Under the influence

[color of law]

So, where is Todd Edgar our first time poster? Is he a one time shopper?

 

[solus]

I didn't keep the news listing on it, it was the mall incident either last year or before. I had to dig to find the charges had been dropped, not sure I can find it again. But it was nationwide news at the time, the original arrest was discussed here in length.

WRAL reporting on his arrest https://www.wral.com/gunman-reported-at-fayetteville-s-cross-creek-mall/14751863/
As far as I know they did not report on the dropped charges, and I don't remember where I found it. I will try though.

Well that was not hard, and WRAL did report charges dropped. https://www.wral.com/charge-dropped-against-soldier-who-took-gun-to-fayetteville-mall/16181183/

Thanks WW, found that incident from 3+ years ago where, quote:

Bryan Scott Wolfinger is charged with going armed to the terror of the public. Police said Wolfinger was carrying an AR-15 assault rifle, military ballistic panel carrier and multiple high-capacity rifle magazine when he was taken into custody. Unquote.

Gee WW, here i thought your NC reference was recent and involved a handgun since that is the forum’s theme, not a LG. Especially since you associated your GATTOP reference to VA where in fact, as i mentioned, several forums members have been actively prosecuted over the charge with their HANDGUNS.

Dropped, sorry LEs strike yet again, as well as the hysteria of jqpublic, quote:
Our client had been at the private property location of Cross Creek Mall for a prearranged and approved gun photo session, there was no signage forbidding such activity at the time and our client made no effort to terrorize or intimate anyone during the relevant time," attorney David Courie said in a statement Monday. Unquote.

Further, this is unequivocally proof of someone losing on an interaction w/LEs who misinterpreted their understanding of the NC statutes and the citizen where the citizen is endure the long drawn out judicial process, year and a half in this case; suffer consequences from employment; as well expend $$$$ for arrorneys.

Please, WW, et al., carry on with your firearm carrying, OC/CC, and drink & imbibe controlled substances [including OTC medications] and thoroughly enjoy the roller coaster sojourn when a nice LE stops to ‘chats’ with you...

Now ya’ll have a good holiday, ya here!

 

[solus]

So, where is Todd Edgar our first time poster? Is he a one time shopper?

Perhaps decided his threshold would be zero consumtion was the prudent way to carry?

 

[griffin]

In Michigan it's tricky. The legal limit for CC is .02, for OC it's .08. However there is wording that says under the influence so you can be cited for even less than the "legal limit."

If I get a chance I'll come back and post the MCLs.

 

[griffin]

Okay, here are the MCLs.

Concealed Carry
.02 BAC is the limit for carrying a concealed pistol. http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-28-425k
.02 or greater is a civil infraction with a one year CPL suspension.
.08 or greater is a misdemeanor with a three year CPL suspension.
.10 or greater is a misdemeanor with a CPL revocation.

Open Carry
Open carry falls under possession. It's .08 BAC for all possession. http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-237
.08 or greater is a misdemeanor for possession or open carry
.08 if you shoot someone is a felony

But here's the tricky part:
(1) An individual shall not carry, have in possession or under control, or use in any manner or discharge a firearm under any of the following circumstances:
(a) The individual is under the influence of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor and a controlled substance.

So you can be below .08 and still be charged with possession/OC while "under the influence."

Same thing with CC.

(2) An individual shall not carry a concealed pistol or portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology while he or she is under the influence of alcoholic liquor

So you can be under .02 and potentially get charged with CC while "under the influence."

 

[OC for ME]

Are there no exceptions for lawful SD when in your cups? Missouri has such exceptions. MO does not criminalize booze and guns as long as you don't get all negligent or hostile in your manners...unless the hostile manner is for lawful SD.

 

[eye95]

There should be lawful self-defense while one is “in his cups”. The first two questions asked after any self-defense action should be the same regardless of the mental condition of the defender:

1. Would a reasonable person have believed himself or herself to be in danger, justifying the use of force?

2. Was the level of force used reasonable based on the threat?

If the answers to those two questions are yes, then the use of force should be deemed lawful.

However, other attendant behaviors—including the drinking itself—might have been unlawful, and should be addressed.

However number 2, if one is “in his cups”, the likelihood of both answers being yes is greatly reduced.

 

[griffin]

There is no exception specifically written under the CC or possession laws. I suspect that the shooting someone was meant to be for negligent discharge, but it doesn't specifically read that way. In the possession MCL it states:

(c) Because of the consumption of alcoholic liquor, a controlled substance, or a combination of alcoholic liquor and a controlled substance, the individual's ability to use a firearm is visibly impaired.

So I'm sure you'd have a higher hurdle to jump should you be under the influence and shoot someone in a self-defense situation. A zealous anti-gun prosecutor could easily say the only reason you shot someone was because you were drunk and that a sober person wouldn't have done the same. One would think that a home invasion would be an easy defense, but I suspect it'd be much harder to mount a successful defense in court for an outside the home shooting if you were under the influence. I've seen what prosecutors and courts do.