oak1971
Regular Member
Its fine if they drink the cheap stuff, but you and I have a taste for the extravagant. :lol:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
ccwing in a Bar, Question?
- Thread starter range rat
- Start date
Its fine if they drink the cheap stuff, but you and I have a taste for the extravagant. :lol:
paul@paul-fisher.com
Regular Member
I agree.
But having said that, and before Paul gets here, let me say that have a drink or two with a meal at a restaraunt is particularly safer than going out to watch a football game or shoot some pool.
Lol!
My main point is that I don't give up my right to self defense if I have a glass of wine with dinner.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Last edited:
professor gun
Regular Member
Yes, this is correct.
The difficult part is defining impairment. Even with the laws pertaining to driving while impaired that definition sometimes is hard to nail down.
I like how MN has handled this, simply making it against the law to carry if you are above a 0.04 blood alcohol concentration. Per research data, you will not be impaired at .04 or lower.
On the other hand, I would recommend no alcohol onboard if one is carrying just because if you have any alcohol in your system and something bad happens where you must use your firearm, you will be a target (particularly in civil court) just because you have alcohol in your system and you have a gun. I have seen this happen in cases involving driving a vehicle. It isn't fair, but that is just how it is.
If you choose to drink while carrying, be aware of what you may be facing.
H
Herr Heckler Koch
Guest
So here we have the [scare quotes] best and brightest [/scare quotes] telling us that it is better to drink and die than to drink and exercise your inalienable rights to happiness, life and self-defense. LOL
M
McX
Guest
the solution is easy, just as there are designated drivers, employ designated carrier(s). ofcourse they may struggle under the weight of everyone in attendances guns, but if they get too loaded and forget to ask for them back.............free guns!
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
Concealed means concealed. Nobody is going to know if you are carrying unless you do something REALLY stupid. If you choose to ignore the prohibition on consuming you will not likely get caught. It is a straw man argument at best to say that some are "telling us that it is better to drink and die yadda yadda yadda"..
You do not have a constitutionally affirmed right to consume alcohol in public. I don't understand why drinking is more important to some people than is self defense.
Motofixxer
Regular Member
941.237 (3)(cx) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out−
of−state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g), if the licensee or
out−of−state licensee is not consuming alcohol on the premises.
As Paul suggested leaving your permit in the car and OC, I don't think would hold up. Even if your permit is not on you, your still a "licensee". Any legal confrontation would end up revealing that. So you would likely be somehow stretched or charged with being a licensee consuming on the premises.
of−state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g), if the licensee or
out−of−state licensee is not consuming alcohol on the premises.
As Paul suggested leaving your permit in the car and OC, I don't think would hold up. Even if your permit is not on you, your still a "licensee". Any legal confrontation would end up revealing that. So you would likely be somehow stretched or charged with being a licensee consuming on the premises.
Last edited:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
You are not reading the law correctly. The Statute simply prohibits someone from carrying a handgun in a tavern. There are only a couple of exceptions. One is for a licensee or out of state licensee so long as they do not consume alcohol. Another is for an "agent" authorized by the manager, etc. If you fall under the "agent" exception, it is irrelevant if you are a licensee. There is no statute prohibiting a licensee from consuming alcohol so long as they are not "under the influence" of alcohol.
Motofixxer
Regular Member
Or am I reading it and applying it more realistically? I'm not saying it's right. And I have to declare I do have a bias toward the real world application and ignorant enforcement, as wrong, as it may be. But as previously discussed...it takes very little for you to be "materially impaired" or under the influence or whatever they want to describe it. It seems like a situation for overzealous prosecution. As such if you are in a Class B establishment, it would be wise to either not consume any alcoholic beverages, or secure your firearm unloaded and cased in your vehicle to remove most any ambiguity of your actions.
M
McX
Guest
!
Trip20
Regular Member
Implying people believe drinking is more important than self defense simply because they feel the consumption of an alcoholic beverage shouldn't null/void their right to self defense.....
