon without legal cause;

2-VICTIMS call police; If you draw a gun, call the police to report what the other guy did to justify you doing so;

3-If the other guy calls first, makes a claim about you drawing or "brandishing" AND if he can ID your gun (or make a reasoned guess, "medium sized black"), you are going to have some serious explaining to do.

I would suggest that in a car, with that license plate on it and so easy to ID you, and with people be able to get upset so easily, that a firearm NOT be carried in such a way as to be easily observed by other drivers. The holster on the dash might be perfectly legal, but I think it is asking for trouble. Get a permit and conceal. Or case it out of sight. Or figure out some way to have it not be concealed by NOT be visible to the hot head, nervous nelly, or anyone else who pulls up along side you or who decides you've cut him off.

Charles




[font="Arial,Helvetica"][/font]

imported post

Not good he screwed up and let his emotions get the best of him. Looks bad for the rest of us. Also close to the legislature meeting never helps.

BTW Whats happened to the fourm lets get this fourm going

imported post

Here's a story to illustrate how easily things can get out of control when nervous Nelly sees a gun.

A team from my company in the 3rd Special Forces Group at Ft. Bragg, NC was assigned to provide military honors at the funeral of a deceased veteran in the DC area. This required them to transport 7 M-4s. Army regulations require that when automatic weapons are transported they are escorted by an armed guard so one of the team carried a loaded M-9. He was not issued a suitable holster and couldn't carry it concealed so it ended up on the dash of the 15 pax van. Someone saw it there and called the police.

Their first clue that something was wrong was seeing a half dozen patrol cars on the side of I-95 that pull out when they saw the van, boxed them in, and pulled them over. They made each of them get out of the van one at a time and lye on the pavement, spread eagle and face down, in their military dress uniforms while it was raining. After they were all out and an officer had recovered the M-9 they asked if there were any other weapons in the van. Can you imagine their reactions when the answer was, "Yes, there are 7 M-4s in the back."

imported post

Charles, your advise seems contrary to the promotion of open carry.

imported post

lockman wrote:

Charles, your advise seems contrary to the promotion of open carry.

Click to expand...

Oh, here we go again...

imported post

lockman wrote:

Charles, your advise seems contrary to the promotion of open carry.

Click to expand...

I would hope not. I am very much in favor of open carry. And so I favor using a little discretion to avoid having OC cause needless problems. A gun sitting on a dash in a car can cause serious problems as Francis' account illustrates.

One can certainly OC in Utah without doing so in a way that gives anyone any claim that a gun was brandished. A holstered gun sitting on the seat, or affixed to a center console complies fully with OC laws near as I can tell, but does so without being so visible as to easily alarm others or cause problems.

And remember, there are different dynamics between OCing on your person and doing so in a car. On your person, odds are that any complaints are either resolved immediately OR you dissapear into anonymity. In your car, someone gets a plate number and the authorities can show up days later.

Now maybe a holster permanently attached to the dash is easily explained. But I would not want to be trying to remember where I was 4 days ago at 4:30 pm and then trying to assure anyone that I had just set my gun on the dash in busy traffic to comply with Utah's OC law rather than setting it on a seat.

To each his own. And I am not attacking OC. Just thinking out loud about how to OC without creating needless problems.

But then, when I OC I do so for personal comfort (or rare political statement) rather than to cause a confrontation or prove anything. So I never go out of my way to be noticed.

If others have a different MO, to each his own.

Charles

imported post

Would love to see the reaction in GA, once the first person gets out in uniform it's
"Have a nice day, drive carefully".

But how do you keep a piece on the dash, I haven't found anything that works
short of permanent bolts, that wouldn't be falling off, or being slung side to side.
Niether a good thing even unloaded,

imported post

SlackwareRobert wrote:

But how do you keep a piece on the dash, I haven't found anything that works
short of permanent bolts, that wouldn't be falling off, or being slung side to side.
Niether a good thing even unloaded,

Click to expand...

Velcro straps.

imported post

That's where you turn one of life's little problems into a challenge in the creative use of Velcro......

imported post

Francis Marion wrote:

Here's a story to illustrate how easily things can get out of control when nervous Nelly sees a gun.

A team from my company in the 3rd Special Forces Group at Ft. Bragg, NC was assigned to provide military honors at the funeral of a deceased veteran in the DC area. This required them to transport 7 M-4s. Army regulations require that when automatic weapons are transported they are escorted by an armed guard so one of the team carried a loaded M-9. He was not issued a suitable holster and couldn't carry it concealed so it ended up on the dash of the 15 pax van. Someone saw it there and called the police.

Their first clue that something was wrong was seeing a half dozen patrol cars on the side of I-95 that pull out when they saw the van, boxed them in, and pulled them over. They made each of them get out of the van one at a time and lye on the pavement, spread eagle and face down, in their military dress uniforms while it was raining. After they were all out and an officer had recovered the M-9 they asked if there were any other weapons in the van. Can you imagine their reactions when the answer was, "Yes, there are 7 M-4s in the back."

Click to expand...

Was this on I-95 in NC or in VA? And just why couldn't he carry concealed?

imported post

Francis Marion wrote:

SNIP Here's a story to illustrate how easily things can get out of control when nervous Nelly sees a gun...

Click to expand...

