Un-holstering a firearm in public

[dorminWS]

The usual definition of "reasonable" conduct would be that of "a reasonably prudent person acting fairly under the circumstances". Yeah, I know, a little circular, but that's what gets trotted out.

Is it reasonable to assume, upon seeing a pistol unholstered in public, that one is in danger of bodily harm? Not by my standards; assuming the pistol is being handled in a safe and responsible manner. Doesn't seem either reasonable or right to impose criminal sanctions on someone because of someone else's blind fear of firearms. On the other hand, it is undeniably poor judgment to haul out your piece in a public place (particularly in the presence of strangers) for any reason.

If the facts are as I assume from the postings, I think the court is wrong about this, and it may be a case of a judge indulging his/her own personal; prejudices (or his perception of the community's) and expecting to get away with it because the defendant probably doesn't have the resources and/or the inclination to fight a battle on the issue and appeal.

What I think the judge should have done was administer a strong butt-chewing to the accuser, the defendant, the arresting cop, and the Commonwealth's Attorney and send them all home.

[WRW]

Was it brandishing or something else the fellow was convicted of. I do see a case for reckless handling, though I do like the butt-chewing option.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[wittmeba]

Thanks for the comments.

I was not trying to be a 'troll' and create an arguable thread, but this seemed like it was going to happen to me - long before I started carrying. It was in Dallas. I just wanted to know if this situation would be reasonable and warrant drawing (if carrying) or I would get myself into trouble.

A big very frustrated guy got upset with me - and I wasn't affecting him directly but in traffic accessing a main road. He was banging on his steering wheel with both hands while yelling - but I had my windows up.

Whether he was going to break a window or just yell more directly is unknown as it didn't happen. It didn't go beyond his expression of anger in his vehicle. But I could see the rage in him from the situation. It became a matter where I didn't even want to look at him.

[Jeff82]

The key is "reasonable". The judge or jury get to figure that.

[wittmeba]

The key is "reasonable". The judge or jury get to figure that.

Exactly!

The word "brandishing" is pretty clearly defined. But when they stretch the meanings for arrest to putting fear into someone, brandishing is no longer the limit. The Libs clutter up every law and definition to provide themselves options against gun owners. If one doesn't fit, they will find one that will.

From Merriam Websters:
brandishing:
1
: to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly
2
: to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner

[Jeff82]

Since when do word's definitions mean anything to a lib?

Sent from my Galaxy S5 Sport using Tapatalk.

[wittmeba]

With some of these anti-gun people, that "irrational fear" thing is a put on.

Oh, no. How could you say that? It's all real. [sarcasm]

http://teapartybulletin.com/you-wont-be ... s-history/

[arlington22201]

Looking for opinions.

Possible scenario here.

You are in your vehicle in traffic.
Everyone is tense as traffic is stopped.
You need to get into another lane to make a turn.
You edge into the lane and some tough-guy gets upset.
He approaches your vehicle and bangs on your window trying to get at you.
He breaks the window.
Hmmm... not much of an avenue for retreat for you in the car, and obviously traffic has your car impeded. - you are cornered.
You draw your gun.
I would too, this could end badly for you.
He backs off.
His mental capacity to reason is not totally impaired.
Is that brandishing? Threatening with a gun?
No, to me this is employing your resources at hand in justifiable preparation of lethal self defense.
It seems the law encourages you that if you need to draw your gun then you should shoot the perp.
I don't think so. The weapon is to preserve your life, not avenge damage to your property (the car). The property damage and circumstances demand immediate involvement of the law, though, and I would certainly press charges. The dude has issues.
I am not a lawyer, but I did read a book about the law of self defense once.


I'm not one to quickly shoot someone if they back off, but I don't want to have the situation turned on me as the bad guy.

Like it or not, you were (hypothetically) thrust into the situation when the window broke, and that entails being involved in "the system". And "the system" means that judges and juries and what not will determine if you acted appropriately. It works great when it applies to everybody, and everybody follows the rules.

Seems like there's a lot of folks these days that could give a rip about the rules...

Thank you wittmeba for posting this question and Palladin for your response.

This very scenario has been on my mind for a long time. I can very easily imagine a situation in which I draw my pistol in fear for my life. However, upon drawing, stop short of pulling the trigger because the threat subsides, just like in the scenario above. This has bothered me because I understand that such a scenario could put me at risk of a brandishing charge.

Palladin, you mention "justifiable preparation." Is this mentioned anywhere in statutes or caselaw? Some google research has yielded me nothing. Does anyone know of any VA sources on the line between self-defense and brandishing?

[wittmeba]

Thanks, arlington22201 for your comments too.

