CHL holder accidently discharges weapon at work question

[mamabearCali]

...this may be unfair...but I'm going to say it...re-write the OPs story so that it was a doctor's office, where you and your children were waiting to have an ear infection treated...you hear an explosion in the next room and a .40 cal round smashes through the wall and misses your oldest child by an inch... I think, given this change in the story, your concern over the shooter's "rights" would be less important and your child's right to be safe in a public place would be paramount...those of us with experience in innocents being shot by idiots playing with guns tend to be able to stack those blocks in the correct order better...

There can be a million what-if in this world. Some can be heartrending. A story can always be made more emotional. I tend to think that in general my family is safer when people rights are respected and not easily removed.

[speedsix]

...I think it's reasonable to expect that someone, lawyer or not, resident of this state or another, who makes such critical statements as:

"...As a side note--that showing an unloaded firearm to a friend in a private office place is a Class A misdemeanor is INSANE! You guys need to work harder on your gun laws there. You have a great castle law, but your laws concerning printing/open carry are nuts."

...ought to know what they're talking about...else why would they hold such a strong opinion about something they didn't know about???

[mamabearCali]

As a side note--that showing an unloaded firearm to a friend in a private office place is a Class A misdemeanor is INSANE! You guys need to work harder on your gun laws there. You have a great castle law, but your laws concerning printing/open carry are nuts.

I wondered when it would come to this comparison. Not even close. As DTOM stated, not laws on printing. Has to be intentional ujnconcelament. And, if you want to compare state laws, look at your Virginia law on negligent discharge http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... d+18.2-279" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; It's a Class 6 Felony.

Sure and it would depend on where you lived whether it would be enforced or not. If you are in downtown Richmond count on getting the book thrown at you. If it happens in cumberland, or fluvanna, likely nothing will happen. That does not mean it is not still stupid. There is what is on the books, and then there is what actually happens. As far as having to be intentional unconcealment not printing--I have heard enough warning of concealed is concealed here to know that yall worry about being charged with that by an overzealous cop. So yeah I think your laws on unconcealment are scary.

[mamabearCali]

...I think it's reasonable to expect that someone, lawyer or not, resident of this state or another, who makes such critical statements as:

"...As a side note--that showing an unloaded firearm to a friend in a private office place is a Class A misdemeanor is INSANE! You guys need to work harder on your gun laws there. You have a great castle law, but your laws concerning printing/open carry are nuts."

...ought to know what they're talking about...else why would they hold such a strong opinion about something they didn't know about???

I know enough to know that simply showing a person a weapon here (in a friendly manner) is not enough to get your CHL yanked and I think that it ridiculous that in TX it is.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Sir I am not a lawyer! So I always hedge that I am pretty sure about this but if you really want to know this then ask a lawyer. I read no where in this thread or this forum that I had to be a subject matter expert in TX law to comment on something. If you want people who are ONLY subject matter experts to comment on stuff then there had better be a sign at the top that says "Unless you are lawyer don't bother commenting." Like I said, where I live, it would depend on where he was working whether a negligent discharge gets you in trouble with the boss or with the police. I stated a basic opinion that yep he was stupid, but in my opinion not stupid enough to lose his license. If TX law states otherwise--then I am glad I live in VA right now not TX.

My point is not that one need be a lawyer but you are claiming that he did nothing legally wrong when in fact he did. As for this being a ND in theory yes but a DA would have no problem prosecuting him under TPC 42.01 as he intentionally pulled the trigger (another requirement for one to have a CHL is to NOT have any charges under TPC 42.01). See below...

...
TPC 46.035 definitely applies...

UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun...

...(g) An offense under Subsection (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) is a Class A misdemeanor

TPC 42.01 applies...

DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
(2) makes an offensive gesture or display in a public place, and the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;
(4) abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner;
(5) makes unreasonable noise in a public place other than a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code, or in or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy;
(6) fights with another in a public place;
(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;
(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;
(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;
(10) exposes his anus or genitals in a public place and is reckless about whether another may be present who will be offended or alarmed by his act; or
(11) for a lewd or unlawful purpose:
(A) enters on the property of another and looks into a dwelling on the property through any window or other opening in the dwelling;
(B) while on the premises of a hotel or comparable establishment, looks into a guest room not the person's own through a window or other opening in the room; or
(C) while on the premises of a public place, looks into an area such as a restroom or shower stall or changing or dressing room that is designed to provide privacy to a person using the area.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(4) that the actor had significant provocation for his abusive or threatening conduct.
(c) For purposes of this section:
(1) an act is deemed to occur in a public place or near a private residence if it produces its offensive or proscribed consequences in the public place or near a private residence; and
(2) a noise is presumed to be unreasonable if the noise exceeds a decibel level of 85 after the person making the noise receives notice from a magistrate or peace officer that the noise is a public nuisance.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor unless committed under Subsection (a)(7) or (a)(8), in which event it is a Class B misdemeanor.
(e) It is a defense to prosecution for an offense under Subsection (a)(7) or (9) that the person who discharged the firearm had a reasonable fear of bodily injury to the person or to another by a dangerous wild animal as defined by Section 822.101, Health and Safety Code.

