Agro says Ferguson always carries his gun.
Kinda defeats the "I forgot I was carrying it" argument.
Ferguson pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon. He then asked for leniency.
So, he owned up to his mistake, and got extreme leniency. Which, if he has no prior criminal record, happens a lot with plea bargains. It should also stand to reason that a sentencing precedent was set for future cases, with similar circumstances.
In the case of this pastor, I really see it as a catch 22 for the anti's. He doesn't get prosecuted, now there is precedent for safeguarding. He does get prosecuted, it shows the firearm by itself is not dangerous and defeats the purpose of the law itself. Under what I understand it to read, as what I think the defense would be.
Koda94, speaking of that, I think your view is a bit unique. To clarify, you believe the sections I quoted are in regards to strictly an imminent self defense situation? Ie; I hand you my firearm to defend yourself, and then you hand it back? If so, I can see how one could read it that way, but I'm still of the thought that it's more along the lines of securing the weapon to prevent harm. Interpretation, again, isn't it wonderful?
ATN082268, it's not about not upholding the law. It's about understanding the law so it can be upheld as intended, which, as we see with this case here, IMO, can be a little different than as it is written.
I wish a couple of our legal eagles can get in here and maybe clarify what I'm trying to say when it comes to the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the same law. Who knows? Maybe I'm waaaay off base and need my thought process revamped and overhauled. lol. Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong.