Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Man arrested in Monroe for carrying a pellet gun

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    By my reading, RS 14:95 doesn't apply.

    http://www.ktbs.com/news/man-arreste...n-in-the-mall/

    Posted: Nov 16, 2009 9:33 AM
    Updated: Nov 16, 2009 9:50 AM

    Monroe police officers arrested a man on charges of carrying a weapon in the mall.

    Authorities say Joshua Willis, 20, was walking around the Pecanland Mall in Monroe with a gun. Willis was said to have been seen carrying the gun in the waistband of his pants. As police recovered the weapon, they found it was a pellet gun that looked like a semi-automatic handgun.

    Willis was arrested on charges of illegally carrying a weapon and possession of a weapon by a convicted felon.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    If you'regonna be dumb, you gotta be tough.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    Agreed, he's an idiot, but that doesn't make him guilty. Do you agree with me that a pellet gun doesn't fit the definition of "weapon" in 14:95?

    (BTW, I sent you a private message a couple of days ago. Check your inbox.)



  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    Agreed, he's an idiot, but that doesn't make him guilty. Do you agree with me that a pellet gun doesn't fit the definition of "weapon" in 14:95?

    (BTW, I sent you a private message a couple of days ago. Check your inbox.)

    14:95
    1) The intentional concealment of any firearm, or other instrumentality customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon, on one's person; or

    From what I have read, the officer thinks he was concealing some instrument "intended" for probable use as a dangerous weapon on one's person.

    So your question is... what is the definition of "dangerous weapon?"

    14:2 gives
    3) "Dangerous weapon" includes any gas, liquid or other substance or instrumentality, which, in the manner used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

    Hmmmm. Can a pellet gun produce such a result??

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    47

    Post imported post

    Yes , a pellet pistol Can penetrate the body, I know a guy that was shot with one, the pellet lodged 1 cm from his heart, the doctor stated that if the pellet had been 1cm to the right, it would have killed him.

  6. #6
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222

    Post imported post

    OK, I can get the felon with a gun charge. What about teh illegal carrying of such? I assume while it may be against Mall POLICY to have a weapon, I doubt it's against the LAW. So maybe he was attempting to conceal it when he had it tucked in his wasteband and someone noticed the bulge? As I understand the mall policies, they are just like any other store in that they may have policies against weapons on site and can ask you to leave. If you don't leave they can have you arrested for refusing to leave/tresspass. But it's not actually against the law to carry in a store/mall.
    President/ Founding Member
    Louisiana Open Carry Awareness League
    www.laopencarry.org

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

    Post imported post

    The best I can ascertain is thatthe pellet gun was "concealed" in the waistband of his pants. That's the only way 14:95 would apply here.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    backdraft522 wrote:
    Yes , a pellet pistol Can penetrate the body, I know a guy that was shot with one, the pellet lodged 1 cm from his heart, the doctor stated that if the pellet had been 1cm to the right, it would have killed him.
    The question isn't whether a pellet pistol can cause harm, it's whether it is "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    I submit that it is not. Especially if it's not a .177, but instead is a 5mm Airsoft.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    47

    Post imported post

    The law is ''Convicted Felon In Possession Of A Firearm '', not ''Convicted Felon In Possession Of a Weapon'', Felon's may possess a weapon, such as pocket knifes, Baseball bat, Pellet gun, Bow & Arrow etc. etc. I think all of those charges will probably be dropped. Also, a pellet pistol is NOT a firearm !

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    backdraft522 wrote:
    Yes , a pellet pistol Can penetrate the body, I know a guy that was shot with one, the pellet lodged 1 cm from his heart, the doctor stated that if the pellet had been 1cm to the right, it would have killed him.
    The question isn't whether a pellet pistol can cause harm, it's whether it is "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    I submit that it is not. Especially if it's not a .177, but instead is a 5mm Airsoft.
    Ok... what you could do at trial (if you had done such a thing and were charged) would be to make the prosecution proof EVERY element of the crime. The burden of proof is on the state. This is one of those cases where the defendant MAY indeed be innocent(of ONE of the charges) but, has to go to trial to win.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

    Post imported post

    backdraft522 wrote:
    The law is ''Convicted Felon In Possession Of A Firearm '', not ''Convicted Felon In Possession Of a Weapon'', Felon's may possess a weapon, such as pocket knifes, Baseball bat, Pellet gun, Bow & Arrow etc. etc. I think all of those charges will probably be dropped. Also, a pellet pistol is NOT a firearm !
    Nope... It's La. RS 14:95.1. Possession of firearm or carrying concealed weapon by a person convicted of certain felonies... of course this is state law we speak of.


