Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Help! Firearm legally carried is NOT brandishing/threatening...

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

    Post imported post

    I'm trying to remember/find the published case law that declares that a legally carried firearm is not, in and of itself, brandishing, disturbing the peace or threatening behavior.

    I thought it was Cassad vs. Somone-or-other, but my search techniques apparently are loaded with fail tonight. Yes, my bus is short...

    I pledge 2 beverages of choice to the first person who can help me along the path, your proximity to Tucson will affect the timeliness of collecting your prize...



    As a bonus, it will help silly-slap some idiots on Democratic Underground.:celebrate





  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    PavePusher wrote:
    I'm trying to remember/find the published case law that declares that a legally carried firearm is not, in and of itself, brandishing, disturbing the peace or threatening behavior.

    I thought it was Cassad vs. Somone-or-other, but my search techniques apparently are loaded with fail tonight. Yes, my bus is short...

    I pledge 2 beverages of choice to the first person who can help me along the path, your proximity to Tucson will affect the timeliness of collecting your prize...



    As a bonus, it will help silly-slap some idiots on Democratic Underground.:celebrate



    You don't need caselaw. It has to be explicitly defined in statute, and brandishing contains an element of intimidation or presentation.

    You ought to tell the Democrats that they're just a pro-gun shift away from winning every election for a few decades and completely killing the GOP.

  3. #3
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    Are you looking for Washington or Arizona ?


    If Washington:
    Casad vs The State of Washington
    http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/gunst...blished%29.pdf

    Its unpublished and holds no weight in court.

    I can also point you to many Washington Police Department training bulletins that support OC.
    http://forum.nwcdl.org/index.php?action=downloads;cat=1




  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    Casad was the one I was thinking of, got the spelling wrong. And for some reason, I was remembering it as a published decision. Argh, wrong again.

    Is there a published court opinion that states that a legally carried firearm does not constitute an arrestable offence? Or am I misremembering the Wisconsin Attorney Generals recent statements?

    I've really got to start saving a list of this stuff.

  5. #5
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    Are your state laws built upon British legal tradition?

    Washington State follows British legal tradition, which states that anything that is not proscribed as unlawful is lawful. So the real question is where can you NOT carry in Washington.
    There are four main state statutes that one must be cognizant of: RCW 9.41.050 (Carrying Firearms), RCW 9.41.280 (Carry on School Grounds), RCW 9.41.300 (Weapons Prohibited in Certain Places), and RCW 70.108.150 (Firearms in Outdoor Music Festivals). It is your responsibility to read and understand the definitions and exceptions in the law.
    RCW 9.41.050 is the primary law which affects gun carrying on a day to day basis. This law makes it unlawful for one to conceal a pistol without a concealed pistol license (hereinafter called CPL), and also makes it unlawful for one to carry a loaded pistol in any vehicle, whether it be openly carried or concealed carried unless a person has a valid CPL. Loaded is defined as having ammunition inside of the gun itself (magazine inserted with ammunition with semi-auto, ammunition in cylinder for revolvers).

  6. #6
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen Releases
    Advice to District Attorney’s Regarding
    Open Carry and Disorderly Conduct

    MADISON - Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen released guidance in the form of an Advisory Memorandum to Wisconsin’s District Attorney’s today regarding Wisconsin’s Constitutional Right to openly carry firearms and its relative application in matters of criminal Disorderly Conduct.

    The Advisory Memorandum is summarized as follows:

    Under Article I, § 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution, a person has the right to openly carry a firearm for any of the purposes enumerated in that Section, subject to reasonable regulation. The Wisconsin Department of Justice believes that the mere open carrying of a firearm by a person, absent additional facts and circumstances, should not result in a disorderly conduct charge from a prosecutor.

    “It is not unlawful, barring other facts and circumstances, to openly carry a firearm in Wisconsin,” Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said. He went on, “This is offered as guidance to Wisconsin’s prosecutors when making charging decisions. It will also assist Wisconsin law enforcement in the exercise of their duty to keep the peace, protect rights and enforce the law.



Posting Permissions

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