Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49

Thread: Drinking & Carrying in your own home

  1. #1
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    Obviously drinking and carry is not legal according to MI law when you're outside your home, but what about inside?

    Say someone breaks into your house and you shoot them while intoxicated. Legal? I've heard that as long as you're on your own property, the police can't get you for possessing a legal firearm while intoxicated. True?

    If someone was CCing at their own home while drinking and the police knocked on the door, would that person need to disclose if they answered the door? Could they get in legal trouble?

    These are all pretty much the same question, so don't feel like there's an answer needed for each paragraph I wrote - just summarize your thoughts on the matter.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  2. #2
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    I found this law, MCL 750.237, that says you cannot carry at all under the influence. I did not find anything about being on your own property, but maybe I'm missing something. How could you be in your home and have a few drinks if you own guns?


    750.237 Liquor or controlled substance; possession or use of firearm by person under influence; violation; penalty; chemical analysis.
    Sec. 237.


    (1) An individual shall not carry, have in possession or under control, or use in any manner or discharge a firearm under any of the following circumstances:

    (a) The individual is under the influence of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor and a controlled substance.

    (b) The individual has an alcohol content of 0.08 or more grams per 100 milliliters of blood, per 210 liters of breath, or per 67 milliliters of urine.

    (c) Because of the consumption of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor and a controlled substance, the individual's ability to use a firearm is visibly impaired.

    (2) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4), an individual who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 93 days or a fine of not more than $100.00 for carrying or possessing a firearm, or both, and not more than $500.00 for using or discharging a firearm, or both.

    (3) An individual who violates subsection (1) and causes a serious impairment of a body function of another individual by the discharge or use in any manner of the firearm is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not less than $1,000.00 or more than $5,000.00, or both. As used in this subsection, “serious impairment of a body function” includes, but is not limited to, 1 or more of the following:

    (a) Loss of a limb or use of a limb.

    (b) Loss of a hand, foot, finger, or thumb or use of a hand, foot, finger, or thumb.

    (c) Loss of an eye or ear or of use of an eye or ear.

    (d) Loss or substantial impairment of a bodily function.

    (e) Serious visible disfigurement.

    (f) A comatose state that lasts for more than 3 days.

    (g) Measurable brain damage or mental impairment.

    (h) A skull fracture or other serious bone fracture.

    (i) Subdural hemorrhage or subdural hematoma.

    (j) Loss of an organ.

    (4) An individual who violates subsection (1) and causes the death of another individual by the discharge or use in any manner of a firearm is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 15 years or a fine of not less than $2,500.00 or more than $10,000.00, or both.

    (5) A peace officer who has probable cause to believe an individual violated subsection (1) may require the individual to submit to a chemical analysis of his or her breath, blood, or urine. However, an individual who is afflicted with hemophilia, diabetes, or a condition requiring the use of an anticoagulant under the direction of a physician is not required to submit to a chemical analysis of his or her blood.

    (6) Before an individual is required to submit to a chemical analysis under subsection (5), the peace officer shall inform the individual of all of the following:

    (a) The individual may refuse to submit to the chemical analysis, but if he or she refuses, the officer may obtain a court order requiring the individual to submit to a chemical analysis.

    (b) If the individual submits to the chemical analysis, he or she may obtain a chemical analysis from a person of his or her own choosing.

    (7) The failure of a peace officer to comply with the requirements of subsection (6) does not render the results of a chemical analysis inadmissible as evidence in a criminal prosecution for violating this section, in a civil action arising out of a violation of this section, or in any administrative proceeding arising out of a violation of this section.

    (8) The collection and testing of breath, blood, or urine specimens under this section shall be conducted in the same manner that breath, blood, or urine specimens are collected and tested for alcohol-- and controlled-substance-related driving violations under the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923.

    (9) This section does not prohibit the individual from being charged with, convicted of, or sentenced for any other violation of law arising out of the same transaction as the violation of this section in lieu of being charged with, convicted of, or sentenced for the violation of this section.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    60

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    Obviously drinking and carry is not legal according to MI law when you're outside your home, but what about inside?

    Say someone breaks into your house and you shoot them while intoxicated. Legal? I've heard that as long as you're on your own property, the police can't get you for possessing a legal firearm while intoxicated. True?

