Wal-Mart...a public gathering?
- Thread starter todd-45
- Start date
- Status
Malum Prohibitum
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Messages
- 572
Todd-45
Todd,
You got some people riled up from their slumber and motivated to action, and now it may be that Mr. Weida was not charged with a violation of OCGA 16-11-127 at all?????
Here is just one thing you posted, "It wasn't that it was a publically owned building, the issue is that Wal-Mart is a public gathering, according to arresting officers."
Would you please clarify, since you spoke to the arresting officers, as you posted in another thread (and, in this one).
Was Mr. Wieda charged with a violation of OCGA 16-11-127, carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering?
Did a magistrate make the comments above at a probable cause hearing?
It sure sounded like this was an eyewitness account of the courtroom hearing . . .
Please clarify whether Mr. Weida was charged with carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering . . . or not.
Todd,
You got some people riled up from their slumber and motivated to action, and now it may be that Mr. Weida was not charged with a violation of OCGA 16-11-127 at all?????
Here is just one thing you posted, "It wasn't that it was a publically owned building, the issue is that Wal-Mart is a public gathering, according to arresting officers."
Would you please clarify, since you spoke to the arresting officers, as you posted in another thread (and, in this one).
Was Mr. Wieda charged with a violation of OCGA 16-11-127, carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering?
Did a magistrate make the comments above at a probable cause hearing?
It sure sounded like this was an eyewitness account of the courtroom hearing . . .
Please clarify whether Mr. Weida was charged with carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering . . . or not.
Malum Prohibitum
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Messages
- 572
I would like to add that "reaching for his waistband" has nothing to do with carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering, so it changes nothing about that particular charge.
Well, not everyone with a carry permit has good judgement. That's the same for the population as a whole.
One point worth visiting . . . if anyone, anywhere, at anytime sees that you are carrying, and you did not INTEND to show them your gun, you have screwed up.
I do not tell friends that I carry. I don't tell anyone. I never, ever, get into a situation where someone might see the gun.
In most states, I believe, it's a violation of the law for anyone to see your gun while you are carrying "concealed."
How are people allowing others to see their guns? (I do understand in this report that he was getting the gun from the truck -- BAD idea).
One point worth visiting . . . if anyone, anywhere, at anytime sees that you are carrying, and you did not INTEND to show them your gun, you have screwed up.
I do not tell friends that I carry. I don't tell anyone. I never, ever, get into a situation where someone might see the gun.
In most states, I believe, it's a violation of the law for anyone to see your gun while you are carrying "concealed."
How are people allowing others to see their guns? (I do understand in this report that he was getting the gun from the truck -- BAD idea).
Malum Prohibitum
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Messages
- 572
NOT in Georgia. A firearms license is for open and concealed carry.
Somebody "seeing" your firearm in Georgia = nothing, legally, unless you are pointing it at them or something.
This incident occurred in Georgia, so even by carrying openly into WalMart, there is no criminal matter to investigate, especially once he showed his firearms license.
I am not commenting on the specifics of this case, because I only know what Todd-45 posted. But in Georgia there is no law preventing somebody with a firearms license from open carrying. It is also common, as I both see it and engage in it.
And I have never been stopped by law enforcement, except one guy who did not want to see my license and just wanted to know what kind of gun I was carrying. And when that occurred, I was walking out of a big box store myself!
I hope this clears up any misconceptions about whether somebody in Georgia "screws up" (as you said) just because somebody else sees a gun. It may be that way in your state, but not in mine.
Somebody "seeing" your firearm in Georgia = nothing, legally, unless you are pointing it at them or something.
This incident occurred in Georgia, so even by carrying openly into WalMart, there is no criminal matter to investigate, especially once he showed his firearms license.
I am not commenting on the specifics of this case, because I only know what Todd-45 posted. But in Georgia there is no law preventing somebody with a firearms license from open carrying. It is also common, as I both see it and engage in it.
And I have never been stopped by law enforcement, except one guy who did not want to see my license and just wanted to know what kind of gun I was carrying. And when that occurred, I was walking out of a big box store myself!
