Possession of guns and consumption of booze

If a person possesses poor judgement or none at all its best to leave the guns and liquor off the days activities. If one has good judgement and gun handling expertise, go easy with the booze. And don't take your own word for having good judgement.

My own experience is: too many drinks and sighting and trigger squeeze suffer and marksmanship deteriorates. Marksmanship requires concentration as well as ability but when one is "right happy" from too many snorts of rukus juice. You couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle, much less hit a target like when sober. Mixing shooting and booze doesn' t show good judgement.
 
The instructor in the first firearms training course I ever took said, "You can have a gun and you can have a temper, but having both at the same time is dangerous."

The same applies to any substance that impairs ones usual good judgement.
 
Any suggestions for where I can research this in KY?
Click to expand...


Best way to go is probably to write your state attorney general's office for an opinion. That way you've got something that's been reviewed by lawyers, and it's all official, should any misunderstandings arise later on.
 
I'm interested in the answer, but not interested enough to research it mainly because I doubt there's much if any precedent. In this case I doubt that a DA or the cops would pursue it if you saved someones' life... but maybe. That's not the point though. The point is whether it is illegal.
Click to expand...
Yup. The minute you step out of your door, intoxicated and with a firearm, you can be. But I won't drop it there, because WILL you is far more important than CAN you. The facts of the incident will be reviewed in depth, and if under any other circumstances the shooting would be ruled righteous, the fact that you were under the influence would most likely be ignored. Let's face it; if you discharge a firearm to defend you life, you COULD (not would) be charged with discharging a firearm within the city limits, etc., but I don't know a peace officer or prosecutor that would. While I can't quote it, it falls under the "exigent circumstances" clause. Same if you've had a few. This is all assuming that the LEOs and prosecutor are capable of some degree of common sense. Now if Ted Kennedy were the prosecutor..... :( :mad:
 
No such law in Texas but we do have public intoxication, which is up to the interpretation of the officer. In other words, if he says you are, then you are. We also have reckless something-or-other, it's been too long, that involves irresponsible display or use of firearms.

My .02: I never touch a firearm if I have had anything at all. Better safe than sorry. What y'all do is of course up to you, and it's none of my business (unless you are in the stall next to me at the range). :)
 
Scenario: You're at home having a severl drinks while watching a football game on TV and are legally intoxicated. You've got your shotgun in the bedroom, maybe even your handgun on your hip (which is habit for many) and you and the guns are all loaded. Suddenly there is a disturbance in front of your house. Two cars crash in the intersection right in front of your house. You walk to your front porch to watch when you see a half naked and beaten woman struggle with some men in the car and she bursts out of the car and runs in your direction screaming for help. 3 large men armed with knives follow.
Click to expand...

Invite the naked chick into your house, and give her the gun... ;)

~Dan
 
I think this is about as illegal as allowing your under 21 year old children to have a glass of wine or beer with their dinner. Definitly nothing I'm going worry about.
 
Just happened to be reading Washington States Statutes re: When prohibited to carry. No mention of not being able to carry when drinking although it is illegal to carry in a public drinking establishment.

If it is necessary for you to use deadly force, and you do it legally, there is a provision in Washington Law to be compensated for legal expenses if some over zealous prosecutor decides to make an example (perhaps because you had a few).

Drunk in public is it's own offense. It might be a good idea to avoid the public in any way, shape, or form if $hit-F@ced. If you are clear-headed enough to recognize that someone is in fear for their life, and you can clearly decide that deadly force is warranted, it is highly possible that you would pass any "sobriety test". For me, this kind of event would MAKE me sober.
 
My How The PC Police Have Changed Things-

I recall when shooters commonly had a pint of their favorite spirits in the off side of their Pachmeyer shooting case to settle their nerves and gents expected others to know their limitations.
 
Yes, but since time immemoriam, reasonable people have expected others to "know their limitations"; unfortunately, it's always been found that the folks who refuse to know and respect their own limitations are the dangerous and stupid and reckless ones that we have indeed cause to worry about.


-blackmind
 
This is insane

An outstanding hit percentage in a gunfight is 50%. Stone cold sober you are gonna miss half the time. Add in a couple of margaritas and that hit percentage is gonna fall faster than Bush's approval rating. It may be legal for you to shoot while drunk, but it sure as heck ain't legal to miss. You are responsible for every round you fire, regardless of the level of sobriety. You nail Miss McKinney's poodle, your're responsible. You hit Miss McKinney and you'll be tappin' your feet waiting for the grand jury to rule on the wisdom of your actions, along with the old dear's NOK and their lawyer

Now of course, everyone's a hero on the internet, and you'll never miss even if you were drinking a heady brew of Jolt Cola and crack, but us mere mortals could well end up in a civil and criminal trick bag. Guns and likker just dont mix. Do one, or the other.
 
There was a time in my life when I was most irresponsible concerning alcohol, a common past time was a few beers and some target shooting in the desert. It was not in mine nor my friends best interest to handle firearms under these circumstances, but that didn't stop us, and thankfully noone was injured, because we still had enough sense to follow the basic rules of firearms safety, namely keep it pointed in a safe direction and keep the fingers off the trigger.

As for being in your own home in possession of a firearm and under the influence of alcohol while your life is in danger, the same rules apply as when sober, namely be sure of your backstop before firing. If you miss and hit a bystander, the same consequences follow regardless of level of impairment at the time, sober or intoxicated.

In public, if you are sufficiently securing your own safety by carrying a firearm it would seem to me that any level of intoxication would be contrary to that goal of personal safety, so it is my opinion that drinking and carrying a concealed weapon in public is oxymoronic.

Whenever you handle a firearm you must be willing to accept the consequences of that action, so if you are the type of person who is unduly influnced by the bottle perhaps it is time to reevaluate your priorities concerning your lifestyle and your weapons, otherwise no harm no foul.
 