    If someone was CCing at their own home while drinking and the police knocked on the door, would that person need to disclose if they answered the door? Could they get in legal trouble?

    These are all pretty much the same question, so don't feel like there's an answer needed for each paragraph I wrote - just summarize your thoughts on the matter.
    I was wondering the same about open carry. Are there any laws if one does not have a CPL and were intoxicated while OC'ing. Not recomended, I was just curious.

  4. #4
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    EDA50 wrote:
    I was wondering the same about open carry. Are there any laws if one does not have a CPL and were intoxicated while OC'ing. Not recomended, I was just curious.
    Take a look at section 1b of the law I posted. That's the part that applies to OC.

    Have to be below .08 BAC.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,416

    Post imported post

    This is how I look at it. I don't know about legality because it really doesn't matter to me but...

    If you are drunk and have to shoot someone, do you really want the prosecutor and jury to know that you shot someone while drunk?

  6. #6
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    ghostrider wrote:
    This is how I look at it. I don't know about legality because it really doesn't matter to me but...

    If you are drunk and have to shoot someone, do you really want the prosecutor and jury to know that you shot someone while drunk?
    I'm not catching what you're pitching...
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,416

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    ghostrider wrote:
    This is how I look at it. I don't know about legality because it really doesn't matter to me but...

    If you are drunk and have to shoot someone, do you really want the prosecutor and jury to know that you shot someone while drunk?
    I'm not catching what you're pitching...
    I try to be a cautious person. Alcohol will impair judgment, and that is what they may think. It may not matter, but anytime alcohol is involved, it will cast doubts. Alcohol in the bloodstream removes a lot of, "benefit of the doubt".

  8. #8
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    ghostrider wrote:
    EM87 wrote:
    ghostrider wrote:
    This is how I look at it. I don't know about legality because it really doesn't matter to me but...

    If you are drunk and have to shoot someone, do you really want the prosecutor and jury to know that you shot someone while drunk?
    I'm not catching what you're pitching...
    I try to be a cautious person. Alcohol will impair judgment, and that is what they may think. It may not matter, but anytime alcohol is involved, it will cast doubts. Alcohol in the bloodstream removes a lot of, "benefit of the doubt".
    True, and I understand that. But if someone breaks into your house with a weapon and gets shot, you shouldn't have anything to worry about legally, should you? This is what I'm trying to figure out.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    I'd just give it to my wife and let her shoot the intruder lol and have another beer

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Jackson , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    985

    Post imported post

    Im here to tell ya if some one breaks into my house and I had been drinking and I felt my life was in danger I wouldnt give a rats a$$ if it was legal!!!!

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Hartford, MI, ,
    Posts
    353

    Post imported post

    cabman1 wrote:
    Im here to tell ya if some one breaks into my house and I had been drinking and I felt my life was in danger I wouldnt give a rats a$$ if it was legal!!!!
    "I'd rather be judged by 12,
    than carried by 6."

    It's better to be alive and $75,000 in debt to lawyer / court fees.

    Than dead.

    -Richard-

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    Your not obligated by law to stay sober, so just in case your house is broke into, just as your not obligated not to take medication, or to be wide awake when you shoot. I will say that Alcohol is taboo when it comes to guns. If you know the law it will not matter, because you will not say anything to anyone, it is called Exercising the 4th, & 5th Amendment.

    Besides what you are restricted from doing in public, is not the same as on private property.

  13. #13
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    i try not to drink, and carry, as with both arms/hands full, i would have to put something down.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Jackson , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    985

    Post imported post

    office888 wrote:
    cabman1 wrote:
    Im here to tell ya if some one breaks into my house and I had been drinking and I felt my life was in danger I wouldnt give a rats a$$ if it was legal!!!!
    "I'd rather be judged by 12,
    than carried by 6."

    It's better to be alive and $75,000 in debt to lawyer / court fees.

    Than dead.

    -Richard-



    amen truer words have never been spokin !!!!

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,416

    Post imported post

    The point I'm making isn't that, "You shouldn't defend yourself if you've been drinking.", it is to caution people what the consequences may be.

    Jim Simmons posted a great commentary on the topic on MGO once.

    http://www.migunowners.org/forum/sho...mp;postcount=7

    I
    Initially, one in such a situation might not be entitled to the benefits of the self-defense act. (On the other hand, I'm still uncertain how beneficial that act is, but that's a different issue.)