  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran XD-GEM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    722

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    backdraft522 wrote:
    Yes , a pellet pistol Can penetrate the body, I know a guy that was shot with one, the pellet lodged 1 cm from his heart, the doctor stated that if the pellet had been 1cm to the right, it would have killed him.
    The question isn't whether a pellet pistol can cause harm, it's whether it is "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    I submit that it is not. Especially if it's not a .177, but instead is a 5mm Airsoft.

    In Louisiana, you would be wrong. I was on the voir dire for a jury for a guy who carried out a robbery with an airsoft that he had painted to look like a Berretta. The judge said that under Louisiana law, anything that could cause death or serious bodily injury would qualify as a weapon. Since you can shoot someone's eye out with it, it's a dangerous weapon. I can't remember his name, unfortunately or I would provide you a link to the case.

    The guy was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

    ETA guy's name was Oneil Carter. here's a link to his story:
    http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2...ding_to_p.html


  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".



  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    It does if you rob a bank with it. :?

  15. #15
    Regular Member turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Independence, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    It does if you rob a bank with it. :?
    So, it comes down to, as many things with the law seem to, a matter of a persons intent?
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Him: "I carry my gun concealed"
    Me: "You're not very good at it"
    Him: "What do you mean?"
    Me: "I know you have a gun"
    End of conversation.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

    Post imported post

    turbodog wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    It does if you rob a bank with it. :?
    So, it comes down to, as many things with the law seem to, a matter of a persons intent?
    That's why the word "intended" is used .

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hammond Area, LA, ,
    Posts
    238

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".
    True, but a pellet gun is customarily used as a dangerous weapon. Many hunters I know use a pellet gun to hunt squirrels with for example. It can be used to cause death. I know as a kid I had a pellet gun that looked just like a .357 revolver and I used it to shoot all sorts of critters in the woods.

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

    Post imported post

    LA Confederate wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".
    True, but a pellet gun is customarily used as a dangerous weapon. Many hunters I know use a pellet gun to hunt squirrels with for example. It can be used to cause death. I know as a kid I had a pellet gun that looked just like a .357 revolver and I used it to shoot all sorts of critters in the woods.
    If you extend it to mean non-humans, then you're in possession of a deadly weapon every time you get in your car, which "customarily" has splattered bug corpses all over the front.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hammond Area, LA, ,
    Posts
    238

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    If you extend it to mean non-humans, then you're in possession of a deadly weapon every time you get in your car, which "customarily" has splattered bug corpses all over the front.[/quote]

    That is an inaccurate correlation. The car's primary purpose is to transport people from point A to point B whereas the pellet gun's purpose is to kill. It's based on the primary use for which you have the tool.

  20. #20
    Regular Member turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Independence, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    georg jetson wrote:
    turbodog wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    It does if you rob a bank with it. :?
    So, it comes down to, as many things with the law seem to, a matter of a persons intent?
    That's why the word "intended" is used .
    LOL yeah, I got that George. Once again, my phraseology isn't up to par. But if one paints a squirtgun to look real and uses it to rob someone, you're charged with armed robbery even though a squirtgun is never "customarily used" as a dangerous weapon, nor is it possible to "intend" to use it as a dangerous weapon as it cannot ever BE a dangerous weapon. It's a hollow plastic toy. If I threw it at you, could you, in all honesty, say you were actually hurt by it beyond an imediate sting? I've stubbed my toe worse than that. Knowing what it is, I just can't call it a weapon.

    To use it in a robbery would be better described as "intent to intimidate" by fooling a victim into thinking it was a real weapon and robbing them because of that.


    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Him: "I carry my gun concealed"
    Me: "You're not very good at it"
    Him: "What do you mean?"
    Me: "I know you have a gun"
    End of conversation.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Hendu024's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    447

    Post imported post

    turbodog wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    It does if you rob a bank with it. :?
    So, it comes down to, as many things with the law seem to, a matter of a persons intent?
    AFAIK, if you walk into a bank and pass a note that says you have a gun and want the money, etc etc you are still considered an "armed robber" even if you don't have a gun, and you will be charged as such.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

    Post imported post

    turbodog wrote:
    georg jetson wrote:
    turbodog wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    XD-GEM, that is not the first time a judge has directed a jury that the law said something other than what it plainly says.

