Here's a perfect storm for a CCW type

[Spats McGee]

. . . .But we are reading a judgement and one in this case where the "findings of fact" are laid out as exactly that. There is no question if the facts are accurate only if the findings of fact are without judicial error. It makes things sometimes seem more clear than they may be. . . . .

It's important to understand that at this juncture, the facts as you have read them are the facts, for all legal purposes. At the trial level, the court or the jury "finds the facts," and decides what the facts were. The appellate court can review those facts, but no new evidence may be introduced. The defendant can make a motion for a new trial, for example, if new evidence has been uncovered, but that would go back to the trial court. Appellate courts look at the record on appeal. They do not allow new evidence to be introduced at the trial court level.

If I ever needed more proof that CC badges are a bad idea, this case would have provided it. In this case, the decedent was already calm, and nobody was in any imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Not only did the appellant flash the badge, then approached him with the intent to remove him from the church. That's not defense of self or others. That's an arrest, and I know of no jurisdiction in which a CCL gives one arrest powers.

A tragic story all the way around, but I will admit that given the appellant's history and the facts as recited by the appellate court, the sentence is not all that surprising.

 

[briandg]

Ten ring, it's in the report that he had an on the belt holster. If it's in an official document it was on the belt. Guy's in church, how well can you conceal anything on your belt? He may have been wearing a suit or jacket, but nobody could wear on otb holster for an hour or two every week and not give away that secret.


Yes, the way it is concealed matters. If you truly hide it, it shows that it's there to be hidden, and be unseen. If no effort is made to truly, deeply conceal it it shows that he chose to not hide it well. Maybe he wanted it to be seen, and his statements seem to support that.

Wyatt earp? Yep. There was a disturbance in the church. He admitted that his plan was about ejecting the guy from the church, not defending the people. He ordered him to come with him out of the church. When the guy (quite predictably. He had already refused once) refused to leave, he flashed a badge, then a gun. When the guy got violent, for whatever reason, he shot, maybe intentionally killed him. He stands by his actions as smart and proper.

Wyatt earp at the corral ejected a horse from the boardwalk and it began a series of events that wound up in the shooting. The killer really had no need or business appointing himself as the 'bouncer', the pastor said so. He escalated that situation, which was not obviously a risk to anyone, to the point of death, according to the pastor.

I read that paper, and it reminded me of a rough and tough 'cowboy' that I knew in the past. He was 6'5" and a bully and tough guy. He carried a 1911 and flaunted it. He talked about 'stare downs'. On the internet he was a troll and a bully, and described himself as being that way in real life, that was confirmed by others who knew him in person.

You see, I have well thought out reasons for saying these things and it all fits together. It is possible that I am misreading the context or documentation.

I find it ironic that he used the badge and gun as 'persuasion tool's. An leo has his in plain sight, and shouldn't put his hand near that gun until he feels a level of threat, you can't use that as a threat.

"What ya gonna do, shoot me for not going outside"? Wow, that would have been really helpful.

 

[GarandTd]

The idea of a CCW badge is rediculous! I would be leery of anyone who chose to carry one much less brandish it as if it gave them authority. Having a carry permit and a lethal weapon on my person empowers me to keep my mouth shut, mind my own business, and avoid trouble like the plague...NOTassert myself over everyone and everything in my presence that doesn't conform to my self righteous beliefs.

The shooter didn't need boxing skills or pepper spray. He needed to mind his own business.

 

[briandg]

Btw, Joe, described above once said, verbatim, "I'm a lot less mouthy if I'm carrying. I don't want to get in trouble."

 

[briandg]

At one point, many years ago, I wondered if a marker of some sort would be a good idea. Not a stupid plastic shield that can be bought at k Mart, but an actual registered tag that could be carried outside of the wallet for identifying purposes. It seemed like it might be better to have one in the wallet and one that was more easily accessed. Maybe clipped on the clothing or dashboard.

That wasn't an important idea, just a way to easily identify as licensed if asked, say during a traffic stop. Now with my state offering permitless carry, I don't even have my card.

Carrying a shield would make me think of a ten year old with his gold sheriff's star that he got in a gumball prize.

 

[GarandTd]

I also envisioned a child with a toy badge.
In PA, my carry permit is a photo-ID of sorts with much of the same info as my driver's liscense. I don't flash it around. As far as Im concerned, it is there for LEOs.

 

[Sharkbite]

it's in the report that he had an on the belt holster. If it's in an official document it was on the belt. Guy's in church, how well can you conceal anything on your belt? He may have been wearing a suit or jacket, but nobody could wear on otb holster for an hour or two every week and not give away that secret.

