Get together shooting???

[HankB]

While I believe drunks ought not be using guns, just as I believe drunks should not be be driving on public roads, I'm not aware of any legal requirement for you to submit to an breathalyzer or other sobriety test after a defensive gun use at your home.

Or, for that matter, at a buddy's home.

Or anywhere that doesn't involve you driving a motor vehicle on a public road.

And you don't have to admit to drinking - or anything else! - before you have good legal counsel.

[atxgun]

Yeah, that's VERY important. Because being intoxicated while CC'ing is illegal, and you'd have to CC at a friend's house or relative's house.

How does this work out in the defense of a third person given the following scenarios:

A) You arrive at a friends house to drink and play poker while carrying. This is a friend that knows you are carrying and is fine with you bringing it into his/her house. But since you know you will be drinking you disarm yourself after arriving and place the gun somewhere else the house.

B) You arrived unarmed for a friendly night of cards and some drinks.

In both scenarios you have made arrangements to spend the night there so the driving aspect is out of the scenario. During the course of the evening an intruder breaks in brandishing a weapon. How would the armchair lawyers around here determine the outcome for scenario A) where you go retrieve your weapon to defuse the threat. This is considering either your weapon is the only one available or is the only one available to respond to the threat in an appropriate manner of time.

And for scenario B) you did not bring your own weapon but you know where your buddy keeps his and you are the closest to it when stuff begins to go down, so you take appropriate action to ensure the threat is taken care of (which very well may mean shooting the intruder of your friends house).

Both scenarios differ of course, but the common ground is engaging in deadly force for an imminent threat in a place that is not your own but for the sake of protecting yourself and third parties. The other caveat is both scenarios involve you being intoxicated at the time of engagement.

[KRoyal]

Yeah, that's VERY important. Because being intoxicated while CC'ing is illegal, and you'd have to CC at a friend's house or relative's house.

How does this work out in the defense of a third person given the following scenarios:

A) You arrive at a friends house to drink and play poker while carrying. This is a friend that knows you are carrying and is fine with you bringing it into his/her house. But since you know you will be drinking you disarm yourself after arriving and place the gun somewhere else the house.

B) You arrived unarmed for a friendly night of cards and some drinks.

In both scenarios you have made arrangements to spend the night there so the driving aspect is out of the scenario. During the course of the evening an intruder breaks in brandishing a weapon. How would the armchair lawyers around here determine the outcome for scenario A) where you go retrieve your weapon to defuse the threat. This is considering either your weapon is the only one available or is the only one available to respond to the threat in an appropriate manner of time.

And for scenario B) you did not bring your own weapon but you know where your buddy keeps his and you are the closest to it when stuff begins to go down, so you take appropriate action to ensure the threat is taken care of (which very well may mean shooting the intruder of your friends house).

Both scenarios differ of course, but the common ground is engaging in deadly force for an imminent threat in a place that is not your own but for the sake of protecting yourself and third parties. The other caveat is both scenarios involve you being intoxicated at the time of engagement.

Very good question I would like to know this myself. As for being in my house I have no problem with that as I own my house I do not live in apartment or rent, So we have most of our get togethers at my house because my other friends do live in apartments or rent.

[Morgan]

"I brought this pistol over to sell to my friend. He bought it for cash. Then the bad guys came in."

I am curious if Charles or another lawyer has some insight into the legalities involved in this, indeed.

Single CHL holder is visiting the apartment of his or her significant other with intentions of a romantic dinner in, with wine, and staying the night.

Actually, I think "staying the night" establishes some "temporary residence", but again IANAL.

Man, I can't wait for Charles's class! :)

[HankB]

Both scenarios differ of course, but the common ground is engaging in deadly force for an imminent threat in a place that is not your own but for the sake of protecting yourself and third parties. The other caveat is both scenarios involve you being intoxicated at the time of engagement.

Unless you're showing signs of being intoxicated (staggering, slurred speech, passed out on the sofa, etc.) establishing proof of intoxication will be difficult, as, since you're not driving a motor vehicle, you are under no obligation to PROVE your sobriety.

[atxgun]

Both scenarios differ of course, but the common ground is engaging in deadly force for an imminent threat in a place that is not your own but for the sake of protecting yourself and third parties. The other caveat is both scenarios involve you being intoxicated at the time of engagement.

Unless you're showing signs of being intoxicated (staggering, slurred speech, passed out on the sofa, etc.) establishing proof of intoxication will be difficult, as, since you're not driving a motor vehicle, you are under no obligation to PROVE your sobriety.

If I were passed out on the sofa I don't think I'd be up and about to get a firearm in the first place

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

I too would like to see what the responses are to those new questions. Look forward to them!

[HankB]

Both scenarios differ of course, but the common ground is engaging in deadly force for an imminent threat in a place that is not your own but for the sake of protecting yourself and third parties. The other caveat is both scenarios involve you being intoxicated at the time of engagement.

Unless you're showing signs of being intoxicated (staggering, slurred speech, passed out on the sofa, etc.) establishing proof of intoxication will be difficult, as, since you're not driving a motor vehicle, you are under no obligation to PROVE your sobriety.

If I were passed out on the sofa I don't think I'd be up and about to get a firearm in the first place

OK, OK, you got me there . . .

But the point is, a failed breathalyzer or sobriety test establishes what is widely regarded as objective proof of intoxication. Without the result of such a test - something you have NO obligation to provide if you're not driving a car - establishing intoxication requires that the officer be able to articulate via his observations some outward signs of intoxication - and that's a subjective test, which will be made all the more difficult in the absence of something like dashcam video.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying drunks and guns go together, since they obviously don't . . . but in the scenario outlined in this thread, there is NO reason to provide any information that might be used against you, and complicate a justified shooting.