And then there are any city ordinances that are in place for something like this.

[speedsix]

...and I think it's absolutely stupid that it's illegal to spit on the sidewalk in Fairbanks, Alaska, too...with about as much impact...Texans aren't known for trying to please folks who live afar off...sometimes not home folks either...

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

For your knowledge...

A. If any person willfully discharges or causes to be discharged any firearmin any street in a city or town, or in any place of public business or placeof public gathering, and such conduct results in bodily injury to anotherperson, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. If such conduct does notresult in bodily injury to another person, he shall be guilty of a Class 1misdemeanor.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Sure and it would depend on where you lived whether it would be enforced or not. If you are in downtown Richmond count on getting the book thrown at you. If it happens in cumberland, or fluvanna, likely nothing will happen. That does not mean it is not still stupid. There is what is on the books, and then there is what actually happens. As far as having to be intentional unconcealment not printing--I have heard enough warning of concealed is concealed here to know that yall worry about being charged with that by an overzealous cop. So yeah I think your laws on unconcealment are scary.

I have no experience in VA but I don't think their laws are optional depending on where you live. Maybe that's just me.

I believe you are misinterpreting the "concealed means concealed". It means if it is properly concealed nobody will know it is a gun and therefore one has nothing to worry about.

Again, there are NO laws in regards to printing.

[mamabearCali]

Sir I am not a lawyer! So I always hedge that I am pretty sure about this but if you really want to know this then ask a lawyer. I read no where in this thread or this forum that I had to be a subject matter expert in TX law to comment on something. If you want people who are ONLY subject matter experts to comment on stuff then there had better be a sign at the top that says "Unless you are lawyer don't bother commenting." Like I said, where I live, it would depend on where he was working whether a negligent discharge gets you in trouble with the boss or with the police. I stated a basic opinion that yep he was stupid, but in my opinion not stupid enough to lose his license. If TX law states otherwise--then I am glad I live in VA right now not TX.

My point is not that one need be a lawyer but you are claiming that he did nothing legally wrong when in fact he did. As for this being a ND in theory yes but a DA would have no problem prosecuting him under TPC 42.01 as he intentionally pulled the trigger (another requirement for one to have a CHL is to NOT have any charges under TPC 42.01). See below...

...
TPC 46.035 definitely applies...

UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun...

...(g) An offense under Subsection (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) is a Class A misdemeanor

TPC 42.01 applies...

DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
(2) makes an offensive gesture or display in a public place, and the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;
(4) abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner;
(5) makes unreasonable noise in a public place other than a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code, or in or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy;
(6) fights with another in a public place;
(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;
(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;
(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;
(10) exposes his anus or genitals in a public place and is reckless about whether another may be present who will be offended or alarmed by his act; or
(11) for a lewd or unlawful purpose:
(A) enters on the property of another and looks into a dwelling on the property through any window or other opening in the dwelling;
(B) while on the premises of a hotel or comparable establishment, looks into a guest room not the person's own through a window or other opening in the room; or
(C) while on the premises of a public place, looks into an area such as a restroom or shower stall or changing or dressing room that is designed to provide privacy to a person using the area.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(4) that the actor had significant provocation for his abusive or threatening conduct.
(c) For purposes of this section:
(1) an act is deemed to occur in a public place or near a private residence if it produces its offensive or proscribed consequences in the public place or near a private residence; and
(2) a noise is presumed to be unreasonable if the noise exceeds a decibel level of 85 after the person making the noise receives notice from a magistrate or peace officer that the noise is a public nuisance.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor unless committed under Subsection (a)(7) or (a)(8), in which event it is a Class B misdemeanor.
(e) It is a defense to prosecution for an offense under Subsection (a)(7) or (9) that the person who discharged the firearm had a reasonable fear of bodily injury to the person or to another by a dangerous wild animal as defined by Section 822.101, Health and Safety Code.

And then there are any city ordinances that are in place for something like this.

