Senator arrested outside Ferguson PD

[*bfine32*]

Didn't this happen about 2 years ago?

[Belsnickel]

(06-28-2016, 11:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Didn't this happen about 2 years ago?

Yes.

[BmorePat87]

This is like 2 years old and some of the facts have been exaggerated.

Also, gun owners can still want gun control.

[fredtoast]

(06-28-2016, 03:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: http://endingthefed.com/us-anti-gun-senator-jamilah-nasheed-arrested-with-a-loaded-gun-extra-clips-and-drunk-in-ferguson.html



Gotta love how those Gun Control proponents live by a double standard.

What a joke piece of propaganda.

She was not drunk and she was actually in favor of gun ownership.

Typical Sunset post.

[Rotobeast]

(06-30-2016, 10:31 AM)fredtoast Wrote: What a joke piece of propaganda.

She was not drunk and she was actually in favor of gun ownership.

Typical Sunset post.

I'm glad you popped up, in this thread.
I wondered if you could verify/refute something for me ?
In researching the laws considering alcohol and concealed carry for MO, I came across a LEO website that had a forum.
There were officers and civilians discussing my query.
The officers stated that the .08 % to determine drunkenness during driving was only to indicate an automatic failure of sobriety and even if the test indicated a lower reading, the officer could still charge the person by their opinion and failed roadside tests.
This was relevant, as it was also stated that the officer's opinion (only) could be used to determine the sobriety of a concealed carry holder with their weapon.
If a concealed carry holder is considered impaired by a substance and they are carrying their weapon, it is considered an automatic felony.

Does that seem to jive with your knowledge of the law ?

[fredtoast]

(06-30-2016, 11:33 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I'm glad you popped up, in this thread.
I wondered if you could verify/refute something for me ?
In researching the laws considering alcohol and concealed carry for MO, I came across a LEO website that had a forum.
There were officers and civilians discussing my query.
The officers stated that the .08 % to determine drunkenness during driving was only to indicate an automatic failure of sobriety and even if the test indicated a lower reading, the officer could still charge the person by their opinion and failed roadside tests.
This was relevant, as it was also stated that the officer's opinion  (only) could be used to determine the sobriety of a concealed carry holder with their weapon.
If a concealed carry holder is considered impaired by a substance and they are carrying their weapon, it is considered an automatic felony.

Does that seem to jive with your knowledge of the law ?

The laws are different from state to state.

In Tennessee, like in many other states, there is no exact level (like with DUIs) required to prove that a person is "under the influence" when charged with a Public Intoxication or Going Armed Under the Influence.  INstead it is based on the officers perception.  this can be challenged in court, but the State does not have to prove that a person has a certain level of alcohol (like .08 BAC with a DUI) or other drugs in his/her system in order to get a conviction.

Interseting side note on the Tennessee law. T.C.A. 39-17-1321 only applies to possessing a HANDGUN while under the influence.  

[Rotobeast]

(06-30-2016, 11:47 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The laws are different from state to state.

In Tennessee, like in many other states, there is no exact level (like with DUIs) required to prove that a person is "under the influence" when charged with a Public Intoxication or Going Armed Under the Influence.  INstead it is based on the officers perception.  this can be challenged in court, but the State does not have to prove that a person has a certain level of alcohol (like .08 BAC with a DUI) or other drugs in his/her system in order to get a conviction.

Interseting side note on the Tennessee law. T.C.A. 39-17-1321 only applies to possessing a HANDGUN while under the influence.  

Thanks

I assumed as much, but thought I'd ask.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-30-2016, 11:48 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Thanks

I assumed as much, but thought I'd ask.

You plannin' something, Roto?

[Rotobeast]

(06-30-2016, 11:51 AM)PhilHos Wrote: You plannin' something, Roto?

Always.....