[Cider Jim]

I thought Medic might like reading this.

Forest man charged after accidentally shooting self in restaurant
A Forest man who accidentally shot himself in the thigh with a concealed firearm Saturday night inside Waterstone Pizza on Jefferson Street has been charged with three misdemeanors.

Wayne Meredith Latham, 56, was charged with recklessly handling a firearm, willfully discharging a firearm in the city and carrying a concealed handgun in a restaurant after consuming alcohol.

http://www2.newsadvance.com/news/2010/s ... ar-502172/

[PAmedic]

what a muh-roon.

this is why God created holsters.

yet lifting a cellie gets you a felony charge

[From the class of 09]

All the posters on the N&A always make me laugh. Everything is political. It's always eithe a dems or reps fault. Why can't we just blame it on this guy being dumb?

[Schfourteenteen]

what a muh-roon.

this is why God created holsters.

yet lifting a cellie gets you a felony charge

And sweatpants.

[matshark]

as a concealed/open carry advocate, i think he should've ended up with felony charges for this, but thats just me.

for starters, he ignored a CLEARLY marked sign that prohibited firearms in the restaurant.

I've heard that he was consuming alcohol (hearsay until i see it reported in the news), which is another crime.

then he discharged a firearm in the city limits.

if he gets felony charges, they can be lessened to misdemeanors. if he gets misdemeanors, well, they cant be upgraded to felony.

lets not forget (as was mentioned earlier) that this guy is an idiot for not having a holster. they were created to prevent JUST SUCH AN OCCURRENCE! if he's going to carry in his pocket, he can at least get a soft holster that prevents anything (such as keys or fingers) from going through the trigger guard.

im guessing the gun in question was probably a glock from my understanding of how the incident went down.

[Hold My Own]

PA correct me if I'm wrong but there are no legal charges for taking a gun into a location (not gov property) that has a sign on the door saying no weapons. Essentially it is a rule by the private property owners and they can only punish you with what pertains to their property (ban you from the premise)


I remember something like this in my course to get my concealed. He actually used banks as an example.

[From the class of 09]

PA correct me if I'm wrong but there are no legal charges for taking a gun into a location (not gov property) that has a sign on the door saying no weapons. Essentially it is a rule by the private property owners and they can only punish you with what pertains to their property (ban you from the premise)


I remember something like this in my course to get my concealed. He actually used banks as an example.

sounds like you need to retake your class...

List of places you can't conceal carry includes:

§18.2-308 (O.): Private property when prohibited by the owner of the property, or where posted as prohibited.


http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms_Res ... fultoCarry

[PAmedic]

PA correct me if I'm wrong but there are no legal charges for taking a gun into a location (not gov property) that has a sign on the door saying no weapons. Essentially it is a rule by the private property owners and they can only punish you with what pertains to their property (ban you from the premise)


I remember something like this in my course to get my concealed. He actually used banks as an example.

Hard to comment as VA and PA law differ (to what degree, I don't really know)

In PA, owners of any private establishment may restrict firearms. Now whether a violation of that consititutes a criminal offense or a civil offense is up to the local DA. Where I live, they tend to deal that stuff down.

[matshark]

i was of the opinion that it was a crime to carry into any establishment when it was expressly forbidden with a sign on the door. i would think that to not make it a crime would be to abridge the rights of the property owner. however, i would be interested in seeing if the property owner would be liable for providing security for patrons when they disarm them upon entering the premises.

[From the class of 09]

seriously how is this still a question? Its illegal....read people

http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms_Res ... fultoCarry

[matshark]

seriously how is this still a question? Its illegal....read people

http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms_Res ... fultoCarry

yep, 2 misdemeanors right there.

[JDUB]

as a concealed/open carry advocate, i think he should've ended up with felony charges for this, but thats just me.

for starters, he ignored a CLEARLY marked sign that prohibited firearms in the restaurant.

I've heard that he was consuming alcohol (hearsay until i see it reported in the news), which is another crime.

then he discharged a firearm in the city limits.

if he gets felony charges, they can be lessened to misdemeanors. if he gets misdemeanors, well, they cant be upgraded to felony.

lets not forget (as was mentioned earlier) that this guy is an idiot for not having a holster. they were created to prevent JUST SUCH AN OCCURRENCE! if he's going to carry in his pocket, he can at least get a soft holster that prevents anything (such as keys or fingers) from going through the trigger guard.

im guessing the gun in question was probably a glock from my understanding of how the incident went down.

you think it should be a felony for discharging in city limits? I think if a felony it would be for the alcohol consumption, but he probably suffered enough with the bullet in the leg and public embarrassment. He'll forever be known as the guy that shot himself in the leg at waterstone while drinking. that's more embarrassing than going to jail IMO.

I agree on the holster thing. anyone carrying without a holster has an accidental discharge coming.

I must have missed something- why was it a glock?

[PAmedic]

Glock = no external safety

[JDUB]

That doesn't make it a glock. A lot of brands have guns with no external safety. I have a ruger without one and my dad has a S&W M&P without one.

[PAmedic]

I don't disagree with you. I'm just advancing a theory as to how MATSHARK may have arrived at that conclusion