I hope this clears up any misconceptions about whether somebody in Georgia "screws up" (as you said) just because somebody else sees a gun. It may be that way in your state, but not in mine.
Malum Prohibitum
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Messages
- 572
Todd-45, in carefully re-reading what you posted, I guess you are not saying there is a different charge, but confirming the newspaper account of Mr. Wieda "reaching for his waistband."
I would still like to know the answer to the question jrm posted on the last page: Where did the judge's comments come from? These are not in any the newspaper story.
I would still like to know the answer to the question jrm posted on the last page: Where did the judge's comments come from? These are not in any the newspaper story.
Lone_Gunman
Member
I don't want to confuse this discussion with the facts, but it really doesn't matter what most states do. In the State of Georgia, open carry is allowed with a Georgia Firearm License, which this guy had. In other words, he could have walked into Wal Mart with his gun showing in a belt holster, and would not have been in violation of any law.
I agree its a bad idea to let people see your gun if you are trying to carry concealed, but it certainly isn't illegal in Georgia to do that. If your gun prints, or you jacket gets pulled up, or whatever, and your gun shows, you are OK.
Here is a link from the NRA website that details Georgia firearm laws:
http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/StateLaws.aspx?ST=GA
Malum Prohibitum
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Messages
- 572
I believe the majority of states allow open carry. Go to www.opencarry.org to get state by state details and a map showing which states do and do not allow open carry.
Anyway, I decided to go directly to the source (motivated by Todd-45's posts
). Here is what I posted over at www.georgiapacking.org regarding this situation:
This will be my last post on the subject. As some of you know, I live in Coweta County, so I took this thread rather personally, thinking officers in my county might be arresting people for public gatherings when in fact they are simply in public places (run a search on State v. Burns on this site for the distinction).
I have spoken to one of the arresting officers, who informed me of what occurred. I judge him by the conversation to be honest and forthright about what occurred. The officers dispatched to the scene were informed by the 911 dispatcher that a man took out a gun and stuck it in his waistband and went into Walmart. The officers must respond to a call like that (I used to have to do so). They approached, Mr. Wieda in Walmart where he was looking at DVDs.
They announced themselves as police officers and asked to speak to him. Mind you, there was one guy in uniform (no way to mistake a Newnan uniform for anything other than what it is) and two detectives with badges displayed on necklaces and radios in their hands.
What would be your response upon being confronted in WalMart by three police officers?
Keep your hands out in the open? Declare that you have a firearms license? Ask, "what is this about, officers?"
According to the officer, Mr. Weida's response was to drop his CDs and reach for his gun, actually putting his hand on the butt of his gun!
The detective nearest to him swiftly dropped his radio and grabbed the hand that was on the gun. An arrest was then made.
The arrestee's excuse was that he believed a friend was playing a joke on him. I submit that even if that excuse is truthful, placing your hand on your gun in a public place (not a public gathering!) is not an appropriate response.
The public gathering charge was the result of some confusion, but is likely to go away in the near future.
I would let this one rest if nothing further or different comes out.
:wink:
Anyway, I decided to go directly to the source (motivated by Todd-45's posts
). Here is what I posted over at www.georgiapacking.org regarding this situation:This will be my last post on the subject. As some of you know, I live in Coweta County, so I took this thread rather personally, thinking officers in my county might be arresting people for public gatherings when in fact they are simply in public places (run a search on State v. Burns on this site for the distinction).
I have spoken to one of the arresting officers, who informed me of what occurred. I judge him by the conversation to be honest and forthright about what occurred. The officers dispatched to the scene were informed by the 911 dispatcher that a man took out a gun and stuck it in his waistband and went into Walmart. The officers must respond to a call like that (I used to have to do so). They approached, Mr. Wieda in Walmart where he was looking at DVDs.
They announced themselves as police officers and asked to speak to him. Mind you, there was one guy in uniform (no way to mistake a Newnan uniform for anything other than what it is) and two detectives with badges displayed on necklaces and radios in their hands.