(Chuckle.) Well, that's one way for a state to enforce its sovereignty againstthe federal government.

imported post

utbagpiper wrote:

SNIP...he has given permit holders and gun owners in general a bad name.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't give it too much thought.

One bad permit holder out how many ten of thousands? Government seems tohave more crooks than CCW-holder lists.

Also,its not like the anti-s need examples one way or the other. Lies and distortion are their stock in trade.

In one sense, us worrying about onebad permit holder is the mirror imageof anti-gunners worrying about onebad permit holder. We're just mimicking their emotion-based thinking when we worry about it.

imported post

Thundar wrote

Velcro straps.

Click to expand...

Well, they won't hold for me, and changing driving habbits is to much work.
The lateral forces when sliding car are considerable when you bite back into the pavement.
Besides it would endanger occupents if I can't keep my edge behind the wheel.
Guess i'll stick with left side holster for driving, or buy a 'prius' that couldn't generate
more than 0.01g's on it's best day.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

utbagpiper wrote:

SNIP...he has given permit holders and gun owners in general a bad name.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't give it too much thought.

One bad permit holder out how many ten of thousands? Government seems tohave more crooks than CCW-holder lists.

Also,its not like the anti-s need examples one way or the other. Lies and distortion are their stock in trade.

In one sense, us worrying about onebad permit holder is the mirror imageof anti-gunners worrying about onebad permit holder. We're just mimicking their emotion-based thinking when we worry about it.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that one bad permit holder made the news, in a negative light. Where as, us the thousands of "good" ones, did not. It only takes one negative to draw the shades on the light for a bit...

imported post

glock10mm wrote:

Citizen wrote:

utbagpiper wrote:

SNIP...he has given permit holders and gun owners in general a bad name.

Click to expand...

...One bad permit holder out how many ten of thousands? Government seems tohave more crooks than CCW-holder lists. .....

Click to expand...

Yes, but that one bad permit holder made the news, in a negative light. Where as, us the thousands of "good" ones, did not. It only takes one negative to draw the shades on the light for a bit...

Click to expand...

+1

And even when a story DOES come out that diplays gun use as rational: it is quickly discarded and picked apart.

Unfortunately i would have to disagree that, "Any publicity is good publicity..". With regards to CWPers, it is common thinking to assume that they are supposed to be the elite-model citizen when it comes to gun ownership. When these stories keep popping us like this, it gets harder and harder to OC. Permit or not!

imported post

ProtectedBy9mm wrote:

+1

And even when a story DOES come out that diplays gun use as rational: it is quickly discarded and picked apart.

Unfortunately i would have to disagree that, "Any publicity is good publicity..". With regards to CWPers, it is common thinking to assume that they are supposed to be the elite-model citizen when it comes to gun ownership. When these stories keep popping us like this, it gets harder and harder to OC. Permit or not!

Click to expand...

Holy crap, we actually agree on something! Right on...

imported post

glock10mm wrote:

ProtectedBy9mm wrote:

+1

And even when a story DOES come out that diplays gun use as rational: it is quickly discarded and picked apart.

Unfortunately i would have to disagree that, "Any publicity is good publicity..". With regards to CWPers, it is common thinking to assume that they are supposed to be the elite-model citizen when it comes to gun ownership. When these stories keep popping us like this, it gets harder and harder to OC. Permit or not!

Click to expand...

Holy crap, we actually agree on something! Right on...

Click to expand...

hey man, you carry - i carry...
you do it one way, i do it another. We are brothers in the same fight, you just look like the milk-man, while i still look like ma n' pa...:lol: SEE, now Im givin' you a hard time. :celebrate

imported post

glock10mm wrote:

Citizen wrote:

utbagpiper wrote:

SNIP...he has given permit holders and gun owners in general a bad name.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't give it too much thought.

One bad permit holder out how many ten of thousands? Government seems tohave more crooks than CCW-holder lists.

Also,its not like the anti-s need examples one way or the other. Lies and distortion are their stock in trade.

In one sense, us worrying about onebad permit holder is the mirror imageof anti-gunners worrying about onebad permit holder. We're just mimicking their emotion-based thinking when we worry about it.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that one bad permit holder made the news, in a negative light. Where as, us the thousands of "good" ones, did not. It only takes one negative to draw the shades on the light for a bit...

Click to expand...

Alright. Lets not go in circles here.

"Made the news" and so forth is a function of the press, their anti-gun agenda, such as have one, and their decision to distribute such information.

Also, don't give the press too much credit, or conversely, discredit your fellow Americans too much. Lots of people take the American press with a grain of salt.

imported post

ProtectedBy9mm wrote:

glock10mm wrote:

ProtectedBy9mm wrote:

+1

And even when a story DOES come out that diplays gun use as rational: it is quickly discarded and picked apart.

Unfortunately i would have to disagree that, "Any publicity is good publicity..". With regards to CWPers, it is common thinking to assume that they are supposed to be the elite-model citizen when it comes to gun ownership. When these stories keep popping us like this, it gets harder and harder to OC. Permit or not!

Click to expand...

Holy crap, we actually agree on something! Right on...

Click to expand...

hey man, you carry - i carry...
you do it one way, i do it another. We are brothers in the same fight, you just look like the milk-man, while i still look like ma n' pa...:lol: SEE, now Im givin' you a hard time. :celebrate

Click to expand...

hey, right on...You said it tho...we both carry...in the same fight.