No you are totally misreading what I am saying. He may very well have done many things legally unacceptable. The ND if prosecuted could likely lose him his CHL, would do so in most places if convicted. However at this time it has not been prosecuted, and thus he has not lost his CHL. Very often people do things illegal and either A) they are not caught or B) the DA chooses not to prosecute for whatever reason.

I put this in the same catagory as running off the road because you were texting on your phone/driving too fast in the rain/eating/too sleepy--all those things are illegal and can get you in serious hot water too, but only if you are caught and the DA wants to press charges. What I have said is that in my opinion if no one was hurt and the DA does not prosecute him then why is this thread treating this situation any differently than any of those. You can kill someone with negligence in a car too.

[speedsix]

...Don't Tread on Me, I'd be honored if you'd step over to the bar and let me buy you a beer...it's that time in Texas!!!

[mamabearCali]

Sure and it would depend on where you lived whether it would be enforced or not. If you are in downtown Richmond count on getting the book thrown at you. If it happens in cumberland, or fluvanna, likely nothing will happen. That does not mean it is not still stupid. There is what is on the books, and then there is what actually happens. As far as having to be intentional unconcealment not printing--I have heard enough warning of concealed is concealed here to know that yall worry about being charged with that by an overzealous cop. So yeah I think your laws on unconcealment are scary.

I have no experience in VA but I don't think their laws are optional depending on where you live. Maybe that's just me.

I believe you are misinterpreting the "concealed means concealed". It means if it is properly concealed nobody will know it is a gun and therefore one has nothing to worry about.

Again, there are NO laws in regards to printing.

The DA in each district decides whether to prosecute someone--not the VA statutes. That is where the discretion comes into play. Also the DA has to know something happened to prosecute--there are many places in VA that are very remote and a ND won't likely even get a call to the police.

Then what are yall so worried about if printing is not a problem.....Sorry I have been here and seen in several threatds several people drill into people's head BE CONCEALED! BE VERY CONCEALED! So I don't buy it that yall aren't worried about printing.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

No you are totally misreading what I am saying. He may very well have done many things legally unacceptable. The ND if prosecuted could likely lose him his CHL, would do so in most places if convicted. However at this time it has not been prosecuted, and thus he has not lost his CHL. Very often people do things illegal and either A) they are not caught or B) the DA chooses not to prosecute for whatever reason.

I put this in the same catagory as running off the road because you were texting on your phone/driving too fast in the rain/eating/too sleepy--all those things are illegal and can get you in serious hot water too, but only if you are caught and the DA wants to press charges. What I have said is that in my opinion if no one was hurt and the DA does not prosecute him then why is this thread treating this situation any differently than any of those. You can kill someone with negligence in a car too.

What we are saying is that he should be reported and charged.

Again your comparison is irrelevant. While one of your scenarios is illegal it is simply a Class C misdemeanor. The same as a regular traffic ticket. There is no law that states a Class C misdemeanor will result in the revocation of you DL. However, there is a law that states that a Class A or B misdemeanor is grounds for losing a CHL. Which is what he should be charged with.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Then what are yall so worried about if printing is not a problem.....Sorry I have been here and seen in several threatds several people drill into people's head BE CONCEALED! BE VERY CONCEALED! So I don't buy it that yall aren't worried about printing.

This is not an issue of concern but legal and illegal. HUGE difference. Many may be concerned about printing as they do not want to draw attention to themselves. The fact of the matter remains that whether one is concerned about printing or not it is still NOT ILLEGAL.

[Keith B]

The DA in each district decides whether to prosecute someone--not the VA statutes. That is where the discretion comes into play. Also the DA has to know something happened to prosecute--there are many places in VA that are very remote and a ND won't likely even get a call to the police.

Then what are yall so worried about if printing is not a problem.....Sorry I have been here and seen in several threatds several people drill into people's head BE CONCEALED! BE VERY CONCEALED! So I don't buy it that yall aren't worried about printing.

Same in Texas

There is more remote area in Texas than in Virginia, so the same here.

The problem is, it DIDN'T happen in a remote area, it happened in a CROWDED OFFICE.

And, those that are concerned about printing are usually newbies that are not yet comfortable carrying and insecure about getting made carrying. I could care less if they see my gun while carrying on my body as long as I have made conscious efforts to properly conceal it. If the wind blows my shirt open or I bend over and they figure out it is a gun butt under my shirt, no biggie. That is not illegal and I will address it if the police are called. No different that police being called in open carry states for someone with a pistol on their hip. Still not illegal, but it happens.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

...Don't Tread on Me, I'd be honored if you'd step over to the bar and let me buy you a beer...it's that time in Texas!!!

Well sir I sure wish I could but I don't think I could make it in time for closing .