What would be your response upon being confronted in WalMart by three police officers?
Keep your hands out in the open? Declare that you have a firearms license? Ask, "what is this about, officers?"
According to the officer, Mr. Weida's response was to drop his CDs and reach for his gun, actually putting his hand on the butt of his gun!
The detective nearest to him swiftly dropped his radio and grabbed the hand that was on the gun. An arrest was then made.
The arrestee's excuse was that he believed a friend was playing a joke on him. I submit that even if that excuse is truthful, placing your hand on your gun in a public place (not a public gathering!) is not an appropriate response.
The public gathering charge was the result of some confusion, but is likely to go away in the near future.
I would let this one rest if nothing further or different comes out.
:wink:
Lone_Gunman
Member
If this is what really happened, then either one of two things is true:
1. Mr Weida is really stupid, or suicidal
or
2. The officer is lying to make Mr Weida look like a criminal, and distract from the incorrect "public gathering" nonsense.
Either of these two things could be true. However, I believe if the officers really felt he was going for his gun, Mr. Weida would likely be riddled with bullets now, and either dead or in the Newnan Hospital ICU.
So far we have only heard the officer's side of the story.
To the Lone Gunman,
Your statement about the suspect being shot if reaching for his gun is way off. No officer is going to fire a shot in a Wal-Mart store unless every other option has been used. A shot fired in an area like that is a very expensive shot and risky. If another officer can disarm the suspect without incident that would be best.
Your statement about the suspect being shot if reaching for his gun is way off. No officer is going to fire a shot in a Wal-Mart store unless every other option has been used. A shot fired in an area like that is a very expensive shot and risky. If another officer can disarm the suspect without incident that would be best.
Last edited:
Malum Prohibitum
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Messages
- 572
I wish to confirm what Shield 529 posted, from personal experience, and many times . . .
SSN Vet
Member
Wally World is one public gathering....
I find myself more and more chosing NOT to attend!!
I find myself more and more chosing NOT to attend!!
Lone_Gunman
Member
I don't know enough about police procedures to disagree with you guys. But some people do get shot by police while attempting to pull out their wallet and otherwise attempting to comply with the officers. There are many examples of police not always handling the situation in the manner you describe but instead by accidentally (or intentionally) shooting the person.
I am always very leery of interacting with police while I am carrying a handgun. I always make it clear to them that I am carrying, and keep my hands in plain view, and move as little as possible.
I am always very leery of interacting with police while I am carrying a handgun. I always make it clear to them that I am carrying, and keep my hands in plain view, and move as little as possible.
Tom Servo
Member
Ok, let's all slow down and take a deep, cleansing breath...
Breathe in, breathe out....
First off, WalMart and other retailers are *not* public gatherings under the law, though I've known LEOs to get confused about the statutes.
I once saw a guy open-carrying at a Quik Trip who got hassled by LEOs who claimed that a) it was a public gathering, b) the Georgia permit was a "concealed" permit, and c) he couldn't carry there because they served alcohol.
Wrong on all counts. The permit *is* valid for open-carry, though I'd not recommend it, privately-owned companies are not "public gatherings," and though the store sells alcohol, it is not for consumption on the premises.
In that case, the man involved the supervisor and was on his way a few minutes later.
As far as this incident, we only know what's in the news story (which is likely hearsay and inaccurate) and what some people have reported on this thread. In any case, it sounds like the guy acted like a buffoon on some level, at least enough to draw attention. The whole situation seems really odd and poorly-handled on both fronts.
Georgia requires that you be law-abiding to get a permit. It does not require you to be intelligent. Those two things do not always go hand-in-hand.
I'm somewhat indifferent to concealment. I don't open-carry, but I'm not paranoid about "printing" either. I was once spotted by an LEO who struck up a conversation about guns but never even asked to see my permit. Maybe because I wasn't acting like a weirdo. In any case, behavior has alot to do with it.
It is true that the Georgia statute is a bit unclear, and the "public gathering" clause really needs to be more clearly defined.
Breathe in, breathe out....
First off, WalMart and other retailers are *not* public gatherings under the law, though I've known LEOs to get confused about the statutes.
I once saw a guy open-carrying at a Quik Trip who got hassled by LEOs who claimed that a) it was a public gathering, b) the Georgia permit was a "concealed" permit, and c) he couldn't carry there because they served alcohol.
Wrong on all counts. The permit *is* valid for open-carry, though I'd not recommend it, privately-owned companies are not "public gatherings," and though the store sells alcohol, it is not for consumption on the premises.
In that case, the man involved the supervisor and was on his way a few minutes later.
As far as this incident, we only know what's in the news story (which is likely hearsay and inaccurate) and what some people have reported on this thread. In any case, it sounds like the guy acted like a buffoon on some level, at least enough to draw attention. The whole situation seems really odd and poorly-handled on both fronts.
Georgia requires that you be law-abiding to get a permit. It does not require you to be intelligent. Those two things do not always go hand-in-hand.
I'm somewhat indifferent to concealment. I don't open-carry, but I'm not paranoid about "printing" either. I was once spotted by an LEO who struck up a conversation about guns but never even asked to see my permit. Maybe because I wasn't acting like a weirdo. In any case, behavior has alot to do with it.
It is true that the Georgia statute is a bit unclear, and the "public gathering" clause really needs to be more clearly defined.
aryfrosty
Member
Carrying your business
I agree that it'll be interesting to track this.... About 6 months ago the rumors flew about "Wally*World" posting some of their stores as "no carry allowed" stores. After a substantial number of letters went in they announced that they had no intention of posting their property. A lot of these situations crop up and then turn out to be different in the final analysis.
As someone wrote here about the person who was detained, "reaching for his waistband and putting his hand on the butt of his weapon", had he done that in my presence I would have put him on safe also. Weapons are not a joke. One remark that really licked all the red off my apple was where they quoted the person as saying he thought some of his friends were "playing a joke on him"... That right there should put his behind in the realm of "used to have a permit and USED to carry." Again, they are not jokes! If he who carries jokes with them or if he keeps friends who might be inclined to joke around with guns they need to lose their guns on the spot. It's those dadgummed jokers who present us with accidental discharges and unintended homicides every year.
I agree that it'll be interesting to track this.... About 6 months ago the rumors flew about "Wally*World" posting some of their stores as "no carry allowed" stores. After a substantial number of letters went in they announced that they had no intention of posting their property. A lot of these situations crop up and then turn out to be different in the final analysis.
As someone wrote here about the person who was detained, "reaching for his waistband and putting his hand on the butt of his weapon", had he done that in my presence I would have put him on safe also. Weapons are not a joke. One remark that really licked all the red off my apple was where they quoted the person as saying he thought some of his friends were "playing a joke on him"... That right there should put his behind in the realm of "used to have a permit and USED to carry." Again, they are not jokes! If he who carries jokes with them or if he keeps friends who might be inclined to joke around with guns they need to lose their guns on the spot. It's those dadgummed jokers who present us with accidental discharges and unintended homicides every year.
Gray Peterson
Member
You're flat out wrong. Only 7 States flat out ban general open carry outside of your home, and 5 of those states are shall-issue states. Those states are: Texas, Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Florida, South Carolina, Illinois, and New York State, plus DC but I don't consider that a state.
Several states require a carry permit before carrying openly or concealed. These are: Indiana, Utah, Georgia, Minnesota, Iowa, Massachusetts (suprise), New Jersey (another suprise), Maryland (suprise), Rhode Island (AG permit), Connecticut, and North Dakota. (Edit: I forgot Tennessee)
There are also a lot of states that make it legal on foot without a permit, but make open carry of a pistol illegal in your car without a carry license. Those states are too numerous to count, but they include my state of Washington, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Delaware.
Regardless of how you may feel about the situation, this man, if he had his firearm license, did nothing illegal in the state of Georgia.
