Court considers whether intoxicated may possess gun in own home

[Aim1]

From the article:

“What you want us to say here is, in the home, whether you're sober or not, whether you've got a gun that is loaded or not, there is no law that is broken?” asked Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor.

Mr. Weber's attorney, Stephen E. Palmer, responded: “That is correct, assuming the gun is lawful and the conduct is lawful.

“Imagine the ramifications that kind of opinion would have,” the chief justice said."



https://www.toledoblade.com/local/c...y-possess-gun-in-own-home/stories/20200225102

 

[herrwalther]

Imagine the absurdity of the counter argument. Before having a few drinks at home, taking all your firearms off the premises before pouring.

 

[kmw1954]

How about being discharged from a medical procedure with narcotic pain killers. Will it then get to the point that the Dr. has to ask if there are firearms in the home before he can discharge you?

 

[Aim1]

How about being discharged from a medical procedure with narcotic pain killers. Will it then get to the point that the Dr. has to ask if there are firearms in the home before he can discharge you?

Good point.

 

[Col. Harrumph]

Imagining ramifications is the legislature's job, not some berobed oracle's.

 

[FL-NC]

Imagine the absurdity of the counter argument. Before having a few drinks at home, taking all your firearms off the premises before pouring.

How about being discharged from a medical procedure with narcotic pain killers. Will it then get to the point that the Dr. has to ask if there are firearms in the home before he can discharge you?

... Or keys to any vehicles, or heavy machinery, or power tools, etc.?

 

[CDW4ME]

Knives are dangerous, so are stairs, a grill, Drano.

 

[Waveski]

I think it is likely that Mr. & Mrs. Weber will be spending more time with lawyers in the near future.

 

[jar]

Common sense should tell folk to lock the guns away if they are going to have a drink.

Common sense should tell folk to not drive a car if they are going to have a drink.

 

[Navy87Guy]

This seems pretty straight forward. Just like any other dangerous object - car, knife, chain saw, machete - your ability to legally own and possess it is complete separate from your right/ability to use it. Whether a person is drunk, drugged, or just angry, when they decide to use an object in an illegal manner, that’s when the crime begins. Until we reach the “Minority Report” level of crime precognition, it’s a specious argument to say that being drunk invalidates a Constitutional right!

 

[edwardware]

Methinks the root of the problem is the insane proposition that intoxication reduces culpability.

Once you thoughtlessly accept that voluntary intoxication reduces culpability, you have no choice but to uselessly attempt to reduce the damage done by people you've decided aren't (fully) responsible for their actions. From there we get laws about carrying your gun in a restaurant that serves alcohol, and drunk drivers excusing themselves with, "but I was drunk!"

As I see it, voluntary intoxication should be an aggravating factor to crimes committed, not a mitigating factor.

 

[Paco42]

I pretty much agree with what everyone else has been saying. If the “berobed oracle” (love that one!) sees fit to legislate from the bench re firearm possession when intoxicated, why not make possession of cars keys when intoxicated a crime? Indeed, let’s extend it to potentially harmful (e.g., “hateful”) social media outbursts—let’s make it a crime to possess a working internet connection when intoxicated. Let’s...oh, never mind. This is potentially another camel’s-nose-under-the-tent-flap affair, with the smart people doing stupid things...wait for it... “for the good of the children”. <sigh>

 

[Iggy]

Should we have to remove an argumentative wife before having a beer when we get home from work? Hmmm? Have to think about that one.

 

[caribou]

I say Fornicate, defecate and intoxicate in your own home peacefully and loose NO Rights.

 

[1942bull]

This is a Catch 22 kind of case. No matter what the court decides it becomes injustice for some. Being intoxicated in your own home is to the best of my knowledge not even a civil offense let alone criminal offense. Public drunkenness is a civil offense. If you carry a gun while drunk in public it can be a criminal offense in some states. I cannot argue with that. But if they apply criminal status to possessing a gun while intoxicated in your own home one of two things happens. They either violate my rights unless they had a warrant or they entered on an emergency basis meaning someone reported the fact and LE considered it a probably dangerous situation and entered. The latter could possibly get a LEO shot as well as the intoxicated person with the gun. Either would be a bad outcome. If LE has no grounds to act against.an intoxicated person in their own home, then someone might be hurt or killed by the drunk. That would also be a bad outcome.

