Hmmm, no arrest made according to the report. That implies he was lawfully carrying.They don’t need reasons. They are (mostly) rabid anti-gunners who will infringe at every opportunity and then some.
YupThey don’t need reasons. They are (mostly) rabid anti-gunners who will infringe at every opportunity and then some.
I think there was no arrest because he was not apprehended, not because he was lawfully carrying. Even a lawful carrier would be in violation of several laws in this case.Hmmm, no arrest made according to the report. That implies he was lawfully carrying.
They don’t need reasons. They are (mostly) rabid anti-gunners who will infringe at every opportunity and then some.
Reckless EndangermentThe news report doesn’t jive with your statement. They know who it is and don’t have charges they can charge him with.
Which laws do you think he violated?
Or quietly, either.dude shouldn't be aloud to carry anymore.
Thanks Biggfoot44. I was thinking of this but I wasn’t sureReckless Endangerment
I hate when that happens.Maybe the gun went off by itself…
Besides reckless endangerment? Unlawful discharge of a firearm perhaps, unlawful discharge of a firearm within city limits...perhaps?The news report doesn’t jive with your statement. They know who it is and don’t have charges they can charge him with.
Which laws do you think he violated?