You also might be seeing more open carry down the line as it gets more organized. There are efforts in the "shall-issue no open carry" states to legalize them there with a license, and legislators are interested in introducing bills.
aryfrosty
Member
Carrying your business
As for the man "doing nothing illegal". Having his weapon either openly carried or concealed was not illegal, I will agree.
But, regardless of how you feel, sir, if the man was stupid enough to put his hand on the weapon or make any sort of manacing response to being challenged by uniformed Police he was doing something illegal.
Further, while being stupid isn't in and of itself illegal, the onus is on the person carrying to do so in such a manner as to not cause public harm.
I don't like the idea of nit-picking police officers looking for reasons to challenge a person who carries, but I do like the idea of those of us who do carry demanding the application of common sense from others who carry.
If we are guilty of providing fodder for the anti-gun nuts just to "prove our point", then mostly we are proving that our point is atop our collective head.
Carrying openly is a good thing if you're hunting, in my opinion. But if any of us are doing so just to create the "hey guys, look at me- look what I've got..." time of life then why don't they just collect teacups or doillies?
As for the man "doing nothing illegal". Having his weapon either openly carried or concealed was not illegal, I will agree.
But, regardless of how you feel, sir, if the man was stupid enough to put his hand on the weapon or make any sort of manacing response to being challenged by uniformed Police he was doing something illegal.
Further, while being stupid isn't in and of itself illegal, the onus is on the person carrying to do so in such a manner as to not cause public harm.
I don't like the idea of nit-picking police officers looking for reasons to challenge a person who carries, but I do like the idea of those of us who do carry demanding the application of common sense from others who carry.
If we are guilty of providing fodder for the anti-gun nuts just to "prove our point", then mostly we are proving that our point is atop our collective head.
Carrying openly is a good thing if you're hunting, in my opinion. But if any of us are doing so just to create the "hey guys, look at me- look what I've got..." time of life then why don't they just collect teacups or doillies?
neoncowboy
Member
In that case (and we'll have to get more details as the case progresses), he should have been charged with assault/threatening/etc...not carrying at a public gathering.
Waving the gun around at Wal-Mart would still not make it carrying at a public gathering.
Regardless of how stupid he is or what other laws were broken...I am interested in why he was charged with carrying at a public gathering when he clearly was not violating that (particular) law.
aryfrosty
Member
Carrying your business
That point is valid...I suspect that by the time we finally get the complete story the argument will have been forgotten. As is usual the various points of view are all valid.
Makes me wonder if there are still issues unspoken of.
BTW. I have known several agencies over the last 35 years who prohibited their officers from carrying openly if off duty. Some would only allow open carry if the officer was carrying a personal weapon. Some wouldn't allow personal weapons. I knew of one young gentleman in the early 80s who carried openly after being told not to and who received a 14 day suspension.
That's anecdotal. I don't expect anybody to accept it at face value.
That point is valid...I suspect that by the time we finally get the complete story the argument will have been forgotten. As is usual the various points of view are all valid.
Makes me wonder if there are still issues unspoken of.
BTW. I have known several agencies over the last 35 years who prohibited their officers from carrying openly if off duty. Some would only allow open carry if the officer was carrying a personal weapon. Some wouldn't allow personal weapons. I knew of one young gentleman in the early 80s who carried openly after being told not to and who received a 14 day suspension.
That's anecdotal. I don't expect anybody to accept it at face value.
wheelgunslinger
Member
LoneGunman queried:
Because Police Officers have the authority to arrest you on whatever charge they like. If you resist, you get charged with resisting arrest. If you question, you risk them issuing you a "handy beatdown" on the spot. Besides, since there are three of them, all sworn into the same fraternital brotherhood, their stories will all be cohesive.
Detaining you for whatever reason they deem proper is what they do. Sure, you can protest at the station, or shell out a couple of grand for a lawyer to get you out of it. Or, Gods help you, wait for a judge to throw it out or an ADA to slap someone on the wrist. But, most people don't have that kind of green or time to spend. Certainly not a guy shopping for DVD's at WalMart.
