Charged with CCW violation after lawful shooting?

[Crusader103]

I am doing a little research on whether or not someone who otherwise employed a firearm justifiably in self defense, but was carrying in violation of the law (without a permit), has ever been charged and/or convicted of the CCW violation. To be clear, I am not talking about a felon or prohibited person but simply an average joe carrying a concealed handgun without a permit who subsequently used it to justifiably shoot an attacker. It would also apply if the victim had a permit but employed his weapon in a prohibited place, i.e. post office.

In practice I have always viewed these as two separate events that have no bearing on the other. If you are justified in shooting someone you are justified in shooting them regardless of whether or not your weapon is lawfully present. If you are unlawfully carrying you are unlawfully carrying whether or not your shooting someone is ruled justified.

Though there may be cases, I am unfamiliar with any in which an otherwise obvious victim of a felonious act was charged with a violation of CCW (generally a misdemeanor) without a permit. I am familiar with a couple of cases in which charges were contemplated but none in which the "victim" was actually prosecuted or even charged.

I could just be drawing a blank. Any references I am missing?

 

[Old Shooter]

How about Bernie Goetz, The New York City subway shooter?

 

[Pilot]

Even if it is a "good shoot", they will FRY you without the proper permitting. Gang bangers get off, but they will make an example of an otherwise law abiding person defending themselves with a firearm.

 

[chieftain]

How about Bernie Goetz, The New York City subway shooter?

The first case I thought of too.

Also:

While I was living in Manhattan about 8 years ago, there was another case of a Navy vet recently moved to Brooklyn with his service pistol, who shot a guy he caught in his sons bedroom.

The Vet had applied for his license but didn't have it yet. They NYC officials were begging him to plead out. Sean Hannity was offering to pay for the Sailors defense. I do not know how that case ended.

Both are very sad stories about the failure of government.

Go figure.

Fred

 

[Crusader103]

How about Bernie Goetz, The New York City subway shooter?

I considered Mr. Goetz. While I support his actions in many regards, especially as it pertains to an example of a disparty of force situation, I find that some of the statements he made (including the ones he admits to and not just the ones alleged) likely contributed to his being prosecuted for many additional charges other than just CCW.

Keeping in mind that self-defense shootings are very dynamic and rarely 100% clear cut, I am focusing more on cases where there appears to be little doubt to the police, prosecutors, etc that the shooting was justified, the only resultant contemplation of charges if you will being the CCW violation.

Even if it is a "good shoot", they will FRY you without the proper permitting. Gang bangers get off, but they will make an example of an otherwise law abiding person defending themselves with a firearm.

That is the claim that I am trying to prove or disprove. Do you have any specific references for this being the case?

While I was living in Manhattan about 8 years ago, there was another case of a Navy vet recently moved to Brooklyn with his service pistol, who shot a guy he caught in his sons bedroom.

Related, I guess, but this doesn't appear to be a CCW violation incident. It may though be a case of being charged with what I feel is a separate event other than the justified(?) shooting itself. Anyone know the disposition of this case?

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

goetz got dinged for more than a permit violation. and he did it with his own big mouth

 

[drsfmd]

While I was living in Manhattan about 8 years ago, there was another case of a Navy vet recently moved to Brooklyn with his service pistol, who shot a guy he caught in his sons bedroom.

The Vet had applied for his license but didn't have it yet.

Without a permit, his very possession of the handgun in NYS is illegal. I'm not saying that it's not a bad law, but this example doesn't meet the criteria that the OP has set forth... this wasn't an otherwise legal person who happened to be carrying unauthorized.

 

[cskny]

Gang bangers get off

Give me a break.

 

[deadin]

Here's something to consider......
It is known that any death that occurs during the commission of a crime (i.e. Bank manager drops dead from a heart attack during a robbery) is considered murder.

Isn't unlicensed concealed carry a crime in most places?
Think about it.......

 

[steveb4c]

Give me a break.

ever watch "first 48"? i have seen a few walk after a justifed self-defence shooting. and they were felons! of course it is "tv" so it could all be fake, right?

 

[Loosedhorse]

In practice I have always viewed these as two separate events that have no bearing on the other.

I doubt that this is strictly true. What I mean is, detectives and a DA have a dead body, a guy who they know shot him...and they know that that person has willingly committed (depending on the jurisdiction) a minor misdemeanor or a 3.5 year felony.

My guess is, in those juridictions where carrying illegally without a permit is a big nothing--supposing such places exist--then the fact that the shooter claiming SD willingly carried in violation of the law won't prejudice the detectives and DA that much. In the place were it is a felony, it will predispose them not to believe his claim of SD and to test it by sending him to trial on a charge of murder.

Not sure. But the evidence that I'd be looking for (cases of claimed SD by someone shooting another while carrying illegally, where no criminal charges were prosecuted other than the carry charge) would be hard to find.

 

[Zoogster]

Exactly LoosedHorse what I was going to state when I saw the thread.

You will have a hard time finding specific cases where it is the only charge, even though it is a more common scenario than the lack of such clear stories lead you to belive. Most of the times where it happens there will be other charges, often more severe charges, and it won't be presented as a self-defense case.

The fact that someone is involved in criminal behavior, like illegally walking around with a loaded concealed firearm, creates a bias that will influence investigators, media perception, and lead to assumed stereotypes and assumptions by both the media and public that hear mention of the incident.
What may be entirely legal self defense instead ends up in court as murder, manslaughter, or in the news as road rage, argument resulting in a shooting, etc

It does not get reported as a self-defense shooting to the public initially, and even if the person is found not guilty of the murder later that is long after it is fresh news and warrants coverage according to the media.
This makes research on such a topic difficult because it won't be immediately apparent which cases are the scenario that you are trying to find information on.
They will be homicide cases where the person was found guilty, innocent, guilty of some charges, or pled guilty in a deal to what may be a seemingly unrelated charge.

This is actually the case for a great many self-defense shootings. They are not known as self-defense shootings until long after they are no longer media worthy and fresh, and it is determined they were self-defense in a courtroom a year or more later.
Some of these cases also result in conviction for murder, manslaughter, or something else, or a pleas deal even when they were legitimate self-defense. Unlike the movies and tv shows the court often comes to the wrong conclusion.

Pilot said:

Gang bangers get off

A lot of gang shootings, as well as those involving drug deals etc are in fact self defense, but those involved still generally do go to prison for murder because of the bias due to their character and life style. It doesn't get presented in the media like that.
Scenario: Gang members go into enemy neighborhood looking to attack someone, find someone, and then while trying to seriously injure or kill the rival they found get killed by the individual defending themselves.
That individually is a gang member involved in a gang related shooting, gets tried and goes to prison, you never even hear about the self-defense angle because nobody considers a gang member shooting another gang member to be self-defense.
Criminals rarely get away with self-defense, even when it is self defense.
The times they do are the exception.
Every once in awhile some drug dealer that successfully defends themselves in a home invasion where some predators decided to rob them for drugs or money will be found to have acted in self-defense, but most of the time they go to prison and its not recognized as a self-defense scenario.
You just don't realize it because if even mentioned in the media it is mentioned as a gang involved shooting, or gang violence, murder, or some other common tag that conjures images of an assumed stereotype.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I don't think they can be separated either.

If the gun hadn't been illegally present, the shooting would not have occurred...it contributes ti the action. While the homicide might be ruled justifiable, the underlying crime of illegal carry would still be present.

You'd have a hard time finding an isolated case of only having charges for the illegal CCW filed, as the other charges would be dependent on the original charge

 

[shootniron]

Massad addressed this in his column in American Handgunner recently, he cited 4 cases where this happened and in every case... it was BAD for the shooter even though they were all justified.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Suppose the pistol was not registered to you and you claimed that you took it away from your attacker and shot him with it. What then?

 

[FMF Doc]

Everyone has hear the old adage"

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6

That implies legal preceedings, and they rarely turnout in the defendants favor.

 

[Birch Knoll]

Suppose the pistol was not registered to you and you claimed that you took it away from your attacker and shot him with it. What then?

Investigators would probably strongly suspect that you were lying, which would result in them looking for, and probably finding, evidence which shows you are lying. Like the lack of the suspects fingerprints on the gun, or the fact that you own (or are currently wearing!) a holster which fit that gun, or have the exact same ammunition at home as was loaded in the gun, and so on.

 

[deadin]

Besides, if you have taken away the BG's gun, why shoot him?

Oh, I know... He pulled another gun. However it might seem a little odd the he had two guns and you had none. Or, maybe he pulled a knife.
Might be best to carry a knife so it can be dropped in case the other guy doesn't have one... but then it will have your prints on it and not his.
I guess you could just wipe it clean and then put it in his hand and hope nobody notices you doing it. This is getting too complicated........

 

[Hondo 60]

The fact that someone is involved in criminal behavior, like illegally walking around with a loaded concealed firearm,

Wow Zoogster, are you employed by the Brady Campaign?
They would be whoopin it up like a purty gal at the barn dance just from reading your terminology.

Sounds to me like "A Concerned citizen exercising their constitutional right to keep & bear arms ..."

 

[hawkeye216]

There was a case in cleveland, ohio six or seven years ago. Two individuals attempted to rob one young man who pulled a concealed handgun and successfully defended himself. It was ruled justifiable homicide but he did plead to a minor misdeamenor for the concealed carry. The case was the mr. Football case.

 

[ScottRiqui]

originally posted by deadin:

Here's something to consider......
It is known that any death that occurs during the commission of a crime (i.e. Bank manager drops dead from a heart attack during a robbery) is considered murder.

Isn't unlicensed concealed carry a crime in most places?
Think about it.......

You're talking about the "felony murder" rule, but it wouldn't apply in this case. The underlying crime in progress would have to be much more serious than simple unlicensed concealed carry in order to elevate a death from "not a crime" or manslaughter to murder under the rule.

Although it varies from state to state, examples of crimes that would trigger the felony murder rule are things like arson, burglary, rape, kidnapping and robbery.

 

[tnxdshooter]

Suppose the pistol was not registered to you and you claimed that you took it away from your attacker and shot him with it. What then?

In TN whether I had a permit or not if it happened in my home nothing would happen. If it happened in public? Possible prison sentence. Oh and we do not have to register guns here. We can also use whatever gun we want with our permit. Also we can carry loaded long guns in our car if the bulletts are in the magazine but none in the chamber. Ahhhh the land of the free.

Sent from Droid Incredible on Verizon Wireless

 

[Zoogster]

Other things will also play a role in biasing responding officers and detectives, the DA, and eventually determining what happens and what charges are pursued.

A woman can often get away with things that a man could not. Responding officers who are typically men will feel more sympathetic to a woman that was forced to defend herself against a man, absent any indications that she escalated the situation or helped encourage or create some sort of confrontation. This is especially true if the person they defended against was a stranger, and not a former or current boyfriend/husband.

An elderly individual likewise is more likely to be treated differently, absent indications that they helped create the situation that led up to a need to defend themselves.
An elderly woman is most likely of all to get a break and not be charged, you can probably find stories of such women that had a gun and no permit and stopped a young criminal without ever being charged.

A young man 18-25 is the least likely to be given the benefit of the doubt, and most likely to be held to the absolute letter of the law.
Even 25-35 will see few breaks in such a serious matter.


Now an age 40+ family man, someone viewed as a calm rational member of the community, they may also get a break, and they may not, it really depends on circumstances and luck. They are still less likely than a woman or elderly individual to get a break.
Likewise a well respected member of the community may get a break. More so in a small community where the responding officers or detectives are likely to recognize the individual before filing the paperwork. While in a city they probably won't be known anymore than anyone else prior to filing the paperwork and be held closer to the letter of the law.


Then other things factor in. Including things as mundane as initial appearance and perception.
Like it or not stereotypes play a role in influencing those that must make decisions.
A man coming home from work in a business suit forced to defend themselves may get treated differently than the same man changed into leathers out riding his Harley forced to defend himself stopped somewhere.



Location will also factor in. In front of your house, you may be more likely to get a break than in front of a bar.
Someone at their workplace or outside of it may get more of a break than during or after attending a local concert.
Places associated with problems or violence bias those responding into seeing everyone involved in something violent at or around them as more than likely part of the problem. They will be held closer to the letter of the law, while also getting the least benefit of the doubt in resulting police reports.
This means they are both more likely to get charged for things like illegally carrying, as well as more likely to get charged for murder and other serious charges related to the incident, and have reports written in a way more likely to result in conviction.

 

[heeler]

Over the years here in Houston there has been numerous justifiable shootings against bad guys by non CHL people that are obviously in violation of the law by carrying without said license but I dont remember hearing on the news or reading in media print the good guy being charged with unlawful carry.
Generally if the guy is no billed by the Grand Jury that's the last of it from what I gather.
Perhaps this is just a common sense Texas thing.
I don't know.

 

[Zoogster]

Texas allows people to have loaded available guns within vehicles without any permit.
This means many people in or around vehicles have ready access to loaded firearms, which can be and often are retrieved when the situation allows for it.
So many people that defend themselves with a firearm in public still had the firearm legally, or semi-legally, even absent any permit to carry.

Concealed carry is also relatively new. In previous times when there was no concealed carry option law enforcement were more likely to look the other way.
Some good guys had guns illegally.
Today with the readily available option of licensed concealed carry in many states that view seems to be changing even in places that are quire pro-gun. Good guys have permission and are licensed. Those carrying unlicensed are extra suspicious. Those carrying unlicensed and who just shot someone...