Quantcast

Is pointing out that you carry a legal threat?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by The Exile, Feb 19, 2020.

  1. The Exile

    The Exile Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    191
    Location:
    Minnesota
    A friend sent me this video and I'm pretty appalled at it if only because of the optics and complete lack of responsibility but basically there is this girl interviewing people, she makes a fat joke at one of her interviewee's expense and when the other person turns around and gets mad the girl responds "you know I carry, right?". I would hope anyone with a CC permit would just know better than to not do that, carrying a gun is a big responsibility and it's not for people who just want to show off how cool/dangerous they are, but I'm wondering if that constitutes some kind of threat.
     
    Jack B. and Olon like this.
  2. Fine Figure of a Man

    Fine Figure of a Man Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,536
    Location:
    Iowa
    It is not illegal to be stupid.
     
  3. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    10,248
    Well, doing some stupid things can be unlawful.
     
  4. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,755
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    Someone saying that they carry is not proof that they carry. Someone saying that they carry and do have a firearm is not proof they have a premit of license. It very well have been a joke. A stupid joke if they are legally armed.
     
  5. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    10,248
    How is that relevant here?
     
  6. Obturation
    • Contributing Member

    Obturation Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2018
    Messages:
    2,038
    Location:
    Northern illinois
    I don't believe it to be a threat of violence to inform someone you may be armed. But as others said, it's in very poor taste and a poor tactic if you're serious about self defense. I'm of the belief that no one should know if you're armed or not until you've cleared your holster, I also don't believe it's wise to draw a gun you're not going to fire in the vast majority of cases . that leads me to say that if you don't intend to shoot someone your status of being armed shouldn't be mentioned or flaunted as a hollow threat under any circumstance . these things are serious and not to be taken lightly.
     
    Blackbeard 44 likes this.
  7. Elkins45

    Elkins45 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    5,335
    Location:
    Northern KY
    Is this Kaitlin Bennett? She's a drama queen/attention junkie and an embarrassment to every responsible gun owner.
     
  8. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    11,820
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    Why do people believe that these sorts of questions have simple "yes" or "no" answers? As usual the answer is along the lines of "it depends." It depends on circumstance. It depends on demeanor. It depends on tone of voice. It depends on body language.

    Assault is, in general:
    Getting shot would count as harmful or offensive contact.
     
    waterhouse and 243winxb like this.
  9. Spats McGee

    Spats McGee Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    4,171
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Having not seen the video, it's hard to tell. That said, I think there's a real possibility that a crime was committed. @Frank Ettin has already pointed out the standard definition of assault. I'll add: Context matters. As described in the OP:
    This is more than just "informing" someone else that one may be armed.The phrase "you know I carry, right?," in and of itself, doesn't tell us that much. Context makes a lot of difference. I can imagine several scenarios in which the phrase would not be a threat. (Running into an old friend who asks why you don't want a beer, getting a hug from your mother, etc.) I'd like to see the video, but my gut says it's an implied threat in this case. It's possible that the interviewer was using the phrase to deter further aggression on the part of the interviewee. But the mechanism is that implied threat of violence.
     
    waterhouse and Kleanbore like this.
  10. 243winxb

    243winxb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    11,413
    Location:
    USA
    Eveything today is a crime.
    Control your fingers also. 20200220_081311.jpg
     
  11. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    10,248
    Telling or otherwise indicating to someone that one is carrying for purposes of influencing their behavior is far less likely to be prosecuted as a crime in Ariszona now that the defensive Display Provision has been enacted, assuming that the action was lawfully justified, than it was before.
     
  12. Paco42

    Paco42 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2020
    Messages:
    72
    To be determined by a jury, if it comes to that. And I certainly wouldn’t wanna be sitting in the defendent’s chair for that one. Whether it’s a threat depends on context, tone, history of interactions, setting, and much more.
     
    Jack B. likes this.
  13. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,755
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    Post #5
    quote Carl N. Brown said: Someone saying that they carry is not proof that they carry. Someone saying that they carry and do have a firearm is not proof they have a [permit or license].
    question Kleanbore: How is that relevant here?

    The OP atated "I would hope anyone with a CC permit ...".
    Having a CC permit is not necessarily a condition for stating "you know I carry, right?" to be or not to be a threat.
    [For the record, if I offended someone with a bad joke they would get an apology from me for being thoughtless, no mention of carry status.]
     
  14. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,755
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    Post#7 Elkins45: "Is this Kaitlin Bennett? She's a drama queen/attention junkie and an embarrassment to every responsible gun owner."

    Yes and yes

    Kaitlin Bennett's fat joke and "You know I carry" remark were a big deal in Oct - Nov 2018. She may still be at it. She has pretty much obnoxioused herself into being shunned by a lot of gun rights people. She did get attention recently at Ohio U where she was surrounded by students who screamed in her face and threw liquids at her and her driver.
     
