Ohio CCW holder charged


PDA






eagle45
January 4, 2006, 09:31 AM
This one looks good for the antis. I don't know what this guy was thinking. Another article from the Dayton Daily News:

Handgun brandished in parking lot dispute
By Amelia Robinson
Dayton Daily News
BEAVERCREEK | A 28-year-old Dayton man with a permit to carry a concealed weapon placed a 9 mm handgun up to a Xenia man's neck following a New Year's Eve traffic dispute in the Mall at Fairfield Commons parking lot, Beavercreek police Sgt. James Wuebben said Tuesday.

Jason Todd Waple was arraigned Tuesday in Fairborn Municipal Court on single counts of felonious assault and aggravated assault.
He was released from jail Saturday after posting bond.
Waple, who didn't return a message seeking comment, obtained his concealed-weapon permit Nov. 17 from the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office.
Greene County First Assistant Prosecutor Suzanne M. Schmidt said this is the county's first case of a concealed-carry permit holder charged with a violent offense related to the firearm.
The concealed-carry law went into effect in April 2004. Schmidt said a county grand jury will review the case and Waple may face charges he violated the concealed-carry law.
Wuebben said Waple told investigators 54-year-old Ronald Plyes did not yield to him at a mall stop sign and nearly hit his vehicle.
Waple "followed him and thought he could take the law into his own hands," Wuebben said.
Waple's gun had 10 rounds in the magazine, but none in the chamber, he said.

.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ohio CCW holder charged" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Janitor
January 4, 2006, 10:03 AM
Well of course he pulled his pistol ... the guy did NOT yield at a stop sign. Didn't you read the article?

What a complete idiot. Pulls his gun because he's pissed off. This is so unfortunate. The fact that this is one idiot in a group of thousands will be completely lost on the antis. They will always press to say that even one jerk is enough to justify stripping all good citizens of the right to protect themselves.

Hmmm - I wonder if Waple was a plant by the antis...

They (the antis) really need to be working on an assult swimming pool ban instead -

http://www.poolalarms.com/pool_drowning_statistics.htm
-

Trip20
January 4, 2006, 10:26 AM
Greene County First Assistant Prosecutor Suzanne M. Schmidt said this is the county's first case of a concealed-carry permit holder charged with a violent offense related to the firearm.
'Nuff said. :cool:

Lupinus
January 4, 2006, 11:07 AM
It doesn't say what caused him to pull the gun after following the guy. Stupid to follow a guy cause he cut you off, esspecialy if he didn't hit your car. But I would really like to know what happened after the other guy stopped.

If he was just pissed off stupid. If the other guy came out of his car with a tire iron or something to that effect and the journalist convienantly left that out then maybe not as bad (to pull the gun, not following in the first place)

eagle45
January 4, 2006, 11:23 AM
It doesn't say what caused him to pull the gun after following the guy. Stupid to follow a guy cause he cut you off, esspecialy if he didn't hit your car. But I would really like to know what happened after the other guy stopped.

If he was just pissed off stupid. If the other guy came out of his car with a tire iron or something to that effect and the journalist convienantly left that out then maybe not as bad (to pull the gun, not following in the first place)

I agree it would be nice to know the entire story, especially if some of the details were intentionally left out. However, I think Mr. Waple is pretty much out of luck on this one. He will be viewed as the aggressor for following in the first place. Everything that happened after that in terms of escalation of the conflict is a result of him following the other guy.

I wonder if Janitor is right? Could be a plant. Stranger things have happened.

USNCHIEF
January 4, 2006, 11:32 AM
It seems to me that once I got my CCW I became more aware of what "not to do". Why would anyone that was armed follow ("chase") someone? That is the first question the court will ask..."why did you chase". These kind of idiots are the ones that the "Brady Bunch" just love....

K-Romulus
January 4, 2006, 11:34 AM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=174265

(link to story of CCW'rs life saved)

mmike87
January 4, 2006, 01:15 PM
One instance of anything is insignificant and doesn't prove anything. How many people experience road rage and run people down in parking lots without gun?

But then again I am speaking to people WITH a clue. Not the antis. :banghead:

Michael Courtney
January 4, 2006, 03:00 PM
Last Summer, my wife was on the jury of a case where the selective reporting could easily make it look like the CHL-holder was in the wrong. But the jury got to hear both sides of the story and they took less than 2 hours to return an acquittal. It turned out that there was substantial evidence showing the CHL holder was justified in his use of his firearm.

A lot of important details get left out or mistrported in news stories, and I would be slow to condemn a CHL-holders actions without all the facts.

Michael Courtney

Old Dog
January 4, 2006, 03:35 PM
We just had a CPL-holding knucklehead charged in my town charged a couple days ago ... he actually pointed his handgun at a couple teenagers after a traffic collision on a local highway (the female teenage driver, apparently intoxicated, drove a short distance away after the collision, swapped seats with her male companion, and then they returned to the scene of the collision) -- apparently deciding it was necessary to hold these young people at gunpoint pending the arrival of the highway patrol, even though they constituted no danger to the man and his family and had indicated they would await the authorities anyway ...

Regrettably, this incident made the local papers, and it does appear was accurately reported, which means another idiot with a CPL strikes a blow against the image of gun-owners who have common-sense.

Manedwolf
January 4, 2006, 03:56 PM
The unfortunate irony is that this is the only sort of story likely to be reported, BECAUSE the individual used their weapon in an inappropriate manner.

The very idea of CCW is that nobody knows who is armed, and hundreds of people that one might pass everyday might be carrying concealed...but you don't know. And you won't, because they're responsible owners who wouldn't pull it out unless there was no other choice in self-defense or in stopping a violent crime.

And what can't be seen can't be reported on. Unfortunately.

Trip20
January 4, 2006, 06:27 PM
Regrettably, this incident made the local papers, and it does appear was accurately reported, which means another idiot with a CPL strikes a blow against the image of gun-owners who have common-sense.
Yeah but that's the problem. "Another idiot" out of how many non-idiot CPL holders in WA?

What we need to do is write our papers and have them print articles regarding normal accounts of CPL holders (or whatever your states calls it) similar to:
Anytown, WA - Stressful Day Forces Anytown Man To The Edge.

Today the unthinkable happened in our sleepy little town. Bob Harrison of 464 North Fork Rd, got dressed as usual yesterday morning. Only, he had no idea his life would change forever that very afternoon.

On his way home from a particularly stressful day at the office, Harrison received a phone call from his wife - a wife who was particularly unhappy with the fact that Harrison had just purchased another firearm. We would later find out Harrison had some 20 firearms in his home.

After this stress-filled day at the office, the unwanted argument with his wife, and the horrendous traffic during this particularly busy Friday afternoon, Harrison knew he would have to drive to the center of town to pick up his dry-cleaning.

Arriving at Cleff Street Cleaners, Harrison pulled past a parking spot, intent on backing into the parking place. A rude motorist pulled in behind him, stealing the parking place. Obscenities were exchanged, gestures were thrown, and Harrison was forced to find an alternative parking place.

The drive home was no better. It was as if the streets were bulging with automobiles, filled to capacity. Of course, Harrison's gas tank was on "E"... he ran out of gas on the turnpike.

Some how, Harrison made it home that evening, ate dinner, argued with his wife some more, and ended up sleeping on the couch. Surprisingly, Harrison had no complaints as he lay there trying to ease away the stress with which this day had polluted his psychy. He had no complaints because he had carried a firearm all day and didn't shoot anybody; no work-place violence, no road rage, no domestic violence. In fact, it was just a normal day for Harrison.

As Harrison lay on his couch drifting off to sleep, the local talking head on his television spewed a story about a local CHL holder who pointed his gun at another motorist. Harrison thought, "What a moron."

CAS700850
January 4, 2006, 06:33 PM
:)

THink a story like that would print? Yeah, right after "Assault Weapon Owners Donate Money to Charity", "Child Shoots Gun at Paper Target, Congratulated by School and Govenment Officials", and "Lawyer Found to be Ethical and Honest."

Trip20
January 4, 2006, 07:20 PM
CAS700850 - One can dream :)

Standing Wolf
January 4, 2006, 07:34 PM
A lot of important details get left out or mistrported in news stories...

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have a nominee for the Understatement of the Week Award!

Seriously: I'm sure there was a great deal more to the story. I won't be surprised if it turns out the concealed carrier was entirely justified in his course of actionóbut "Man Doesn't Bite Dog" isn't headline news.

Carl N. Brown
January 4, 2006, 08:18 PM
A lot of jury decisions that appear incomprehensible to news audiences
actually make sense to the jurors who heard the legally admissable
evidence and arguments in court and followed the judges instructions
on the law. The news accounts report misleading evidence, frivilous
arguments by prosecutors and attorneys before the judge with
the jury not present, endless speculation by people with pages or
air time to fill, et cetera. News accounts are also heavily slanted
by editoral bias and the press (and public) appetite for man-bites-dog.

I would not bet my life on the accuracy of a single news report.

Helmetcase
January 4, 2006, 10:17 PM
Regrettably, this incident made the local papers, and it does appear was accurately reported, which means another idiot with a CPL strikes a blow against the image of gun-owners who have common-sense.
Just have to keep making the case that exceptions like those idiots prove the rule. Just like I don't quit driving just because some idiot drinks 12 shots of tequila and plows into his neighbor's fence, I shouldn't have to surrender my right to defend myself because someone else is stupid enough to abuse the RKBA.

Michael Courtney
January 5, 2006, 03:47 PM
Regrettably, this incident made the local papers, and it does appear was accurately reported, which means another idiot with a CPL strikes a blow against the image of gun-owners who have common-sense.

I would not conclude that a news story was accurately reported unless I was able to compare the news story with all the evidence and testimony given at trial. A news story takes five minutes to read. Most jury trials take several days.

The case for which my wife served as a juror had a CHL holder holding an "honest citizen" at gun point for police. This was a fact that neither the prosecution nor the defense disputed.

The legal issue revolved around whether a reasonable man would have felt the need to use force in the situation, given the information he had at the time. The jury concluded that holding the man at gunpoint was a reasonable use of force and acquitted the CHL holder. The jury reasoned as follows:

1. Holding a suspected criminal at gunpoint is not the use of deadly force, it is a threat of deadly force. The applicable laws of the state have a lower thresold for the use of non-lethal force. Consequently, threatening deadly force to prevent certain crimes is acceptable in situations where actual application of deadly force would not be allowed.

2. The fact that the "honest citizen" who was held at gunpoint had previously pulled a knife on the defendant's son and his guests and admitted he was still in possession of the knife made the threat of force reasonable.

3. The fact that the defendant instructed his wife to call 911 before leaving his home to confront the man threatening his son and guests made the legality of his motive clear for the jury.

4. Expert testimony presented at trial was convinving that holding a criminal at gun point may be poor tactics, but the conventional wisdom not to draw unless shooting is legally justified is a tactical idea, not a legal requirement in the state of Ohio. The jury was unwilling to convict for tactical errors.

Michael Courtney

Henry Bowman
January 5, 2006, 04:06 PM
Michael, that sounds like an extraordinarily sophisticated jury.

Michael Courtney
January 5, 2006, 07:59 PM
Michael, that sounds like an extraordinarily sophisticated jury.

We live in a relatively wealthy, well-educated jurisdiction. Over half of the jury had college degrees, and there were at least three engineers. Not to mention a gunsmith and a CHL holder. The only two potential jurors who got dismissed were a hair dresser and a LEO who was familiar with the details of the case.

I've been called for jury duty a few times, and the jury my wife was on is not atypical of the folks who show up. Of course, the lawyers can skew the balance of who makes the jury during voi dire, but in the case my wife was on, the prosecutor failed to make what seemed like some obvious challenges.

Michael Courtney

If you enjoyed reading about "Ohio CCW holder charged" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!