Your question is part of why I commented. I see it played out like this.
- The plaintiff goes through the scenario "Was he/she brandishing"? No. Try the next possibility.
- Was the person trying to present a defense to the aggressor? Yes... So it seems they go down the line of possibilities until they find something that fits.

The upside is there would be lots of witnesses - now the question is are they pro or con about guns.

If the laws were written and were simple - Was he/she brandishing and that question is answered - thats it. End of discussion. But the Libs clutter the details and possibilities with crap until there will always be something they can claim. That's where we will lose.

We need to force a good thorough clean up of the laws.

[WRW]

Or we could research "Common Law". Look to "reasonable Force".

http://www.lawteacher.net/cases/crimina ... efence.php

That would be a good place to start.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[screwedbygoogle]

....It seems the law encourages you that if you need to draw your gun then you should shoot the perp....

The law encourages you to not draw your gun unless you must shoot the perp.

You gun is a deadly weapon - use it for its intended purpose or leave it holstered.




I am not a curmudgeon, I am THE Curmudgeon!

[dorminWS]

Or we could research "Common Law". Look to "reasonable Force".

http://www.lawteacher.net/cases/crimina ... efence.php

That would be a good place to start.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Just a heads up: That site you linked, at a super cursory glance, appears to be British and citing British cases. Unless it gets on this side of the Atlantic deeper into the article, I'd look a little further.

[WRW]

Or we could research "Common Law". Look to "reasonable Force".

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.lawteacher.net/cases/crimina ... es/crimina ... efence.php</a><!-- m -->

That would be a good place to start.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Just a heads up: That site you linked, at a super cursory glance, appears to be British and citing British cases. Unless it gets on this side of the Atlantic deeper into the article, I'd look a little further.

Yes, that's where our Common Law begins and, as such, is a good place to start. There are other good starting places, if you prefer.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[ProShooter]

I remember a few years ago in Chantilly at Hooters near the Capital Expo Center (Gun Show Weekend) an guy with his holstered pistol were dining there after the show and the bombshell waitress asked the guy about his gun, she asked if she could see it, when he removed it from the holster the gun fired and hit the waitress in the stomach, wounding her but not fatally. This is why so many restaurants do not want firearms inside.. it only takes a mishap like this and everyone goes anti-gun. So best to keep it holstered and show your friends your new purchase later in private..

That's not even close to what actually happened at Hooters.

[ProShooter]

I got an update from the OP on this. His co-worker was convicted of a class 2 misdemeanour including a fine. And community service.

A class 2????

[MarcSpaz]

I got an update from the OP on this. His co-worker was convicted of a class 2 misdemeanour including a fine. And community service.

A class 2????

I though brandishing was either class 1 or 6. Just going by what I was told.

[MarcSpaz]

I remember a few years ago in Chantilly at Hooters near the Capital Expo Center (Gun Show Weekend) an guy with his holstered pistol were dining there after the show and the bombshell waitress asked the guy about his gun, she asked if she could see it, when he removed it from the holster the gun fired and hit the waitress in the stomach, wounding her but not fatally. This is why so many restaurants do not want firearms inside.. it only takes a mishap like this and everyone goes anti-gun. So best to keep it holstered and show your friends your new purchase later in private..

That's not even close to what actually happened at Hooters.

Found these...

http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/201 ... irfaxTimes

http://www.eater.com/2012/7/30/6560159/ ... s-arrested

[ProShooter]

I got an update from the OP on this. His co-worker was convicted of a class 2 misdemeanour including a fine. And community service.

A class 2????

I though brandishing was either class 1 or 6. Just going by what I was told.

Brandishing is a Class 1 Misdemeanor

[ProShooter]

I remember a few years ago in Chantilly at Hooters near the Capital Expo Center (Gun Show Weekend) an guy with his holstered pistol were dining there after the show and the bombshell waitress asked the guy about his gun, she asked if she could see it, when he removed it from the holster the gun fired and hit the waitress in the stomach, wounding her but not fatally. This is why so many restaurants do not want firearms inside.. it only takes a mishap like this and everyone goes anti-gun. So best to keep it holstered and show your friends your new purchase later in private..

That's not even close to what actually happened at Hooters.

Found these...

http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/201 ... irfaxTimes

http://www.eater.com/2012/7/30/6560159/ ... s-arrested

His gun was unloaded from having attended the gun show. He tried to reload it while sitting at the table, and he fired it and struck the girl in the foot under the table. Nothing to do with a hot waitress and showing off the gun.

[Oakes]

Maybe it's time to change the law. If you are bent over changing a tire and your weapon becomes detectible you should not have to go to court for that.