Jump to content

Scary Incident Last Night


KahrMan

Recommended Posts

Posted

The guy couldn’t have thought the person in the car was a threat. If they were they would have killed him when he walked up.

Posted
  On 8/12/2016 at 11:26 AM, DaveTN said:

The guy couldn’t have thought the person in the car was a threat. If they were they would have killed him when he walked up.

Expand  

You are mistaken, it's impossible to kill Rambo.

  • Like 2
Posted
  On 8/11/2016 at 11:06 PM, Erik88 said:

I'm disturbed, but not surprised, that some of you are defending this wanna be George Zimmerman with a long gun.

 

 

Expand  

I was not defending him at all with my comment. I think he is a idiot.  I do still think the lady could have picked a better place to pull over such as a parking lot or told the caller she would have called them back in a few minutes. I can't see myself pulling into a place like she did to stop and talk on the phone at night. It's legal but is it smart?

Posted
  On 8/12/2016 at 3:06 PM, gunslinger_Griff said:

You're respectfully wrong... 

Chuck Norris, or more specifically his beard, can...  :bowrofl:

Expand  

I admit I was wrong. It looks like it was also legal.

39-17-1308. Defenses to unlawful possession or carrying of a weapon.

(a)  It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:

       1. By a person in fear of Chuck Norris, his beard, or it's perceived presence in a vehicle.

  • Like 2
Posted
  On 8/11/2016 at 11:06 PM, Erik88 said:

I'm disturbed, but not surprised, that some of you are defending this wanna be George Zimmerman with a long gun.

 

 

Expand  

I've yet to see the problem, other than the lady drove away butthurt.

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 8/12/2016 at 7:24 PM, gregintenn said:

I've yet to see the problem, other than the lady drove away butthurt.

Expand  

I wonder if you would feel the same if your wife was jutting in a car minding her own business and some guy came up and pointed at rifle directly at her.

 

I talked to my neighbor some more and rifle was pointed directly at her.  When she said it was not pointed at her she just meant that he did not have it shouldered with his hand on the trigger.  Even though he was cradling the rifle in his arms, the muzzle was pointed right at her chest.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
  On 8/12/2016 at 7:46 PM, KahrMan said:

...Even though he was cradling the rifle in his arms, the muzzle was pointed right at her chest.

Expand  

That's aggravated assault, if she could prove it, or if he admits it.

Could be even if just shown as act of intimidation.

- OS

Edited by Oh Shoot
Posted (edited)
  On 8/12/2016 at 7:46 PM, KahrMan said:

I wonder if you would feel the same if your wife was jutting in a car minding her own business and some guy came up and pointed at rifle directly at her.

 

I talked to my neighbor some more and rifle was pointed directly at her.  When she said it was not pointed at her she just meant that he did not have it shouldered with his hand on the trigger.  Even though he was cradling the rifle in his arms, the muzzle was pointed right at her chest.

Expand  

It's happened....only the guy was wearing a badge. I had a long conversation with the police chief, but it did no good. She wasn't scared, but very pizzed off.

 

You're right. I don't care for a lack of muzzle discipline. We have heard her side of the story. I expect his is different. I've no idea how accurate either story would be.

It wasn't a good situation no matter how you slice it. It seems people are on edge most everywhere in light of recent events. Some people are also just plain nuts. I wish it wasn't this way, but have no idea how to change it.

Edited by gregintenn
  • Like 1
Posted

SOME people 100 percent take their right to bear arms beyond what is reasonable. Myself, I would not even consider the idea of having an exposed rifle cradled in my arms in the event I was approaching someone who was mysteriously parked in front of my house for an odd period of time. Legalities placed aside, what the man did was disrespectful and extremely uncalled for. If nothing else, carry the rifle in a safe and non-threatening manner (if even possible). On the other hand, none of us know what this guys issues or mental state are, so I am trying to stay objective here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted
  On 8/12/2016 at 10:01 PM, conn_air7 said:

SOME people 100 percent take their right to bear arms beyond what is reasonable. Myself, I would not even consider the idea of having an exposed rifle cradled in my arms in the event I was approaching someone who was mysteriously parked in front of my house for an odd period of time. Legalities placed aside, what the man did was disrespectful and extremely uncalled for. If nothing else, carry the rifle in a safe and non-threatening manner (if even possible). On the other hand, none of us know what this guys issues or mental state are, so I am trying to stay objective here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Expand  

 

  On 8/12/2016 at 10:01 PM, conn_air7 said:

SOME people 100 percent take their right to bear arms beyond what is reasonable. Myself, I would not even consider the idea of having an exposed rifle cradled in my arms in the event I was approaching someone who was mysteriously parked in front of my house for an odd period of time. Legalities placed aside, what the man did was disrespectful and extremely uncalled for. If nothing else, carry the rifle in a safe and non-threatening manner (if even possible). On the other hand, none of us know what this guys issues or mental state are, so I am trying to stay objective here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Expand  

Right. It sounds like the guy was an ass, and there are certainly no shortage of those. The fact remains, however, that no one was injured, assaulted, molested, etc., so all in all, it turned out pretty good.

Posted
  On 8/12/2016 at 11:34 PM, gregintenn said:

 

The fact remains, however, that no one was injured, assaulted, molested, etc., so all in all, it turned out pretty good.

Expand  

And all we have to go on is a third-hand story from a woman talking on the phone, sitting in a car, when it's just about dark, if not already.  

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 8/11/2016 at 10:46 PM, Oh Shoot said:

Again, there is no "brandishing" law per se in TN. Would have to rise to level of reckless endangerment or aggravated assault.

- OS

Expand  

Eh...it was used to intimidate yes?
 

  Quote

See King v. St. Vincent’s Hospital, 502 U.S. 215, 221 (1991)("[T]he meaning of statutory language, plain or not, depends on context."). The statute defines a brandish as occurring when an individual takes one of two courses of action: either the individual "display[ s] all or part of the firearm," or the individual "otherwise make the presence of the firearm known."
...
Our interpretation is further supported by the requirement that the presence of the firearm be made known "in order to intimidate [another] person." 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(4). The obvious way of intimidating a person during the commission of a crime is not to make it known that a gun exists somewhere, but, rather, that the gun is present "at hand" such that it could be used.

Expand  

 

Posted (edited)
  On 8/15/2016 at 6:05 PM, tennesseetiger said:

Eh...it was used to intimidate yes?
 

 

Expand  

Reference of King vs St. Vincent's Hospital is SCOTUS case about reemployment after National Guard service, btw?

But anyway, yeah, if the DA thinks this encounter involved significant enough intimidation, then yeah, he can make case that aggravated assault is justified. As I said.

The TN statute for simple assault requires that the person "Intentionally or knowingly causes another to reasonably fear imminent bodily injury". And rises to aggravated assault if same plus "Uses or displays a deadly weapon".

The point is that some states have a separate law specifically covering "brandishing" of a firearm. TN does not, and the word is not even found in TCA.

What seems clear cut is that the guy violated 39-17-1307.  If that encounter is deemed "in public", then it's a Class A Misdemeanor.

But then, a prosecutor doesn't have to press any charge he doesn't want to.

- OS

 

Edited by Oh Shoot

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

TRADING POST NOTICE

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions.

TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

THE FINE PRINT

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is not a lobbying organization and has no affiliation with any lobbying organizations.  Beware of scammers using the Tennessee Gun Owners name, purporting to be Pro-2A lobbying organizations!

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines
 
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.