The case in question has constitutional ramifications. Does the state law prohibiting possession while intoxicated in one's home mean the Fourth Amendment has no weight in terms of requiring a warrant to search or seize. I do not recall their being any exceptions to the 4A related to being drunk. So if LE comes into my home it should have a warrant unless LE is responding to a dangerous situation. For LE to do that it would have to have a report of the possible danger to enter, search, or seize. If there was a report from someone inside the home, the matter takes on a different look. The person reporting could be in danger. Could LE seize the weapon once it ascertained that there was intoxication. and how would they make that determination? Sometimes it is very obvious that a person is very intoxicated, but that is not a crime in your own home.

This kind of case poses the same injustices as do "Red Flag" laws. Seizing a gun might prevent violence, but seizing a gun can also leave the owner defenseless. That is a Catch 22. as is the matter in question.

 

[Speedo66]

Article says police found him intoxicated holding an unloaded gun, no threats reported, in his home.

If you are found intoxicated in your car in your garage, no keys present, are you guilty of DUI?

The gun situation was definitely not smart, but not necessarily a crime in my opinion.

 

[reddog81]

If the guy was acting like a belligerent fool they should be able to charge him with something appropriate like brandishing a firearm.

 

[film495]

lawyer get paid by the hour, so they don't care how foolish something sounds at face value, they want to get paid

 

[CDW4ME]

If drinking disqualified one from having a gun in the home, same "logic" says they can't have a motor vehicle in the driveway/garage.

 

[whughett]

Years ago a co- worker leaving a company after hours function, intoxicated, with a CCW. On being stopped by the local police was charged not only with DUI but faced a heavy penalty for having procession of a fire arm while intoxicated. Only a plea bargain to surrender the CCW kept him from jail time. First offense.

 

[Pudge]

At some point someone will figure out it is about the intoxicant, not the firearm. Maybe that's what we should make illegal?

 

[.38 Special]

Might be worth noting that this case isn't exactly about being drunk in a home with guns, but rather being drunk at home with a gun in your hand. From the article:

Said Chief Justice O'Connor: “Nobody is saying that your client can't own a gun. Nobody says that he can't have the gun in the same room with him. It's the fact that he's intoxicated and is in possession of the gun (that) is the problem.”

 

[herrwalther]

Might be worth noting that this case isn't exactly about being drunk in a home with guns, but rather being drunk at home with a gun in your hand. From the article:

These people think A leads to B leads to C. I don't carry my firearm at home regularly. Closest I get is leaving my firearm on after I walk the dogs at night. So is a holstered firearm while having a drink a danger? How about handgun in a bedside safe with the key in my pocket? Both are legally in my possession. And this leads back to the absurdity of not being allowed to legally drink while being a legal occupant in your own home.

 

[Aim1]

Might be worth noting that this case isn't exactly about being drunk in a home with guns, but rather being drunk at home with a gun in your hand. From the article:

Said Chief Justice O'Connor: “Nobody is saying that your client can't own a gun. Nobody says that he can't have the gun in the same room with him. It's the fact that he's intoxicated and is in possession of the gun (that) is the problem.”

If you're drunk in a car with the keys you are guilty of DWI in most places, you don't even need to be driving.

I disagree with that.

You have not committed a crime by mere possession of the car keys while in the car intoxicated.

Many people have gone to their cars to "sleep it off" and never driven.

 

[jmorris]

“Imagine the ramifications that kind of opinion would have,”

Indeed, over .08 and have a car in the garage, DWI for you my friend. Congratulations your a felon now...

These people think A leads to B leads to C.

Because it often does unless you are asked to say the alphabet backwards then it’s c to b to a.

In context it’s the ramifications of the “slippery slope” being referenced to.

The whole innocent until proven guilty, what constitutes a crime, how much the State has control over your otherwise lawful actions inside the privacy of your home, etc.

Rewind to Bloomberg wanting to limit how large of a soda you could buy in New York. Now fast forward to child neglect charges because you let your kid have 6 pieces of Bacon for breakfast and regular milk vs almond...