Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Officer cited for drunken driving faces OWI firearm charge

  1. #1
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest

    Officer cited for drunken driving faces OWI firearm charge

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/o...136292548.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Gitte Laasby, MJS
    A Milwaukee police detective accused of driving drunk on a Milwaukee County freeway while armed with a handgun is scheduled to appear in court Thursday after being charged with operating a firearm while intoxicated.
    [ ... ]
    Another deputy who was taking photos of the accident noticed a Wauwatosa firefighter passing a gun holster to Chicks. The deputy found three magazines of ammunition in the truck.
    The firearms OWI does not ATM appear on his rap sheet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisc. Stats.
    § 941.20 Endangering safety by use of dangerous weapon.
    (1) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor:
    (a) Endangers another’s safety by the negligent operation or handling of a dangerous weapon; or
    (b) Operates or goes armed with a firearm while he or she is under the influence of an intoxicant; or ...

  2. #2
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    I'm less afraid of this guy's operation of his firearm than his operation of a vehicle.
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  3. #3
    Regular Member Cobra469's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Allis, WI, , USA
    Posts
    218
    I'm afraid of both. But what is operation of a firearm? Doesn't say he used it. Should be operating a vehicle while drunk while armed. Or possession of a firearm while intoxicated. Oh well. Hopefully he will be forced to get some help and make smarter choices. He of all people should know better.

  4. #4
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Milwaukee County Case Number 2011CM006568
    The Defendant was charged with the following offense:
    Count No.

    Statute Cite Description Severity Offense Date Plea
    1 941.20(1)(b) Operate Firearm While Intoxicated Misd. A 11-30-2011

  5. #5
    Regular Member thieltech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Beaver Dam
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Herr Heckler Koch View Post
    Milwaukee County Case Number 2011CM006568
    The Defendant was charged with the following offense:
    Count No.

    Statute Cite Description Severity Offense Date Plea
    1 941.20(1)(b) Operate Firearm While Intoxicated Misd. A 11-30-2011


    how was he operating it ?? was he shooting at something ??????

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by thieltech View Post
    how was he operating it ?? was he shooting at something ??????
    It's not unheard of.

    http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/FW-...Charges-122711

    FORT WORTH, Texas - A Fort Worth police officer was arrested on Monday for allegedly driving while intoxicated and providing a firearm to a felon.
    ...
    According to investigators, Officer Daniel Gonzalez and an ex-con, Bobby Joe Newton, were driving around in the officer's personal vehicle while shooting his personal handgun.

    They said Gonzlalez shot a street lamp before giving the gun to Newton, who shot a street sign several times.

  7. #7
    Regular Member thieltech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Beaver Dam
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    It's not unheard of.

    http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/FW-...Charges-122711

    FORT WORTH, Texas - A Fort Worth police officer was arrested on Monday for allegedly driving while intoxicated and providing a firearm to a felon.
    ...
    According to investigators, Officer Daniel Gonzalez and an ex-con, Bobby Joe Newton, were driving around in the officer's personal vehicle while shooting his personal handgun.

    They said Gonzlalez shot a street lamp before giving the gun to Newton, who shot a street sign several times.
    wow , thats freakin unreal ..... do these cops think ? im not even sure when i was 18 i thought of doin crape like that

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Is mere posession considered operating?

    This should frighten everyone! Not that a cop was drunk driving, but that they are trying to nail him with intoxicated use of a firearm.

    At any point did the cop remove the firearm from its holster, threaten anyone with it, point it at anyone?

    Yeah, he is stupid for OWI, but does being under the influence make ones right to self defense null and void???

  9. #9
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by thieltech View Post
    how was he operating it ?? was he shooting at something ??????
    Probably something like this:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	gat.jpg 
Views:	65 
Size:	56.8 KB 
ID:	7674
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Milwaukee Wisconsin
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by Nutczak View Post
    This should frighten everyone! Not that a cop was drunk driving, but that they are trying to nail him with intoxicated use of a firearm.

    At any point did the cop remove the firearm from its holster, threaten anyone with it, point it at anyone?

    Yeah, he is stupid for OWI, but does being under the influence make ones right to self defense null and void???
    The citation to the statute was posted earlier, by Herr HK, indicated the exact words for the statute paragraph quoted:

    941.20(1)(b) Operates or goes armed with a firearm while he or she is under the influence of an intoxicant; or
    When recording the description of that 941.20(1)(b) paragraph in court systems, it would be routine to see it shortened to "Operating under the influence" even though, for this particular case, the actual evidence and testimony is expected to support, the "goes armed with" portion of the statute.
    Last edited by E6chevron; 12-28-2011 at 06:39 PM.
    Wis. CCL #5x Springfield XDM 3.8 Compact .40 S&W, Utah CFP

  11. #11
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    He has 5 case numbers:
    2011TR037337 346.63(1)(a) OWI (1st)
    2011TR037338 346.63(1)(b) Operating w/ PAC >=0.15 (1st)
    2011TR037339 346.89(1) Inattentive Driving
    2011TR037340 346.57(2) Unreasonable and Imprudent Speed
    All of which are forfeitures... yes, even the drunk driving charges, because it's "only" the first time he's been caught. (Wonder why they didn't put them all on one charge? I've seen other cases with several statutes on one charge #.)