Ohh no....

I carried OTW on the point of the firing side hip for almost 20 years. My duty gun rode there, so my concealed pistol did as well. A 1911 for about 10 of those years, then a Glock of one flavor or another. That INCLUDED at Church. No one ever saw my pistol, and i assure you i didnt make any kind of statement

Your statement is just ridiculous.

 

[briandg]

I believe that those things can be dangerous, this proves in a very limited way. The way I interpret the documents, the shooter flashed his badge intending to exercise authority. Come with me, I'm the boss. Dead guy recognized the absolute foolishness. Maybe even thought about the kid with the plastic badge and cap gun.

I believe that anything that can be used to falsely identify a person is a dangerous thing that can be misused. Before we get into any arguments, keep in mind that impersonating a police officer is illegal in many jurisdictions. wearing a harness over a shirt that says SWAT is in principle a crime. If that badge said 'police officer' when he flashed it, there would have been charges. I wish that they weren't available to the public but that's a ridiculous thought. But you can equip yourself at army surplus to the level that just a few words can result in a stolen valor charge.

 

[briandg]

Sharkbite, so you say. How did you manage to carry something as big as a bible on your belt, completely concealed for years, and have nobody see it? Can you explain how you did it, what sort of clothing did you use to keep that covered in all times you were in public, year round?

If you don't think that it applies to you it probably doesn't, but you know very well that it applies to many people. I don't believe that I said that it was about everyone. It's about many people, and I believe that he was doing it. I've seen plenty of people who want to have their carry weapon seen and they make effort to do that.

Would you say that wearing a t shirt that has 'i carry concealed season's to hide a concealed weapon is incongruous? People do. I've seen a guy wearing the shirt.

https://www.spreadshirt.com/i+carry...8224&msclkid=f0d1ca6983c81dac5c1190a80b8ae7ff

 

[Double Naught Spy]

it's in the report that he had an on the belt holster. If it's in an official document it was on the belt. Guy's in church, how well can you conceal anything on your belt? He may have been wearing a suit or jacket, but nobody could wear on otb holster for an hour or two every week and not give away that secret.

I carry my pistol (1911, usually Officer's model for church, but sometimes full size) in a belt holster and have never had an issue with it at church. Concealment really isn't a big deal.

 

[Sharkbite]

Sharkbite, so you say. How did you manage to carry something as big as a bible on your belt, completely concealed for years, and have nobody see it?

I’ll go one better....today i carried my usual CCW pistol. A S&W M&P 2.0 compact. The same size gun as a Glock 19. OWB Blade-tech holster, spare mag on the support side, Sure-fire flashlight and a RATS tourniquet. ALL carried in Church, TOTALLY concealed, under a sport coat. I even stood chatting with the paster before service and he asked if i was carrying today (he knows i normally do). So im pretty sure nobody else noticed.

Now, i normally carry Appendix theses days, so the open front coat threw him off. Thats the same way i dressed for Church all those years ago. Not hard to conceal lots of stuff with the right gear

 

[johnwilliamson062]

That was an impressive read. So very much done wrong. I am thinking one of those guys many around had thought should not be carrying or should be reported to some authority for one reason or another and no one acted. In fairness, knowing you should do something is often far shot of knowing what that something should be which is short of actually doing it.

a sit on your butt, stay calm and quiet, don't even make eye contact situation.

Although I absolutely agree appellant acted improperly, I wouldn't agree dong nothing is absolutely the answer. A lot of unknown details to this specific circumstance, but I don't think it would be unreasonable to put oneself in a position to support the ushers/staff that are controlling the situation if the person were to become violent. The ushers at my church are all quite nice and probably far better prepared to calm an unstable person than myself, but they likely average 40 years older than myself. I would hate to see them rolling around on the floor with an unstable person half their age. Tough on the hips.


A buddy attends a church where the ushers all CCW. Quite odd IMO.

 

[In The Ten Ring]

I suspect the "never get involved ever" attitude on this forum is something of a sham, meant to fool lurkers. I think quite a few forum members would step up to help with whatever it was and often do so. That's just my thoughts on it, I apologize if I am overestimating any member's grit.

I have concealed carried in church for some time and no one knew. I didn't carry on the hip but if I wore a suit coat I wouldn't worry about it being spotted. A person might look a bit odd with a coat on during summer but hey, if they always wore that coat, no one would wonder.

 

[briandg]

John, you've misread that a bit. I did not say that no intervention should take place. If the church had chairs, it was likely pretty small. In any case, an armed man who sees a disturbance shouldn't leap into action unless there is an obvious danger. When there is any sort of altercation that appears to be 'harmless' that armed man needs to stand down and wait until he is needed. This requires that certain things may be done, such as seeking a more advantageous spot in cover or in closer range.

Wait and see. The guy wasn't escalating, he was calming down, give the guy room to breathe and feel safe while you discreetly watch for signs of trouble. If the guy drew a weapon you will have the absolute element of surprise as the congregation distracts him. Every situation is different at every tiny detail.

Careful, deliberate actions may fail to save lives. That's terrible. Rash, poorly considered actions may lead to many deaths. I prefer unfortunate to tragic.

Don't make a target of yourself. Stay low profile. If you are spotted and singled out you may die without even getting a clear window to the target, leaving the group alone. That's tragic.

Think of it as a standoff, in a way.

 

[hdwhit]

Glenn E. Meyer wrote:
A perfect storm for a CCW type gone wrong.

No.

A perfect example of what the opponents of CCW would happen if CCWs were widely permitted.

As Double Naught Spy ably summarized in Post #2, the guy's actions were nothing short of criminal. He deserves to spend a long time in jail to reflect on his attitude towards guns. He also deserves to have his defense attorney take most of his life's savings away in legal fees. He deserves (although his family does not) to have his family left financially ruined because of his failure to abide by either the law or his CCW training.

Bottom line: If you're looking for an excuse to use your weapon, you're a criminal. No two ways about it. Responsible gun owners use deadly force only when there is no other alternative.

 

[Lohman446]

I'm sure there is a counter argument somewhere. In my opinion if I am on a jury and one of those "fake badges" comes into play its going to work against the person "flashing" it. Again, subject to counter arguments that are going to have to be good, I see it as an attempt to impersonate an officer (perhaps not legally).

[the court] was troubled by Appellant’s tendency to insert himself into circumstances that could cause his death and portray him
as a hero.

If you want to be an officer of the law by all means apply to be so. Otherwise leave the badges at home.

It's important to understand that at this juncture, the facts as you have read them are the facts, for all legal purposes. At the trial level, the court or the jury "finds the facts," and decides what the facts were.

See how clear you made that and how muddled I managed to . But you have hit on the import, at least to me, of appellate decisions. They are broader in impact AND they don't get boggled down in question of fact only on how those facts and the law interact.

 

[briandg]

An interesting thing that I was once told by a coach. You can't make yourself into a hero. That's decided by everyone else. Don't do something stupid thinking that it will make you a hero, because all its going do do is ruin your life if you blow it by missing that half court shot instead of passing the ball.

Wanna be a hero? Better be Han solo, because if you're jabba, you could save an entire bus load of expecting mothers and go to jail because you accidentally tore off a blouse.

He thinks that he was heroic, right? He wasn't. Heroism is decided mostly by the press. The press disagreed.

 

[Lohman446]

On the topic of tactics: My take away is the guy is an idiot tactically. He revealed the presence of a gun with his nifty little tin star and then brandished the weapon prior to having any justification to even consider the use of lethal force. One could accept that he intervened and asked the supposed "attacker" to leave but in this case he intervened alone, despite the presence of plenty of others around him, and then escalated the situation. A situation that could have easily waited for police intervention.

Simply put there was no good outcome for him in this scenario. Let's say he had flashed his badge AND gun and the individual had left and called the police rather than punching him. The trial records we would be considering would almost certain involve brandishing (if not assault with a deadly weapon) and possibly impersonating a police officer.

Because of the severity of the outcome it is easy to overlook the legal and tactical errors the individual made leading up to that outcome.

 

[TailGator]

Reading between the lines a bit, it seems to be that some people are assuming that a belt holster or a gun "on the hip" is OWB, while others are including IWB in the phrase. Personally, I think of IWB as being on the belt or on the hip just as much as OWB. Perhaps I read it to fast, but I didn't see anything in the court record specifying IWB or OWB, nor anything to indicate that concealment was compromised until the charged man chose to display his pistol.

I agree with the opinions that the badges come perilously close to impersonating the officer, and I find myself thinking that those who purchase them are wannabes.

 

[briandg]

Yes.

His entirely unsmart decision to confront an unknown opponent in an environment that he cannot possibly control with certainty was An enormous risk.

Imagine one thing. His interaction with the guy, who was stable at the time, provoked him and that provocation ended in the death of a half dozen babies that were there for baptism. The possible damages are beyond comprehension.

He got lucky. He's only been sentenced for homicide. He could be the guy who triggered a truly catastrophic event.