  15. MedWheeler

    MedWheeler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,278
    Location:
    SouthEastern FL
    As others have mentioned, it depends on the context. I once read of an exchange in which an individual challenged a stranger coming out of a gun show, becoming antagonistic and hostile, and verbally attacking him for his apparent pro-gun position. The respondent basically asked the subject why, if he was so convinced that gun owners were so volatile and murderous, would he be unafraid to pick a fight with one on the street. This could, in a stretch, be taken as a threat by someone desperate to feel threatened, but was certainly not intended as one.

    Whether or not Miss Bennett intended a threat, or committed one, is probably appropriate for this thread and forum, but I don't believe discussion of her in general, including name-calling, is.
     
  16. film495

    film495 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    831
    probably not unless they say they are going to do something specific to someone, and then only if people believe them and that they are not just running their mouth.
     
  17. RickD427

    RickD427 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    King County
    I didn't see the video referred to in the OP's posting.

    But it's also important to note that "Threatening" someone is rarely a crime and that begs the question of what is a "Legal Threat."

    Absent a federal issue, general crimes are proscribed by the states and there's 50 different ways of doing it. No state that I'm aware of has a statute that makes a simple threat illegal. And that's not by accident. A broad statute making "Threats" illegal would run afoul of free speech protections. For that reason, you're going to see very specific aggravating conditions being required in any state statute making the (aggravated) threat(s) illegal.

    My frame of reference is California law, and California's "Threat" statute is found in Penal Code section 422. Here is the text of the statute:

    "Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family’s safety, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison."

    There are three specific elements beyond the making of the threat that must be present for the threat to become a crime: 1) Gravity of Purpose, 2) Immediacy of Execution, and 3) Sustained Fear (greater than an ordinary fear).

    The District Attorney's office was really disinclined to file 422 charges believing that the section was overused by LE agencies. The generic arrest report would read "The suspect threatened to kill the victim causing the victim to fear for their life..." The filing DDA would typically ask "How was he going to do the killing" (impeaching the Immediacy element) and "What did the victim do to prevent the killing" (impeaching the Sustained Fear element). If the investigator responded that there was some reference to a weapon, and that the victim made the LE report because of the fear, a filing rejection would result because neither element was satisfied.

    For a CCW carrier to make reference to their weapon is really bad form but it's hard to see it as being a crime unless there is more involved.
     
  18. WestTexShooter

    WestTexShooter Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    181
    More curious to the proper response -

    Say nothing?
    Say “as am I”?
    Say “you better be”?
    Say “with your face you need self protection when using a mirror”?

    Really being facetious here as I believe they best policy is to walk away from “trouble”.

    But beyond legal requirements imposed on the person carrying, I wonder of potential liabilities placed on other person.
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2020
  19. Spats McGee

    Spats McGee Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    4,171
    Location:
    Arkansas
    As far as I know, those aren't the applicable legal standards anywhere. If you have a citation that shows that I am mistaken, please post it.
     
    waterhouse and FlSwampRat like this.
  20. Trunk Monkey

    Trunk Monkey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,279
    Location:
    Colorado
    The video is not all that hard to find if you skip to I think it's 3 minutes and 20 seconds Kaitlin Bennett approaches the woman in the yellow shirt, asks her a question, sticks the microphone in her face and then when the woman leans in to answer KB pulls the microphone back and says "She's going to eat it."

    The woman bows up on her and says "What the F did you just say to me?" To which KB replies "You know I carry right?"

    I'm not a lawyer, I'm not pretending to be one and I don't know if she would get convicted in Colorado but I'll bet you she would get arrested for doing that.

    If exactly that incident happened in downtown Colorado Springs I have no problem believing that CSPD would arrest her for menacing.

    AND this isn't the only video she does that in. I just seen one other one where she gets right in the man's face and eggs him and eggs him and eggs him. Then when he pushes back she steps back and says the same thing "You know I carry a gun right?"

     
  21. George P

    George P Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    4,465
    I don't see the statement "You know I carry, right"? as a threat, merely a statement. Now if she said, "You know I AM carrying, and if you want to start something.....", THAT, IMO has a totally different context
     
  22. Trunk Monkey

    Trunk Monkey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,279
    Location:
    Colorado
    I can't speak for Pennsylvania but in Colorado intent is a key component of the law. If I was on the jury, even just watching the video there is no reasonable doubt in my mind that she said that was the intent to intimidate that woman.

    I'd vote to convict
     
  23. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    10,248
    Depends on the context.

    One can be charged with assault for simply touching or exposing a gun--no words need be spoken.
     
  24. film495

    film495 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    831
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/threats-of-violence-against-individuals

    The Ninth Circuit concluded that a “true threat” is “a statement which, in the entire context and under all the circumstances, a reasonable person would foresee would be interpreted by those to whom the statement is communicated as a serious expression of intent to inflict bodily harm upon that person.”290 F.3d at 1077. '>1239
     
  25. Spats McGee

    Spats McGee Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    4,171
    Location:
    Arkansas
    And at what point did the Ninth Circuit (or any other court) include "only if people believe them and they are not just running their mouth?"
     
    Coyote3855 likes this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice