Blurring? Hmm... ok. I'm addressing the issue as a whole because it is all intertwined.
If you want to discuss the finer facets, fine.
Your right to defend your life if there is an imminent threat to it is never negated by the simple act of consuming alcohol or even a controlled substance. You will find no exception in any common law standard or in WI Statutes for being under the influence or at some arbitrary BAC level.
Correct, and I'd like it to remain that way.
However, some of the antis in this thread would like to remove my ability to do so
with the most effective means available (i.e., my firearm) upon the consumption of alcohol.
We assert our ability to defend ourselves is being severely limited by The State because we're disallowed from concealed carrying at all right now. I'm taking that same argument a step further by applying it to what others would do in this thread.
I support lifting the prohibition of being in a tavern or any other place with a Class B license while armed.
Look at that. Common ground.
I also support a penalty for being under the influence while carrying. It is defined in the Statute by your actions and not BAC. If you do something stupid with your gun because you have been drinking, there should be a stupidity penalty as you have demonstrated that you are not capable of acting responsibly on your own and need to be punished like a child.
This is where we definitely part ways.
I support penalties for committing illegal acts with a firearm. Those acts are already illegal right now today and you can bet your bottom dollar there are plenty of penalties on the books for you to pay. That is enough. If you do "
something stupid with your gun" you already have a penalty to pay because of those aforementioned laws.
That alcohol is part of the "totality of the circumstances" should not change the penalty. The illegal act should be penalized the same whether sober or drunk because the consequence is the same. If you threaten someone with your weapon because you're
sober and angry, or whether you're
drunk and full of bravado... you're an idiot of equal proportion. Take it further, you shoot in that same scenario. Same same… you’re toast and you deserve what you get.
To imply this additional statute is somehow necessary is exactly what's going on right now with concealed carry. For years we've heard opposition to concealed carry based on the fact that criminals use guns to commit crimes and thus we do not need more guns on the street.
Pro CC folks counter by advising only the law-abiding follow the law; criminals do not respect the concealed carry prohibition. Criminals will continue to commit their crimes with their choice of weapon and carry method. In essence, we say prohibition on concealed carry purely limits the law-abiding, and in the ends merely adds up to one additional misdemeanor charge thrown on the scumbag criminal's court docket. The concealed carry statute is unnecessary.
Why then should my ability to exercise my Rights be curtailed by the actions of the lawless (lawless = those folks you envision getting hammered and doing stupid things…)? See my signature line.
The 3rd issue is simple common sense. I have zero problems with someone having a beer while armed. Any reasonable person standard supports this. Whether armed or not or whether you intend to drive or not, if a person can not show the self control to stop after a beer or 2 or to consume at a rate slow enough to keep you out of trouble, you need to be honest with yourself that there is a problem. If you are going out with the intention of hanging one on, leave your handgun in the car. If you decide that you simply have to be armed at all times, drink soda. With the right comes responsibility. If you are sober, you are better able to defend yourself and those around you if you choose to do so.
No matter where you are or what you are doing, drawing your handgun is always your last line of defense. Keep in mind that in a crowd, and especially in a crowded bar, even if you are armed that it may be better to use some other weapon of opportunity than to draw and fire.
You have zero problems with someone having a beer. Well I’m sure those people are glad they have your blessing.
I appreciate the reminder that a firearm is the last line of defense, and the advice on shooting in to a crowd……. I thought that was “common sense”, but I suppose not since you felt it important to convey the idea (???).
Look. I have absolutely NO intension of getting sloshed with a pistol on my hip. The last thing I want is the responsibility of having a firearm to look after when I’m drunk.
That’s called personal responsibility, and that is what I support in lieu of “common sense”.
It’s funny that you use the term “common sense”. It reminds me of when antis want to put “common sense” restrictions in our bill such as training, permitting and such.
