as bad as it gets (test case)

[OhioPaints]

Scott: <<<Now THIS is what the legislature needs to hear as a good reason to separate the databases..."...if it saves just one officer's life, sniff....">>>

You know in Kentucky, you don't even have to notify an LEO that you have a CHL or if you are armed. Let's get down to reality: what difference does it make? If the person is a bad guy, he isn't going to be on the list and may or may not use a gun. He definitely will keep it hidden. If the person has a CHL, it shouldn't make any difference to the LEO, either he is legal and not a threat, or he is a bad guy (see above). So, bottom line, IMO, there is zero postive value in the database.

To me, this is all unjustified paranoia. It isn't going to stop a bad guy at all, and those of us who are legal are not a threat.

We live a few minutes from the bridge to Kentucky and it's nice to cross the state line and quit worrying about this silly stuff.

Ken

(Oh, BTW, in Kentucky it has always been legal to have a loaded handgun in the glove compartment (unlocked) even before they allowed CCW.)[/quote]

[willbird]

In Florida the way I read it having a gun in a closed container, IE so it isnt just laying on the seat has always been legal, glove box (even unlocked) qualifies. I wonder if the closed container language was adeed after the infamous FBI/MIAMI foulf up where several officers laid their guns on the seat, and proceeded to ram the vehicle, thus launching the forearm somewhere they couldnt find it when they needed it ??




Bill

[NavyChief]

In Florida the way I read it having a gun in a closed container, IE so it isnt just laying on the seat has always been legal, glove box (even unlocked) qualifies. I wonder if the closed container language was adeed after the infamous FBI/MIAMI foulf up where several officers laid their guns on the seat, and proceeded to ram the vehicle, thus launching the forearm somewhere they couldnt find it when they needed it ??

Bill

I don't know about "always," but it's been on the books a long time. I don't know the legislative history. I don't think it had anything to do with the Miami fiassco, although there were many valuable lessons learned from that.

From FL's CCW Reciprocity FAQs (bolding mine):

QUESTION 6. I am planning a trip to Florida shortly. I do not have a permit from my home state nor do I want to obtain a Florida permit. However, I would still like to have a weapon with me for self-protection. What are my options?

Florida law does allow a citizen to transport a weapon in a private vehicle, even if that citizen DOES NOT HAVE a concealed weapon license. Note the following two key provisions in the law:

Section 790.25(5), which deals specifically with possession in a private conveyance states that "it is lawful and is not a violation of s. 790.01 for a person 18 years of age or older to possess a concealed firearm or other weapon for self-defense or other lawful purpose within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use. Nothing herein contained prohibits the carrying of a legal firearm other than a handgun anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful use. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm or other weapon on the person. This subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided in s. 776.012."

Section 790.001(17) defines the term "securely encased" to mean "in a glove compartment, whether or not locked; snapped in a holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access."
So, while you cannot carry the weapon on your person, you can at least have it nearby in your vehicle while traveling.

[willbird]

In a holster attached to the steering column would be fine the way I read it...as long as the holster is snapped

Bill

[NavyChief]

In a holster attached to the steering column would be fine the way I read it...as long as the holster is snapped

Bill

Yep. A shoe box on the seat is fine - as long as it's got a lid.

(But if it's under the back seat where you can't even reach it but not in anything you're in deep doo-doo. )

[GasTurbine]

Dan's arrainment was yesterday @ 9:00 am. The defendent is almost always required to be present, but a judge has the final say. The arrainment is just the reading of the charges, and then a plea.

The defendent *can* ask that charges be dropped at this point, but usually the judge and prosecutor wont agree, unless they already have all the information in the case, and have already spoken with witnesses and the arresting officer(s).

Dan entetred a "not guilty" plea on both charges, and was not held. Now enters the pre-trial phase. This is were both parties can gather evidence, get dispositions, see what evidence the other side has, interview witnesses, ect. This is also the time that negociations with the prosecutor could happen...either a lowering of the charges, or even a complete dismissal...or...nothing at all.

Im also guessing that Dan may have been told to be a little tighter lipped.