I agree that there is more to the story. But, so far, I see a glaring example of Police officers doing an unlawful detention.
Because Police Officers have the authority to arrest you on whatever charge they like. If you resist, you get charged with resisting arrest. If you question, you risk them issuing you a "handy beatdown" on the spot. Besides, since there are three of them, all sworn into the same fraternital brotherhood, their stories will all be cohesive.
Detaining you for whatever reason they deem proper is what they do. Sure, you can protest at the station, or shell out a couple of grand for a lawyer to get you out of it. Or, Gods help you, wait for a judge to throw it out or an ADA to slap someone on the wrist. But, most people don't have that kind of green or time to spend. Certainly not a guy shopping for DVD's at WalMart.
I agree that there is more to the story. But, so far, I see a glaring example of Police officers doing an unlawful detention.
Car Knocker
Member
Lonnie,
Utah does not require a carry permit for open carry.
Utah does not require a carry permit for open carry.
If the permit holder was reaching for his piece in a threatening manner and the officers wanted to arrest him for that, okay - that's fine. He can defend himself against a criminal charge of Scaring the Bejeesus Out of a Peace Officer or whatever the criminal complaint is there.
Charging him for carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering just doesn't make sense in this context. Without making any comments as to guilt or innocence in this particular case, allowing Georgia police to arrest someone with a permit for carrying a firearm into Wal-Mart at their discretion essentially renders the permit worthless. We might as well return to the days where concealed weapons were outlawed but the prohibition was selectively enforced.
Charging him for carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering just doesn't make sense in this context. Without making any comments as to guilt or innocence in this particular case, allowing Georgia police to arrest someone with a permit for carrying a firearm into Wal-Mart at their discretion essentially renders the permit worthless. We might as well return to the days where concealed weapons were outlawed but the prohibition was selectively enforced.
Otherguy Overby
member
Double standard?
OIC, when a startled CCW holder grasps the grip of his gun without drawing, it is a crime. But if an LEO does it with intent to intimidate it is perfectly acceptable...
Regardless there just isn't enough information to determine intent in this case.
OIC, when a startled CCW holder grasps the grip of his gun without drawing, it is a crime. But if an LEO does it with intent to intimidate it is perfectly acceptable...
Regardless there just isn't enough information to determine intent in this case.
aryfrosty
Member
Carrying your business
I agree with all of you who are concerned about unlawful arrest and detention.
In fairness we have to accept that no police officer is perfect. They are asked to make decisions in tenths of seconds that attorneys and judges, and the man on the street, will have hours or days to mull over. Sometimes they try very hard to do what is right and just and still make mistakes. So do doctors, lawyers, judges and the rest of us. And I'll stipulate that the job attracts a modicum of people who shouldn't have the power they are given.
Also I say that none of us here are perfect. You can hit that nail any way you like. The phrase, "hindsight is always 20/20" comes to mind. But we weren't there and we could all be wrong, or all be right, but more likely we're all partially right.
If anyone is interested in what the Georgia Constitution and amendments thereto say about resisting unlawful arrests I suggest you go the the library and read them. Or, if you like, go to an attorney and let them explain the laws to you. In spite of how things often appear the Police aren't always wrong.
I agree with all of you who are concerned about unlawful arrest and detention.
In fairness we have to accept that no police officer is perfect. They are asked to make decisions in tenths of seconds that attorneys and judges, and the man on the street, will have hours or days to mull over. Sometimes they try very hard to do what is right and just and still make mistakes. So do doctors, lawyers, judges and the rest of us. And I'll stipulate that the job attracts a modicum of people who shouldn't have the power they are given.
Also I say that none of us here are perfect. You can hit that nail any way you like. The phrase, "hindsight is always 20/20" comes to mind. But we weren't there and we could all be wrong, or all be right, but more likely we're all partially right.
If anyone is interested in what the Georgia Constitution and amendments thereto say about resisting unlawful arrests I suggest you go the the library and read them. Or, if you like, go to an attorney and let them explain the laws to you. In spite of how things often appear the Police aren't always wrong.
- Status