    A pencil can cause death or serious bodily harm, but that doesn't make it "customarily used or intended for probable use as a dangerous weapon".

    It does if you rob a bank with it. :?
    So, it comes down to, as many things with the law seem to, a matter of a persons intent?
    That's why the word "intended" is used .
    LOL yeah, I got that George. Once again, my phraseology isn't up to par. But if one paints a squirtgun to look real and uses it to rob someone, you're charged with armed robbery even though a squirtgun is never "customarily used" as a dangerous weapon, nor is it possible to "intend" to use it as a dangerous weapon as it cannot ever BE a dangerous weapon. It's a hollow plastic toy. If I threw it at you, could you, in all honesty, say you were actually hurt by it beyond an imediate sting? I've stubbed my toe worse than that. Knowing what it is, I just can't call it a weapon.

    To use it in a robbery would be better described as "intent to intimidate" by fooling a victim into thinking it was a real weapon and robbing them because of that.

    Let's not get confused here... illegal carrying of weapons and armed robbery are 2 different charges...

    64. Armed robbery
    A. Armed robbery is the taking of anything of value belonging to another from the person of another or that is in the immediate control of another, by use of force or intimidation, while armed with a dangerous weapon.
    Both statutes DO use the term dangerous weapon and 14.2 defines dangerous weapon...

    (3) "Dangerous weapon" includes any gas, liquid or other substance or instrumentality, which, in the manner used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

    If I were a defendant charged with either, I would force the prosecutor to prove that my squirt gun(the one you refer to) is a "dangerous weapon" as defined by 14.2

    If it CANT be used as a dangerous weapon then how can it be INTENDED to be used as such.



  23. #23
    Regular Member turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Independence, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    georg jetson wrote:
    Let's not get confused here... illegal carrying of weapons and armed robbery are 2 different charges...

    64. Armed robbery
    A. Armed robbery is the taking of anything of value belonging to another from the person of another or that is in the immediate control of another, by use of force or intimidation, while armed with a dangerous weapon.
    Both statutes DO use the term dangerous weapon and 14.2 defines dangerous weapon...

    (3) "Dangerous weapon" includes any gas, liquid or other substance or instrumentality, which, in the manner used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

    If I were a defendant charged with either, I would force the prosecutor to prove that my squirt gun(the one you refer to) is a "dangerous weapon" as defined by 14.2

    If it CANT be used as a dangerous weapon then how can it be INTENDED to be used as such.

    My point exactly. Give you a further example of when a weapon isn't a weapon. I was once arrested for carrying a concealed weapon. The "weapon" in question was a folding blade buck knife in a sheath on my belt. I used it in my (then) job as a carpenter. The Judge dismissed the charge on the basis that a folding blade knife that requires two hands to open did not fit the definition of "weapon" as defined in RS 14:95.

    R.S. 14:95: A. Illegal carrying of weapons is:
    (4) The manufacture, ownership, possession, custody or use of any switchblade knife, spring knife or other knife or similar instrument having a blade which may be automatically unfolded or extended from a handle by the manipulation of a button, switch, latch or similar contrivance.

    As my knife wasn't a weapon by law, I couldn't be prosecuted for having it.

    I think that if one carry's one of those lockblade knives I see alot now days, the ones with the little stud mounted on the side of the blade so it can be opened one-handed, you may have more trouble with this than I did with my old Buck knife, because it can be opened (and by it's design, intended to be opened) one-handed. That little stud may be considered a "similar contrivance". Then again, maybe not.
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Him: "I carry my gun concealed"
    Me: "You're not very good at it"
    Him: "What do you mean?"
    Me: "I know you have a gun"
    End of conversation.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post


    LA Confederate wrote:
    KBCraig wrote:
    If you extend it to mean non-humans, then you're in possession of a deadly weapon every time you get in your car, which "customarily" has splattered bug corpses all over the front.

    That is an inaccurate correlation. The car's primary purpose is to transport people from point A to point B whereas the pellet gun's purpose is to kill. It's based on the primary use for which you have the tool.
    [/quote]


    Really? You contend that the primary use of a pellet gun is to kill?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hammond Area, LA, ,
    Posts
    238

    Post imported post

    [user=2835]KBCraig
    Really? You contend that the primary use of a pellet gun is to kill?
    [/quote]

    Yep sure do. What's what most kids and most squirrel hunters use them for. I take it from your skepticism that you are not a hunter and do not know of such things.

Posting Permissions

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