The next hearing is July 11th @ 2:00 pm, at which time, if the parties did not come to some sort of agreement, a trial date will be set.

[LeiraHoward]

Just finished reading through all 41 pages on this thread...

*whew*

Good luck, Dan... sorry that you have to be the test case, but hopefully this will make the point on a lot of fronts!

[Kowboy]

Dan:

I have not read all 41 pages, but I do have some experience with the law.

You must spend as much as you can possibly afford for the best legal council you can get. Spend more than you can afford. You would't get in a gun fight with blanks, don't get into a legal defense with a blank lawyer. I'm prepared to put some money where my mouth is here too. PM me and I'll make a defense donation.

This is all about barganing from a position of strength. If the prosecutor knows your lawyer will whip his butt, he will cave like a house of cards, I promise. If the prosecutor knows your overworked public defender is in over his head, he'll never deal.

I'm speaking from experience. Thirty years ago the Oregon police raided my house, found a small bag of weed and a tiny pot plant in the back yard. When I asked for a warrant, they backhanded the glasses off my face, knocking me down and said "There's your warrant." They confiscated my girlfriend's period-cramp pills and I swear, I'm not making this up, THEY ATE MY DINNER! French fried shrimp, I'll never forget. They did compliment my cooking.

I was charged with possession of marijuana and cultivation of marijuana but the thing that really concerned my fifteen-hundred-dollar-retainer lawyer was the obstructing official business charge. Jeff Goldstien, ESQ. was apparently worth every penny because I paid fifty bucks for the possession charge and they dropped the rest when he was through with them.

Several years ago, I was charged with trespassing and was slapped with a Personal Protection Order. I knew my Michigan CPL would never happen if this stuck. Three grand in lawyer fees later, both vaporized in court. Of course, it helped that they had no case whatsoever.

You will win. You will pay. We will help.

Kowboy

[dan_sayers]

You'd be impressed

This was just pointed out to me. The ordinance as written doesn't even provide for transportation between those places. So it's also in violation of federal transportation regulations.

[charles1198]

I'm speaking from experience. Thirty years ago the Oregon police raided my house, found a small bag of weed and a tiny pot plant in the back yard. When I asked for a warrant, they backhanded the glasses off my face, knocking me down and said "There's your warrant." They confiscated my girlfriend's period-cramp pills and I swear, I'm not making this up, THEY ATE MY DINNER! French fried shrimp, I'll never forget. They did compliment my cooking.

I'd like to have read the police report on that. I bet it was interesting. From what I've seen (and read in their own horrible grammar) I'm not impressed one bit. Oregon sounds like a bad place to be.

[BB62]

...I'd like to have read the police report on that. I bet it was interesting. From what I've seen (and read in their own horrible grammar) I'm not impressed one bit. Oregon sounds like a bad place to be.

Oregon sounds like it is in dire need of an open carry walk, motorcycle ride, etc., to be followed (or preceded, not sure) by a lawsuit challenging the status quo there.

Sign me and at least 3 other people up.

I have serious doubts about whether the prosecutor there is going to be stupid enough to push this case - leaving us (and Dan) right back where we started.


BB62

[almega]

This was just pointed out to me. The ordinance as written doesn't even provide for transportation between those places. So it's also in violation of federal transportation regulations.

LOL, thats true, never thought about that.

[rhwiley]

You'd be impressed

This was just pointed out to me. The ordinance as written doesn't even provide for transportation between those places. So it's also in violation of federal transportation regulations.

Dan,

I'm glad you shared that information - especially since I have to be in Oregon this weekend. I really makes me wish I could change my lodging location. The more I think about it, I might end up ordering delivery rather than go out for food in the evening. Too bad I can't relocate to a more hospitable location....

[Morne]

Oregon sounds like it is in dire need of an open carry walk

Sign me up! I'll have my 4-month old son holstered in his Snugli frontal carrier and at least one pistol on my hip! Not sure which is more dangerous...

[TunnelRat]

Just finished reading through all 41 pages on this thread...

*whew*

Hey, Chief! We got any more of them gold stickers for Leira...?