Now -- the question is CAN (NOT WILL HE, BUT CAN) the police or DA arrest/prosecute you for being intoxicated while in possession or using a firearm?
Click to expand...

I think the bigger question is, can you understand completely what is going on?

Suppose you walk out on a screaming, running woman with half her shirt gone. But it just so happens, that the big guy just cut it off, because it was hung up on the burning car. She is running because the car is on fire, and she isn't quite thinking straight. She was just in a car accident, explaining why she might be bruised.

Now, you step out your door, and shoot the guy you though was trying to rape her (which is exactly what most people do right after a wreck), and it turns out that you just killed the guy that saved her life.
 
sendec said:
This is insane

An outstanding hit percentage in a gunfight is 50%. Stone cold sober you are gonna miss half the time. Add in a couple of margaritas and that hit percentage is gonna fall faster than Bush's approval rating. It may be legal for you to shoot while drunk, but it sure as heck ain't legal to miss. You are responsible for every round you fire, regardless of the level of sobriety. You nail Miss McKinney's poodle, your're responsible. You hit Miss McKinney and you'll be tappin' your feet waiting for the grand jury to rule on the wisdom of your actions, along with the old dear's NOK and their lawyer

Now of course, everyone's a hero on the internet, and you'll never miss even if you were drinking a heady brew of Jolt Cola and crack, but us mere mortals could well end up in a civil and criminal trick bag. Guns and likker just dont mix. Do one, or the other.
Click to expand...

Obviously, one would hope for doing one or the other. Hypothetical situations can take us anywhere, though. And in the hypothetical situation in which a person who's been drinking (or even merely in the possession of alcohol) is given cause to bring a gun into a situation to save a life, I don't think it's right to say that he should not must not better not use the gun.

Yes, inebriation can alter the way a person sees what's going on, but perhaps we're not all talking about a guy who's stumbling-drunk? Maybe we're trying to get at the heart of whether you could be charged for ANY mixing of alcohol and guns. It seems that the law in some places may be so vague as to allow for charging someone for coming out of his house with a gun to face an intruder on his property just because he had had two Sambucas.


-blackmind
 
sendec said:
It may be legal for you to shoot while drunk, but it sure as heck ain't legal to miss. You are responsible for every round you fire, regardless of the level of sobriety.
Click to expand...


I don't think it's accurate to say that "it ain't legal to miss."

When they shot that guy on the steps in NYC 19 times, they fired 41 times. That's 22 shots that "missed" and hit... something. Were those cops charged, tried, and convicted "for missing"?

You speak with a hyperbolic bent, sendec, and often it bleaches the validity of your point right out of your words -- especially in your well-known zeal to put people in their place with your superior knowledge and insight.

If I were to be attacked at my front door by a trio of homebreakers, and I fired, hitting two and sending the third running, but I happened to miss with two rounds and they embedded themselves in my car, or the fence at the edge of my property, are you saying that a DA is going to charge me for not being PERFECT?? :rolleyes:


-blackmind
 
Tell ya what, BM, why dont ya have a few drinks, toke up, and play a round or two of frisbee golf - then tell me there's no penalty for missing.:rolleyes:
 
If you are drunk and you have to defend yourself, between the alcohol and the adrenaline what you learn in this thread probably won't influence your decision.
 
I, for one, am glad that I don't live in the "united states" that most here seem to do.

You know what I can do? Make you jealous that no on can arrest me for any stupidity that I bring upon myself... especially Sendec, if he were the LEO here, couldn't do a dang thing.

I can get fully loaded, and step outside and fire anything I wish. AR, fine, .45, fine, .357, fine, 30-40, fine, shotgun, fine, anything at all.

Can't get me for public intoxication.. what public? Can't get me for reckless endangerment, the house behind mine is over a mile away and protected by a hill.

Sound disturbance you say, nope, zoned for small industrial, 24/7. What else could they try to get me with.... absolutly nothing.

Never fired on purpose in the back yard while drinking and most likely won't. Will I have a firearm while drinking available to me when drinking, heck yes.

I for one doesn't believe that because I am taking a legal drug, aka alcohol, that my rights stop when I pop the top. That I should heed the opinions of others that will look down their nose for such a thing and then act as if they are superior to others.

And I grin and love it, because it's not that they think they are better, they are upset because they know that people do so and they can do nothing about it. As long as they (the drinkers) obey the law, they can't be the "hero" to come and bust them for doing nothing but just having a legal product and enjoying their rights.

But they have the boards, the internet, in which to attack others and try to get others to agree with them. Some will read my post/reply and automatically wish to be disasociated with me, that is fine. Everyone has their right to their opinion. Yet you will have some that will try to make it their purpose to demonize the person saying what they believe and calling them stupid, irresponsible, and whatever other term they can come up with to discredit the person.

That, is what I know, and expect, to happen next.

And for the rules, gun ownership and use needs to be done in a responsible manner, yet if all is safe except for the actual shooter, what is irresponsible? The person that decides to do what he or she does, is up to them, and if all they harm, are themselves, then if you jump on that and say that this is irresponsible, then what you are saying is that you should have a say in controlling their life. Do you?

No, I don't think so, you have no control over anyone or what they wish to do as long as they harm no one but themselves. If you think you do, then you are very wrong and if you think that you're not, prove me wrong.

Wayne

*playing devils advocate here.
 
sendec said:
Tell ya what, BM, why dont ya have a few drinks, toke up, and play a round or two of frisbee golf - then tell me there's no penalty for missing.
Click to expand...


More...*ahem* relevant comments from our resident Police Identified Gentleman.


What you know about me wouldn't fill a thimble. It's funny to watch you make a fool of yourself trying to insult me.


-blackmind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top