1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Alcohol and Home Defense

Discussion in 'Legal' started by lpsharp88, Mar 6, 2013.

  1. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator

    Yes, and here's the key: if it was obvious, you wouldn't be on trial. If you're on trial it means that with everything considered your justification was sufficiently not obvious that the prosecutor concluded that he could convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that you're guilty.
  2. breakingcontact

    breakingcontact Well-Known Member

    If the difference of a person being hammered out of their mind vs having a beer or two cannot be understood by the jury you're in deep trouble. Suppose if you're hauled in front of a jury at all you've got major issues.
  3. smalls

    smalls Well-Known Member

    Yesterday, 07:32 PM #68
    The problem is that alcohol affects different people differently. I know people that get wasted off a couple beers, and others that can down a whole bottle of Jack Daniels and not even look drunk.
  4. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator

    And the fact that one doesn't "look drunk" doesn't mean he's not impaired. And I'm sure that a prosecutor would have no trouble getting expert testimony to that effect.
  5. SHR970

    SHR970 Well-Known Member

    And the last two posts oversimplify that fact that without a breathalyzer reading, urinalysis, or blood test they won't know what your BAC is let alone any other mitigating pharmaceuticals or recreational drugs that are in your system. Simply saying the person smelled of alcohol and exhibited XYZ isn't enough. Diabetic Ketoacidosis has been mistaken for being drunk enough in the past that it is well documented.

    The burden of proof will be on the prosecution to show that you were impaired enough for it to matter for the given circumstances to the point that you were criminally negligent.
  6. chrisTx

    chrisTx Well-Known Member

    Being the victim of a crime, or a potential crime doesn't usually warrant a blood alcohol test on the victim. As long as you are within the scope of the law, and a 'reasonable person' would have acted in the same or similar manner, then what's to be worried about?
  7. breakingcontact

    breakingcontact Well-Known Member

    I don't want to give them any help though, either. Not condemning those of you who do drink.

    I know there are other issues they could use against a person. They could attack the caliber used. The number of shots fired and on and on...

    I respect we all have to make our own decisions. I am a fan of using what or about what police use in terms of pistols or shotgun ammo.
  8. RetiredUSNChief

    RetiredUSNChief Well-Known Member

    I agree with "Anything can happen in a civil suit".

    OJ was aquitted in a CRIMINAL trial, where the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt". A civil trial has a different standard: "preponderance of evidence".

    In a criminal trial if you can introduce even one reasonable doubt, then you can be aquitted. In a civil trial, if 51% of the evidence is against you, you lose.

    What would happen depends on the type of trial you are in, among other things.
  9. 2@low8

    2@low8 Well-Known Member

    Why Muddy The Water?

    When I was a LEO working in the uniform division there were two things that alerted me that a person may be under the influence of alcohol:
    1- Certain physical behaviors and 2- The odor of an alcoholic beverage.

    So if you drink I recommend two things:
    1- Don’t drink to the extent that your physical behavior shows it and 2- keep something handy to mask your breath like the specific breath sprays that neutralize the odor or foods with strong masking odor.

    I don’t see that neutralizing or masking the odor as deceptive; it’s just keeping from muddying the water. If you are not physically impaired, which is the essence of being under the influence, then why let the odor convict you? Do as you’re your conscience guides you. Since I NEVER consume more that 3 ounces of alcohol in less than a 2 hour period the above routine works for me. YMMV
  10. thorazine

    thorazine Well-Known Member

    My vote is,

    No and no.

    Unless it was a bad shoot to begin with then I am sure that's more ammunition that will be used against you. =D

Share This Page