Posted on 04/01/2019 4:02:48 AM PDT by Moseley
Gun-owners, they are coming: on March 21, a Fredericksburg man was prosecuted and convicted of the misdemeanor crime of merely holding a B.B. gun in public. I know because I was in the trial, as the attorney defending Mr. Wolff.
The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. However, gun control activists are trying to criminalize gun ownership. Their next step is that you are a criminal if you take a gun out in public. If they have to let you own a gun, you can't ever take it out of its case.
Liberals continue to try to criminalize private ownership of guns, despite losing a key battle in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 2820–2821, 171 L.Ed.2d 637, (2008). Unlike conservatives, left-wingers never quit. They intend to win the war eventually and disarm the American people.
Now they claim that it is illegal to "open carry" a firearm. The mere existence of a gun if anyone else is around now has become the crime of "brandishing" and/or "assault" (which means frightening people, contrary to popular misunderstanding) or both.
In Virginia, in the Fredericksburg General District Court, my client was charged with two counts of "brandishing" a firearm under Va. Code § 18.2-282 and two counts of assault under the all-purpose (vague) Va. Code §18.2-57, for a single incident that took no more than 30 seconds. (In my own defense, I took the case knowing that Virginia statutes are bad and need to be challenged by a campaign of appeals.)
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
He testified that he did not know what was going on, so he took his B.B. gun for his own protection. Standing in his own yard, he shouted across the fence, "What are you doing there? That is private property." The woman then shouted, "He's got a gun!" The man and the woman then calmly walked away, never answering his question. They were "flaggers" assisting a road construction project, but nobody had ever informed Mr. Wolff before. His question was never answered. He went back into his townhouse, thought the incident was over, and went back to his morning meal.
Nobody suggested that he ever pointed the B.B. gun at anyone, nor that he waved it or flourished it in an ostentatious or angry manner (referring to dictionary definitions of "brandish"). But he was then arrested for two counts of "assault by intimidation" and two counts of brandishing, purely because the two workers said they were afraid.
There was body-cam video of the interviews after the fact. Everyone agreed on the day of the incident that the defendant carried a B.B. gun by holding the barrel (the front tip up by his hip) so that the trigger end hung down near the ground, and that he held the B.B. gun down next to his leg. He then leaned it up against the fence.
There were four counts alleging two victims from the same incident. So if you have a gun around ten people, you could be charged with twenty misdemeanors from one single action. That would be ten crimes of brandishing by just holding the gun passively and ten crimes of assault from the same holding, because there are ten people around.
The judge seemed sympathetic but said that he felt constrained by prior court cases to find Mr. Wolff guilty of Va. Code § 18.2-282, which also criminalizes merely "holding" a firearm "in such manner as to" frighten someone. The judge discussed with me that the statute is completely subjective from the standpoint of the complaining person.
I say this makes the statute unconstitutional — void for vagueness — because anyone can say he is afraid just because you are holding a gun. How do you know what to means to hold a gun "in such a manner" as to make someone afraid? There are no standards to follow.
How do you know if you are breaking the law? What is "brandishing?" Nobody knows. There is no definition in the statute. Virginia considers dictionaries, but those definitions are all over the map.
We should all be offended by vague and ambiguous laws that can be bent like putty in the hands of prosecutors or police.
Mr. Wolff is a disabled veteran living on a small pension. He needs help to pay $1,300 for the court reporter’s transcript. Otherwise, he won’t be able to take the case up on appeal. If anyone cares about the growing assault on every American’s Second Amendment rights, please help with a donation of whatever you can manage, large or small
https://www.gofundme.com/prosecuted-for-quotopen-carryquot-need-transcripts
Now, in order to take the case to Second Amendment organizations like the Virginia Civil Defense League, Gun Owners of America, and the NRA, or The Rutherford Institute with John Whitehead in Virginia, it is necessary to show the court reporter’s transcript to them. They need to know that this case is a good example of the legal question before going forward with it.
Read the entire article at:
Next will be if you display a photo if a gun
They’re already proposing a law for that in Florida. Social media pics of firearms will land kids in jail and fine them.
Or if your child eats a slice of bread that looks likes a pistol...
...yeah,I could see that...a kid holding a hotdog and he pointed at someone...
I assume posing for a picture sitting in an anti aircraft gun battery is fine as long as it is Viet Cong is still ok?
From then on I just concealed carried. Yeah, I know... d;^)
Some aspects of Homer's case doesn't pass the smell test. If they were flaggers, they're usually pretty well marked in reflective clothing and working during the day. Sometimes at night but usually still well marked in safety gear. Homer shouldn't be charged with brandishing if he didn't wave the weapon at anyone. That's where discretion of the officer(s) and magistrate come in. But on the flip side, that's also where the problem may become inflamed.
Humans, they're the worst.... d;^)
Flaggers for a construction crew, would by law, be wearing hi-vis clothing, and easily recognized, as compared to winos and other trouble makers, loitering in a parking lot.
I’m slightly skeptical of the events in this story, as told.
Oh, absolutely.
Just like it’s fine for someone’s wife or a child to be fondled, as long as a democrat VP does it.
Right to keep (in your domicile) and BEAR (while you are in public going about your business) arms.
That’s how I see it, and I strongly believe the me who wrote and ratified he Constitution would agree.
You don’t lose other rights when you walk outside your house.
The DA and the judge should be charged with deprivation of rights under color of law.
In Dumb Delaware they are working on a bill in this Democrat state that makes the original gun owner guilty of a crime if their stolen weapon is used illegally. They steal it, you can go to jail.
It’s against the law to reveal a pistol in Florida already.....except when fishing.....just revealing a pistol is considered brandishing........
The goal of the left is to criminalize non-violent citizens and to strip guns from their hands, while intentionally leaving them in the hands of violent criminals.
I love Tucson- I hope it is still the same as last time I was there.
I went out to target shoot in the desert with some friends.
A cop car came down the road and what did they do? “Just checking if everyone is safe (and can we target shoot with you?)” They even offered to pay for the ammo they used...
Told them no but thanks for being on the job!
Well, they dunned a kid who’d chewed a Pop-Tart into the “shape of a gun”, a few years ago.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/17/pop-tart-gun-suspension-upheld-by-maryland-judge/
World is gonna be far different when you can carry a phaser that looks like a TV remote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.