Ben Wallace should have attended an OC seminar; it could have saved his a$$ :(

Glock9mmOldStyle · Sep 29, 2011

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2011/09/29/ben-wallace-arrested-on-suspicion-of-drunken-driving/

He screwed up drinking, but he could have easily avoided the firearms charge by simply using an "approved container" instead of his backpack, placed in the rear of the SUV instead of the passenger seat. Sad to face a FELONY over an unloaded pistol. All Pistons need to check out this and other OC websites such as MGO/MOC/CLSD/UFO etc...

DrTodd · Sep 29, 2011

Glock9mmOldStyle said:
http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2011/09/29/ben-wallace-arrested-on-suspicion-of-drunken-driving/

He screwed up drinking, but he could have easily avoided the firearms charge by simply using an "approved container" instead of his backpack, placed in the rear of the SUV instead of the passenger seat. Sad to face a FELONY over an unloaded pistol. All Pistons need to check out this and other OC websites such as MGO/MOC/CLSD/UFO etc...

I didn't know the container needed to be "approved"... the things I learn here...:lol:

Glock9mmOldStyle · Sep 29, 2011

DrTodd said:
I didn't know the container needed to be "approved"... the things I learn here...:lol:

Yup - I know you were razzing me DrTodd

, it must be designed for guns for those that don't know?

Just another BS law in my opinion to trip up folks. Hell, lets say you are a welder by trade and fab up a 1" thick walled diamond plate steel container, in MI that would be an illegal transport for a NON CPL holder.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(3y...px?page=shortlinkdisplay&docname=mcl-750-231a

Snip MCL 750.231
(d) To a person while transporting a pistol for a lawful purpose that is licensed by the owner or occupant of the motor vehicle in compliance with section 2 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.422, andthe pistol is unloaded in a closed case designed for the storage of firearms in the trunk of the vehicle.

(e) To a person while transporting a pistol for a lawful purpose that is licensed by the owner or occupant of the motor vehicle in compliance with section 2 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.422, and the pistol is unloaded in a closed case designed for the storage of firearms in a vehicle that does not have a trunk and is not readily accessible to the occupants of the vehicle.

DrTodd · Sep 29, 2011

Glock9mmOldStyle said:
Yup - I know you were razzing me DrTodd , it must be designed for guns for those that don't know?

Just another BS law in my opinion to trip up folks. Hell, lets say you are a welder by trade and fab up a 1" thick diamond plate steel container, in the MI that would be an illegal transport for a NON CPL holder.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(3y...px?page=shortlinkdisplay&docname=mcl-750-231a

Snip MCL 750.231
(d) To a person while transporting a pistol for a lawful purpose that is licensed by the owner or occupant of the motor vehicle in compliance with section 2 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.422, andthe pistol is unloaded in a closed case designed for the storage of firearms in the trunk of the vehicle.

(e) To a person while transporting a pistol for a lawful purpose that is licensed by the owner or occupant of the motor vehicle in compliance with section 2 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.422, and the pistol is unloaded in a closed case designed for the storage of firearms in a vehicle that does not have a trunk and is not readily accessible to the occupants of the vehicle.

No problem, I knew what you meant.

But... I would think that if you designed the case to hold your handgun it meets the requirement. The law doesn't dictate that it can't be designed by you. I imagine that what they were trying to avoid was someone who attempted to argue that, for example, a backpack full of other things met the requirement as a case. But, without any case law, who really KNOWS what they were thinking? (get it, CASE law ?)

Glock9mmOldStyle · Sep 29, 2011

DrTodd said:
No problem, I knew what you meant. But... I would think that if you designed the case to hold your handgun it meets the requirement. The law doesn't dictate that it can't be designed by you. I imagine that what they were trying to avoid was someone who attempted to argue that, for example, a backpack full of other things met the requirement as a case. But, without any case law, who really KNOWS what they were thinking? (get it, CASE law ?)

I my humble opinion, the only safe way to avoid nit picking LEO's / Prosecutors is to use a "Store bought" case thus no way for them to weasel a charge.

That was a good word play Dr. well done Sir! :monkey :banana:

DrTodd · Sep 29, 2011

Glock9mmOldStyle said:
I my humble opinion, the only safe way to avoid nit picking LEO's / Prosecutors is to use a "Store bought" case thus no way for them to weasel a charge.

That would be the safest way, but I'm just sayin'...

BTW, I bought a metal gun safe at Harbor Freight that looks like a book... except it says that it is for firearms right inside of it (see below). The interesting thing is that "case" would probably pass muster. Just shows the illogical thoughts of those who make such stupid laws.

Glock9mmOldStyle · Sep 29, 2011

DrTodd said:
That would be the safest way, but I'm just sayin'...