Hmm...speaking of strawman arguments.... way to misrepresent your opposition.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
Please follow the context of the thread. No one has ever stated that the use of alcohol will null/void your right to self defense. Not a single WI Statute nullifies your "right" to self defense no matter what the level of alcohol in your system. My statement directly addressed the outrageous statement regarding drinking and dying and the prohibition of going armed while under the influence of it.
Regarding the Statute, drinking enough so that you are under the influence of alcohol is a deliberate act. You have free will to drink in moderation. If you choose to drink excessively while carrying a firearm, that is a conscious decision you have made in spite of WI Statutes prohibiting it. Responsible adults make responsible decisions. If you make this conscious decision to drink excessively in spite of the Statute prohibiting it, you put your ability to legally carry at risk and you have set drinking at a pretty high priority in comparison.
Last edited:
theoicarry
Regular Member
Everyone has had some good comments here. We (my wife and I) have made a pact and standby this. We we go out for dinner one of us may or may not decide to drink a alcoholic beverage, the other may not and will be driving, Period no exceptions. I will under no circumstances consume any alcohol while CCW. I will also keep my pistol in a case while in a car so as not to infringe on any school zones etc., out of town will be addressed differently.
Once I receive my CCW permit - license I do not plan on leaving my home without my pistol. This is just me, I don't like to take unnecessary chances.
If I am forced to defend myself or family one day (I hope this never happens) but if I do, there is one thing I have to be and this 100% sober.
What works for me may not work for you.
Once I receive my CCW permit - license I do not plan on leaving my home without my pistol. This is just me, I don't like to take unnecessary chances.
If I am forced to defend myself or family one day (I hope this never happens) but if I do, there is one thing I have to be and this 100% sober.
What works for me may not work for you.
BrewTownBagger
Regular Member
BROKENSPROKET
Regular Member
Wrong. Google the definition for 'materially'.
BROKENSPROKET
Regular Member
I have no cite. That is what defense attorneys have told me. I suppose that is hearsay. Two tickets are alway issued for a drunk driving arrest. One for OWI and another for DUI. If they get a BAC of .08 or greater the DA will drop the DUI charge and prosecutes the OWI charge.
IF the BAC is lower than .08, the OWI charges gets dropped for lack of evidence and the DA has to make a decision whether or not to prosecute the DUI charge if the Defendant wants to go to trial. DA's loose alot of these cases, so they are not always eager to go to trial.
Motofixxer
Regular Member
As helpful as Google is, I'm going to balance the legal BAC of .08 and the convictions that have happened at and above that limit despite passing competency and the field sobriety tests etc. Tipped also towards that side is the reference to the .04 in MN by Professor Gun. Also added to that side is past actions of Law Enforcement to stretch, twist, and make up their own rules along the way. Then on the other side is the Google dictionary definition of "Materially". Nope sorry my previous post is a safer approach.
BROKENSPROKET
Regular Member
I personally will NEVER drink while carrying a firearm. NEVER.
I use google to find definition to words I have question about and I have never heard of a Google dictionary. Google is the search engine, not the source itself.
I am saying that your understanding of what 'materially impaired' is wrong.
Brass Magnet
Founder's Club Member
It holds up because you are not exercising your privilege as a licensee. If the enforcers did approach you they may have RAS but if you exercised your rights properly they would not gain PC from the encounter as long as you have the permission required from the owner. The enforcers could always contrive and make up evidence of course.
In other cases that have nothing to do with drinking the line of thinking is similar. If you have a permit but are OC in any place that OC would otherwise be legal without a permit, a request for such permit should carry no legal authority as you are exercising your right and not the privilege.
Last edited:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
Actually, one is operating with a PAC (prohibited alcohol content) and the other is Operating Under the Influence. I can tell you for a fact that both are prosecuted concurrently if the defendant pleads not guilty and it goes to trial. I witnessed personally a hot-shot DUI defense attorney make an ass of himself trying to defend a client. He failed miserably despite his advertising in media that he was an expert at doing so. Getting you off is not as easy as taking your money is.
In the cases where your BAC is less than .08 and you are not involved in an accident or other clearly unsafe act with the vehicle it is much easier to convince the DA to drop the charges and not prosecute. DAs do not like fishing expeditions without solid evidence.