    Also, the fact that the shooter has a measurable BAC is a fact that would be taken into consideration in determining whether the shooting was in legitimate self-defense. For example: suppose it goes down in a narrow city street, where on first glance the shooter didn't have any avenues of escape to avoid the now-dead bad guy. But it turns out there was a not-very-obvious avenue down which our shooter could have escaped to elude the bad guy. (Yes, I know -- you're all envisioning something like Diagon Alley from the Harry Potter movies.)

    The question becomes whether it was reasonable for the shooter to have missed this avenue of escape / retreat. And then the question becomes whether the shooter would have been aware of it had he/she not been drinking.

    It would also be a factor in evaluating judgment calls, and any other situational detail that turns out not to be as the shooter thought. (Stranger, versus turning out to be a drunk neighbor. Or where the shooter thought there was a weapon, turned out to be an arm in a cast. Etc.)

    Any level of alcohol consumption affects judgment, reflexes, response, congnition, and coordination. If one perceives a threat, pulls the trigger and hits an innocent bystander, every bit of alcohol that the shooter consumed is another nail in the shooter's proverbial coffin.

    That's the broad strokes answer. Done Deal is right that there is no way to address how alcohol consumption would affect all possible situations -- every defensive shooting is unique.

    Ziggy, you are right that one does not forfeit their right to self-defense merely because they are inebriated. However, inebriation will not be allowed to excuse to hold a shooter to a lower standard than someone who is sober. And where a drunk shooter performs more poorly than one who would have been sober, they can expect little mercy from the legal system.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    I found this law, MCL 750.237, that says you cannot carry at all under the influence. I did not find anything about being on your own property, but maybe I'm missing something. How could you be in your home and have a few drinks if you own guns?

    SNIP
    Section 237 does not exempt private property, CPL holders, etc, therefore, IMO, if you're in possession (under control) of a firearm while at/above a 0.08 BAC you're in violation of the Section.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509

    Post imported post

    A legally justified shooting is justified whether you're a teetotaller or a falling-down lush.


  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    A legally justified shooting is justified whether you're a teetotaller or a falling-down lush.
    I don't think anyone questioning that a justified shooting wasn't legally justified. It's even in a justified shooting you still can be in violation of the statute.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,416

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    A legally justified shooting is justified whether you're a teetotaller or a falling-down lush.
    Of course it is, and nobody is disputing that. However, "falling down lush", can potentially make it more difficult to determine if it's justified or not. JS makes some excellent points that should not be ignored.

    Regardless of who agrees or disagrees, getting drunk is still viewed as irresponsible behavior. Combine that with gun-play, and it's a whole new landscape.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    Not sure if it is legal to be drinking and carrying in your house, but if I am drinking my guns are always locked up.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,416

    Post imported post

    cm2624 wrote:
    Not sure if it is legal to be drinking and carrying in your house, but if I am drinking my guns are always locked up.
    Projects a little more seriousness on the concept doesn't it. With that kind of boundary in place, you either don't drink, or don't be prepared to use the gun for defense. It's a serious choice.



  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    60

    Post imported post

    I don't drink, but man one should be able to do as he pleases in his own house and still be able to defend himself. My house should be my rules.

    I don't smoke either and quite honestly smoke bothers the sh** out of me however I believe that a bar owner should be able to make the choice if they want the place smoke free or not. If I don't like it, I won't freaking go there.

    Hey government, get the hell out of the way. There are people living over here. And BTW we do a better job of it that many of yourpower hungryflunkies!!!!!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    ghostrider wrote:
    cm2624 wrote:
    Not sure if it is legal to be drinking and carrying in your house, but if I am drinking my guns are always locked up.
    Projects a little more seriousness on the concept doesn't it. With that kind of boundary in place, you either don't drink, or don't be prepared to use the gun for defense. It's a serious choice.

    If someone breaks in my house I would use the gun in a minute. Happy new year everyone.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    The Right to Keep & BEAR against anything Tyrannical, Oh yeah and Shall NOT be Infringed.



  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    Serious? Thisis a topic? Guns and Alcohol?Alrighty then... I really like the post of someone stating they would shoot if someone broke in there house and they were drinking. You would have a direct drive to the local P.D. and most likely be charged with several crimes. Seriously Is common sense really this hard to come by these days...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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