BTW, I bought a metal gun safe at Harbor Freight that looks like a book... except it says that it is for firearms right inside of it (see below). The interesting thing is that "case" would probably pass muster. Just shows the illogical thoughts of those who make such stupid laws.

View attachment 7011

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000

DrTodd · Sep 30, 2011

Glock9mmOldStyle said:
+1,000,000,000,000,000,000

That should cover me for a while :lol:

Glock9mmOldStyle · Sep 30, 2011

DrTodd said:
That should cover me for a while :lol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VSYmGSJtCA

stainless1911 · Sep 30, 2011

I would hope that this would draw attention to the useless laws that should be removed, but Its probably going to get lost among other issues. The guy is rich, spoiled even, famous, and drinking and driving was at play here. If it were from rolling a stop sign, it might garner more support.

stainless1911 · Sep 30, 2011

Penalties need to be attached to the oath that the police take. That way, as soon as one brings someone up on a charge like this, he can be immediately terminated for breaking the oath that he swore to.

scot623 · Sep 30, 2011

stainless1911 said:
Penalties need to be attached to the oath that the police take. That way, as soon as one brings someone up on a charge like this, he can be immediately terminated for breaking the oath that he swore to.

"Charge like this"? Did I miss something? He was drunk driving while had a gun in the passenger compartment of his vehicle...very illegal. What oath did the officer break?

Venator · Sep 30, 2011

scot623 said:
"Charge like this"? Did I miss something? He was drunk driving while had a gun in the passenger compartment of his vehicle...very illegal. What oath did the officer break?

Why his oath to uphold the 2A in regards to the gun charge. He didn't for the drunk driving arrest.

Keep in mind LEOs have discretion to arrest. There are more than one sheriff in the country that are refusing to charge for mere possession of a firearm (even though their state may have laws against it.) and are only charging for using the gun in a crime. They take there oath to uphold the Constitution seriously.

stainless1911 · Sep 30, 2011

Exactly.

If I were a cop, I would explain ti the person, "The law says this or that, but I took an oath to a greater law, and follow a higher power, the next cop might just charge you with something". As for the DUI, busted.

Gort · Sep 30, 2011

A Great Responsibility.
This act of drinking and carrying a concealed weapon, was Ben Wallace's choice to do.
No one took this right from him, he also had the right to follow the law or not, “His Discretion”

To Protect and Serve, If Ben Wallace decides to drink and conceal again, the Officer may have saved someones life, and saved Ben Wallace from serving the rest of his life in prison.
Ben Wallace, should thank the Officer.

Venator · Sep 30, 2011

Gort said:
A Great Responsibility.
This act of drinking and carrying a concealed weapon, was Ben Wallace's choice to do.
No one took this right from him, he also had the right to follow the law or not, “His Discretion”

To Protect and Serve, If Ben Wallace decides to drink and conceal again, the Officer may have saved someones life, and saved Ben Wallace from serving the rest of his life in prison.
Ben Wallace, should thank the Officer.

You don't get it.

Glock9mmOldStyle · Sep 30, 2011

Venator said:
You don't get it.

This is a sad incident all the way around. It is clear Ben Wallace made mistakes, bad ones. It is also clear that he made an attempt to comply with the law in MI (be it a poor one) the pistol was unloaded and stowed in a backpack in the passenger seat. Now should he be facing a 5yr felony? That is the irony here in my opinion...It's a misdemeanor to driver a 4,000+ lbs SUV down the road filled with "explosive & toxic" materials drunk, but it's a 5yr felony to improperly transport his pistol for self protection? That is what people should be asking here in my honest/humble opinion.

stainless1911 · Sep 30, 2011

The average joe doesnt know the laws like some of us do. This law shouldnt exist to begin with.

The first amendment to the constitution should have been one that prohibited any laws that werent common sense.

sprinklerguy28 · Sep 30, 2011

The pistol was registered in his wife's name. As far as I can tell he does not possess a CPL. Therefore the possession of his wife's pistol is a crime on its own.

Venator · Sep 30, 2011

sprinklerguy28 said:
The pistol was registered in his wife's name. As far as I can tell he does not possess a CPL. Therefore the possession of his wife's pistol is a crime on its own.

Well, I think the point is if we had constitutional carry, the gun would have been inconsequential and the only charge would have been drunk driving.

The point is the mere possession of a firearm (Constitutional right) should not be illegal.

Ben Wallace should have attended an OC seminar; it could have saved his a$$ :(

Campaign Veteran

Michigan Moderator

Campaign Veteran

Michigan Moderator

Campaign Veteran

Michigan Moderator

Campaign Veteran

Michigan Moderator

Campaign Veteran

Banned

Banned

Regular Member

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

Banned

Regular Member

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

Campaign Veteran

Banned

Regular Member

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter