User Panel
Posted: 1/25/2006 5:38:12 PM EDT
A coworker of mine was arrested about six months ago on a DWI. He told me last night that his Colt mustang .380 was taken at that time. He has a CWP so here is the shit, the judge refused to give him back his gun. He said good I got another gun off the streets. If he didn't like it he could hire a lawyer to fight it. What the F..., who do you write to complain about this kind of abuse?
|
|
He had no lawyer for a DUI?! |
|
|
And I'll add:
|
|||
|
If I'm reading that correctly, I think yer buddy is screwed. |
||
|
I would write a letter to my coworkers parents and tell them they raised an imbecile. I'm not a fan of taking guns, but lets call it like it is, he is still an imbecile. I guess the lesson is not to get a DUI while you are packing..... |
|
|
Stick
Are you a law man? I don't drink myself so I agree. But the weopon was not used to commit a crime and he was legal to carry. Just doen't seem right thats all. |
|
Even though it pains me to hear a perfectly good firearm is going to be destroyed, I've gotta agree with stickman on this one, your co-worker made a bad decision. if ya plan on drinking don't plan on packing. even if you do find yourself in a deadly force situation your probably not going to make a good shoot/no shoot choice, and even if you did, the beer or whatever will effect your speed/aim/etc. and even if its just 'ONE' beer, some lawyer will find a way to hang you for it even if it otherwise was a justifiable shooting. and then your co-worker becomes another statistic for the anti-gun lobby to use.
My condolences for that poor Colt 380. and nope, I'm just a civilian. |
|
Another good firearm taken off the street, through no fault of it's own.
Your coworker is a dumbass. |
|
That's the problem. He wasn't legal to carry if he was "under the influence of intoxicating liquor". |
|
|
yup |
||
|
I agree that he screwed himself (assuming he flunked a breathalyzer) but there is still a -lot- wrong with this law. For instance, not that long ago, these guns were auctioned to raise funds for law enforcement. A few years ago some of the statists in King County decided that "if it saves one life"(tm) then keeping all these evil guns off the street by destroying them would be "worth it". This of course is a truckload of brown steamy and it needs to be excised from our laws like a cancer. Thing is we can't do this until the powerbase in Olympia swings away from the party whose platform is routinely riddled with anti gun planks. And... that means we have to overcome some pretty serious barriers. I see that as 1- Gunny inertia (forces with the power of a black hole keeping gunny backsides stapled to their couches during elections) and 2- Voting systems that were "reformed" by increasing the systems that caused problems last time, like mailed in ballots. Some stuff needs fixing and you can bet our leaders aren't gonna do it. |
||
|
I have to go with the majority on this too. Your friend is a dumbass and a stupid one at that. In spite of the 2nd amendment anyone who carries concealed needs to be morally responsible. That includes not drinking and packing.
As far as DUI is concerned they should bring back flogging for it. Three lashes for the first offense, five the second and so on. |
|
Just another on the long list of reasons to not be drunk and driving, drunk and fighting with a woman, drunk taking medication and fighting with the familty unit or in any way intoxicated and interacting with law enforcement. He could ask the lawyer who represented him at sentencing if this portion of the case is worth appealing or asking the judge to reconsider. He needs to write a nice contrite statement to accompany the appeal.
|
|
Yes. In most areas, DUI is a mandatory booking. It is going to be rather hard for an officer to let someone keep a weapon while they are going to jail. The jail staff frowns on that..... If he wasn't being booked into jail for some odd reason, giving a drunk guy back a weapon usually isn't on the top ten list of great ideas. Lastly, as already pointed out, he was in violaion of the law by carrying intoxicated (weak, but true). I am not a fan of taking away weapons from the public, and I have berated other officers more than once when I felt something was inappropriate and I later learned of it. If I'm taking a weapon, there is usually a robbery, drive by, or dead body around. |
|
|
It is my opinion that the statute reads, not it is illegal to carry if you're intoxicated, but that it is illegal to carry if you are found guilty of a crime while being intoxicated.
If he had beat the DUI, a misdemeanor in this here state and in my jurisdiction an offense that is only booked for if the person fails the attitude test of has no way of getting home otherwise, he would not be subject to losing his firearm. I would have put it into evidence under "safekeeping/known owner" and he could have got it back the next business day. |
|
Quoted:
RCW 9.41.098 Forfeiture of firearms — Disposition — Confiscation. (1) The superior courts and the courts of limited jurisdiction of the state may order forfeiture of a firearm which is proven to be: (e) In the possession of a person who is in any place in which a concealed pistol license is required, and who is under the influence of any drug or under the influence of intoxicating liquor, as defined in chapter 46.61 RCW; The statute seems pretty clear actually. A vehicle is a place in which a CPL is required if you have a loaded gun with you. There is no other requirement for a violation of law in order to confiscate and place within the jurisdiction of the court, except that he be under the influence of intoxicating liquor, as defined by law. It is more in the vein of a civil seizure and forfeiture than a criminal one. I don't believe a charge even need be brought. Sort of like a seizure under the RICO Act, which doesn't require the actual filing of criminal charges in order for the feds to seize money or property. The burden is upon the owner to file a claim for the return of the property. ETA: That is not to say that officer and court discretion wouldn't allow them to handle it as described above. |
|
As I re-read it I see I read it incorrectly the first time. It would still take a crime to make it happen in my jurisdiction, as you'd have to go before a judge for some reason to cause this to happen. In the scenario I laid out, where I took a pistol into evidence for safekeeping/known owner, it would not be an element of the crime and would not be evidence in the case. So if I got a guy for trespassing (refusing to leave a pizza hut) then found a pistol on him subsequent to arrest I would not put it into "evidence" as part of the crime unless one of two things happened. 1. He made threat that could have been carried out by having the gun on him. or 2. He is a total ass and I wanted to screw him. Discretion can be a bitch or your friend. |
|
|
I'm glad he got arrested for DUI and glad his Colt got confiscated during that arrest, I hope he gets his license suspended as well. He's lucky he didn't get killed or killed anyone for being DUI, I'm not happy that the court will not return his Colt. But he deserves the punishment. He can go get another one. Anyone with a CPL knows about not packing when alcohol is involved.
There's too many deaths caused by DUIs and yes other causes, I am a strong supporter of the DUI laws and I hope that if anyone get caught they get the worst punishment. US has one of the most lenient punishment when it comes to this. You kill someone while drving intoxicated, you should also get punishment by being the test dummy in a car crash test. Then, if you survive, you should spend 20 years or more in jail, solitary that is. |
|
|
|
|
Boy I have the whole LE community chiming in cool.
Yes he's a dumb ass, what got me was the judges comment about getting another gun off the street. Sounds like some anti gun nitwit hiding behind the robe. |
|
convicted of a DUI, you really don't have to assume that he failed a breathalyzer.
glad the gun was taken, i would deserve the same if i was carrying while drinking or drunk... and driving. but then again, i'm really not that stupid. the judge was not abusing any power, just exposing his lazy and airy opinion of firearms. i hope the judge gets mugged, just because he sounds like an a-hole. |
|
Floggin isn't enough. The drunk could kill someone I love. You gotta take away their license for a time. That hurts way more than the lash. |
|
|
Agreed. |
|
|
Seen this once before and recently.
Hope your coworker learns quick. Repeat forfeitures add up in revoked time on the CPL. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.