    2011CM006568 941.20(1)(b) Operate Firearm While Intoxicated
    Which is an A misdemeanor.
    I agree it's not stated clearly in the charge; probably should be "going armed with", but they're in the same sentence. Might be amended in court tomorrow.

    If the BAC is correct, and if that holster the firefighter handed him had a pistol, he was clearly "armed with" while drunk.

    OTOH, this article says the pistol was "in the car". Merely having it in the car isn't "going armed with".

    If it were, say, in the trunk (especially if he'd been the least bit smart & put it in a safe) that wouldn't be "going armed with".

    more than an hour and a half after the crash - Chicks' blood-alcohol level was 0.139
    Which means that at the time of the crash it could have been over 0.15, & had decreased an average of 0.015 per hour... (see pg 5 & 6 of this PDF &/or this wiki.)
    or it could have been lower & alcohol was still being absorbed while they #$&@ around for 90 min on scene & getting him to the hospital to have his blood drawn.
    Either way, I'd lay odds that he was over 0.08% when he crashed.

    And amazingly, it seems that there's a real house address listed on the court website, not a work address:
    8200 W Daphne Ave.; Milwaukee; 53224
    (Whether or not it's actually his...?)

    BTW, he's a detective, not just a regular LEO.
    Let's see if he gets a "do not posess" order, for either "weapons" or motor vehicles.
    (IIRC, the ND cop trespassing @ Southridge isn't prohibited, even though he broke the law & had a high potential of causing serious injury or death.)
    WI court case search page
    Last edited by MKEgal; 12-29-2011 at 04:11 PM. Reason: oops - slipped a zero
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North of Madison
    Posts
    177

    Power

    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    He has 5 case numbers:
    2011TR037337 346.63(1)(a) OWI (1st)
    2011TR037338 346.63(1)(b) Operating w/ PAC >=0.15 (1st)
    2011TR037339 346.89(1) Inattentive Driving
    2011TR037340 346.57(2) Unreasonable and Imprudent Speed
    All of which are forfeitures... yes, even the drunk driving charges, because it's "only" the first time he's been caught. (Wonder why they didn't put them all on one charge? I've seen other cases with several statutes on one charge #.)

    2011CM006568 941.20(1)(b) Operate Firearm While Intoxicated
    Which is an A misdemeanor.
    I agree it's not stated clearly in the charge; probably should be "going armed with", but they're in the same sentence. Might be amended in court tomorrow.

    If the BAC is correct, and if that holster the firefighter handed him had a pistol, he was clearly "armed with" while drunk.

    OTOH, this article says the pistol was "in the car". Merely having it in the car isn't "going armed with".

    If it were, say, in the trunk (especially if he'd been the least bit smart & put it in a safe) that wouldn't be "going armed with".


    Which means that at the time of the crash it could have been over 0.15, & had decreased an average of 0.15 per hour... (see pg 5 & 6 of this PDF &/or this wiki.)
    or it could have been lower & alcohol was still being absorbed while they #$&@ around for 90 min on scene & getting him to the hospital to have his blood drawn.
    Either way, I'd lay odds that he was over 0.08% when he crashed.

    And amazingly, it seems that there's a real house address listed on the court website, not a work address:
    8200 W Daphne Ave.; Milwaukee; 53224
    (Whether or not it's actually his...?)

    BTW, he's a detective, not just a regular LEO.
    Let's see if he gets a "do not posess" order, for either "weapons" or motor vehicles.
    (IIRC, the ND cop trespassing @ Southridge isn't prohibited, even though he broke the law & had a high potential of causing serious injury or death.)
    WI court case search page
    Us mortals will be charged with whatever needs to be to generate income for the system and the lawyers. In a case like this he will plea bargain get a slap on the wrist and no consfication. he is above the law don;t ya know.... but you or I do this and we are HOSED.....
    May I see your First, Fourth And Thirteenth Amendment Permits, please?

    Guns do not make you a killer. I
    think killing makes you a killer. You can kill
    someone with a baseball bat or a car, but no one is
    trying to ban you from driving to the ball game. (Andy Rooney RIP)

  13. #13
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426

    Angry

    As of the hearing today, none of the traffic citations include a restriction on driving or possessing a motor vehicle or cell phone.

    The OWI (firearm) citation does not include a restriction on possession of "weapons".
    The restrictions are:
    Absolute sobriety. Not to drive unless has a valid driver's license. Defendant advised it is a requirement to attend all future court proceedings.
    Anyone want to try to claim that regular citizens aren't second class?

Posting Permissions

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