-
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.
Milw. Man Arrested Recklessly Endangering Safety/Negligent Handling
- Thread starter HandyHamlet
- Start date
Sorcice
Regular Member
I smell something fishy here. Betting gun didn't have a holster in pocket and she fingered it. Lol
davidmcbeth
Banned
No one was hurt ... just an accident ... should not have been charged w/anything.
Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
I don't think it really meets the definition of Wis stat 941.30 (1) or(2)
941.30SUBCHAPTER IV OTHER DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTALITIESAND PRACTICES941.30
Recklessly endangering safety. 941.30(1)
(1) First-degree recklessly endangering safety. Whoever recklessly endangers another's safety under circumstances which show utter disregard for human life is guilty of a Class F felony.
941.30(2)(2) Second-degree recklessly endangering safety. Whoever recklessly endangers another's safety is guilty of a Class G felony. - See more at: http://statutes.laws.com/wisconsin/941/941.30#sthash.Oci9oYCY.dpuf
But that doesn't mean one well not have to defends oneself and spend lots of time and money doing so.
Wonder what make and model it was
941.30SUBCHAPTER IV OTHER DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTALITIESAND PRACTICES941.30
Recklessly endangering safety. 941.30(1)
(1) First-degree recklessly endangering safety. Whoever recklessly endangers another's safety under circumstances which show utter disregard for human life is guilty of a Class F felony.
941.30(2)(2) Second-degree recklessly endangering safety. Whoever recklessly endangers another's safety is guilty of a Class G felony. - See more at: http://statutes.laws.com/wisconsin/941/941.30#sthash.Oci9oYCY.dpuf
But that doesn't mean one well not have to defends oneself and spend lots of time and money doing so.
Wonder what make and model it was
Last edited:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
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;
davidmcbeth
Banned
He wasn't handling the gun ... nor operating it.
Just an accident .. jee wiz, every time there is a coulda situation happens an arrest has to be made?
No one was hurt ... no harm/no foul.
I guess a civil issue regarding the damage, if any, that the discharge may have caused.
If it would have dropped from its holster and he caught it before anything further happened, they'd arrest for that too ....
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
It was negligence in this case not some blameless "accident". They were (mis)handling the firearm by manipulating what it was being held in when it fell and discharged. The fact that it was not in some type of a holster or otherwise retained and this fact leading to it falling and discharging is being charged as criminal negligence.
No, they would not. Something actually happened and it was not in a "holster" which had a reasonable expectation of safely and effectively retaining it.
Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
Maybe maybe not.
Do we know what the actual charge is or well be, has he had an initial appearance yet the DA might decide to charge some thing different.
davidmcbeth
Banned
I see it as a "no harm" "no foul" situation. It was an accident. Guns are not supposed to discharged when dropped.
Like dropping a stuffed toy and an eye pops out and injures someone ... big crime there.
Ya never been at a gun range before where an accidental discharge happens? Jeez, we turned into *******?
Like dropping a stuffed toy and an eye pops out and injures someone ... big crime there.
Ya never been at a gun range before where an accidental discharge happens? Jeez, we turned into *******?
Last edited by a moderator:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
I know ranges which will ban you from the premises for a single negligent discharge. I have never seen a toy eyeball fly out at over 800 fps. There was property damage and they fled the scene. That alone can get you charged with a crime.
Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
a) Endangers another's safety by the negligent operation or handling of a dangerous weapon
One could argue that here was no handling or operation of the weapon.
He didn't handle it nor did he operate it.
I think it is a stretch to say by taking off his coat he was operating or handling it.
One could argue that here was no handling or operation of the weapon.
He didn't handle it nor did he operate it.
I think it is a stretch to say by taking off his coat he was operating or handling it.
I'm not sure I agree with that. If I take off my holster with the gun in it, am I not handling the gun? I submit that I am.
Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
No you are handing a holstered gun, I submit that he was handling his coat with a gun in the pocket.
If you are handling a closed box with a gun it are handling the gun or the box.
You are handling a box with a gun in it IMHO.
Now if you stick your hand in side the box and grab the gun you are now handling the gun.
Here's the definition of
hand·ling
/ˈhandl-iNG/
noun
noun: handling; plural noun: handlings
1.
the act of taking or holding something in the hands
Thus he was handling his coat with a gun in its pocket.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
One could argue that Elvis is still alive but that would be no less ridiculous.. :dude:
He was negligent in the fact that his firearm was not secure. By handling the coat with the handgun inside of it, he was by default also handling the handgun. Let's have some accountability here. The idiot was negligent and there are consequences for negligence. His negligence caused property damage. He can show up in court and try to plea it down, but I see nothing wrong with accountability for negligent actions with deadly weapons.
Maverick9
Regular Member
When first carrying a female friend was carrying something in an Uncle Mike's "holster shaped object".
She went to a shoe store and in full view (of me LMAO) out pops the little something onto the carpeted floor. Fortunately no body saw it and it didn't take out any fluffy bunny slippers.
True story. It is 'the story which shall never be mentioned', or some female thing they do. TSWSNBM. Orders come from on high - SWMBO.
She went to a shoe store and in full view (of me LMAO) out pops the little something onto the carpeted floor. Fortunately no body saw it and it didn't take out any fluffy bunny slippers.
True story. It is 'the story which shall never be mentioned', or some female thing they do. TSWSNBM. Orders come from on high - SWMBO.
OC for ME
Regular Member
Is the order to not possess any weapons a permanent order or not to possess until after the "trial"? Can gun rights be revoked for a misdemeanor in WI?
OC for ME
Regular Member
Two shot Derringer.....now we know what type of "weapon."
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
It can be a condition of bond. WI does not typically take away RTBA for misdemeanor with the exception of domestic violence. In addition to a bond condition, the courts can order you to not possess weapons because of a domestic abuse injunction, domestic abuse tribal injunction, child abuse injunction or harassment injunction.