Hypothetical in Mass, involves Bourbon

Atlantis

NES Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2018
Messages
1,681
Likes
2,814
Feedback: 4 / 0 / 0
Okay, so my understanding is that massprudence says carrying and alcohol are basically zero tolerance policy. Frankly, this is logical to me. No need to mix those two intentionally.

What about defense of your home? You are enjoying a nice bourbon, sitting on the couch with the misses, and you hear someone start pounding on your door. You aren't wasted, but you aren't sober. You have a chance to unlock your properly stored firearm and retrieve it just before someone kicks in your door. You neutralize the threat, and PD arrive on scene and ask if you've been drinking.

A) I assume generally speaking the best advice is to plead the 5th and call for a lawyer.

B) Lets say you are dumb enough to say "yes" or that you have the smell on your breath, etc. Lets say you blow a 0.1?

Is it the same charge as carrying under the influence? Just bad timing and a hurdle for your defense case?

Is drinking at home a liability?
 
I'm sorry Officer, I will not answer any questions without my lawyer present.

He/she will say " you are not under arrest so why don't you talk to me"

The proper response, again is I'm sorry Officer, I will not answer any questions without my lawyer present.

Chances are the alcohol would be more of an issue in a wrongful death lawsuit than a criminal action, but if it is the Officers report, it will get into the discovery in a civil suit.

Reckless Endangerment is not a charge I want tacked on by the D.A., or in a Grand Jury indictment.
 
I need to drill that into my skull. Respectfully declining to answer any questions is far better than attempting to assume what the right answer is or getting cute with the truth.

Probably /Thread
 
As stated already

"Officer I'll be happy to answer any questions and cooperate with your investigation once my attorney is present".

My thoughts......if it was a "good shoot".....meaning there is evidence to threat of grave bodily harm or death that warranted lethal force response from the home owner with no collateral damage......what difference does it make if the home owner had 3 fingers of bourbon in him? Now the da may feel differently......that's just my thought.
 
Legally there is no difference having a drink at a bar/restaurant vs. in your home. It will be made into an issue by the DA and you need a damn good criminal defense attorney who also knows firearms laws or you will likely be convicted.
 
As stated already

"Officer I'll be happy to answer any questions and cooperate with your investigation once my attorney is present".

My thoughts......if it was a "good shoot".....meaning there is evidence to threat of grave bodily harm or death that warranted lethal force response from the home owner with no collateral damage......what difference does it make if the home owner had 3 fingers of bourbon in him? Now the da may feel differently......that's just my thought.

Okay lets keep the chat going.

Someone pounds on your door. You retrieve your firearm. You try to communicate through locked door. No avail, only more pounding. The door is kicked open, the threat crosses your threshold, they have no visible weapons in hand, to wit, they are unarmed. But they just kicked your door in, and are rushing you. Do you consider ending that threat to be a "good shoot"? How would you defend that situation in court? Drinking or not, are we required to permit an unarmed attacker to kick in our door and acost us?

Legally there is no difference having a drink at a bar/restaurant vs. in your home. It will be made into an issue by the DA and you need a damn good criminal defense attorney who also knows firearms laws or you will likely be convicted.

So despite being locked/stored properly. The moment you retrieve said firearm, you are now "carrying" and subject to influence laws? Aka a STRICT reading of the law says you are prohibited from retrieving a firearm from storage while under the influence, regardless of the presence of a threat?
 
Do what every good alcoholic does, and have a good story ready...

"After the home invader rushed towards my wife with a Ginsu that he found in my kitchen, I shot him twice in the chest and once in the head because his arm was still moving with the knife in it."

1588304261672.png

"Then I took a big belt of Old Grandad, right after dialing 911 to steady my nerves"...

1588304123115.png

Pro tip: Practice not slurring...
 
Last edited:
Do what every good alcoholic does and have a story ready...

"After the home invader rushed towards my wife with a Ginsu he found in my kitchen, I shot him twice in the chest and once in the head because his arm was still moving with the knife in it."

View attachment 353229

"Then I took a big belt of Old Grandad, right after dialing 911 to steady my nerves"...

View attachment 353228
I actually have a few Ginsu knives and they are awesome
 
OK I am posting this from Florida, we have a very strong " stand your ground law", if someone kicked my door in Florida, I could drop them where they stood and with almost certainty not be criminally charged.... alcohol in my system or not.


Now remember Florida has some strange laws regarding guns in bar rooms but I digress.



New Hampshire.... there is going to be some legal hassle, but if the evidence is a kicked door and you can convincingly have your lawyer argue that you were in fear of your life or imminent grave danger, then chances are it won't be prosecuted.


Now Massachusetts? Charles Manson could come thru your door with an axe in one hand and a chain saw in the other and you are going to be cuffed and stuffed.


Very few self defense shootings in MA go away without some sort of court action.

The easiest way to get convicted after what would normally be considered a justified use of deadly force IS TO TALK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER
 
Drinking and carrying a firearm is frowned upon? f*** me.

In Florida you can CCW in a restaurant, if the restaurant has a bar you can not sit at the bar, or be in the bar area while carrying a weapon

If it is a bar and not a restaurant, CCW is a big no no

remember open carry in Florida is a bigger no no
 
We've been through this before - never any good reason to answer police questions if you are even remotely a potential suspect. Its not a matter of answering questions with a lawyer present, its just "I don't want to talk to you" - if there is something the police need to know which exonerates you, a lawyer can tell them if need be without you accidentally incriminating yourself.

I don't think they can mandate a test for intoxication either, and this isn't like driving where a refusal has an automatic consequence. For sure, if you resist/refuse until they literally hold you down to take your blood, then there is no way to make it seem like you agreed to it - if they broke any law in the process that evidence is toast.
 
The MA courts have held that being under the legal drive BAC limit (.08) is ***NOT*** a defense against a carrying under the influence charge because guns are more dangeous than cars.

Yes, really.
if there is something the police need to know which exonerates you, a lawyer can tell them if need be without you accidentally incriminating yourself.
They cannot twist a lawyers words to use against you. For example if you are inaccurate as to time or distance, or make a mistake about how long you were at the gun shop (if using that as an alibi) the police can use the inaccuracy of that statement against you. Not so if your attorney says the same thing on your behalf.

Plus can you thread the needle? Do not act so calm that they claim you had the demeanor of a stone cold killer, but also do not act so agitated that you were out of control? Not be to so consistent in every answer as to appear as if it is a carefully worked out story, but not so inconsistent as to have those differences uses as proof of intentional deception?

Use precise wording "I invoke my right not to answer questions and wish an attorney present", so you are invoking both your 5A rights and the right to counsel. The courts have become increasingly demanding that the subject must affirmatively invoke the right to remain silent, and it is not implicitly invoked by ones actions. If you waive that right, and subsequently invoke it, the point at which you invoke it can be used against you (as in "He exercised his right to remain silent as soon as we asked him if he knew he was carrying a pre-ban mag in his gun'".
 
Last edited:
"If you've done nothing wrong, there's no reason not to talk to us" is a lie.

Unless you're a witness to someone else's problem - you're a potential suspect - and most of us are incapable of doing anything other than talking ourselves into more trouble.

A couple of friends of mine are cops, and we were talking about this one day. He pointed out that he's had hundreds, perhaps several thousand interactions with suspects. He's used to interviewing people in stressful situations - most of those people aren't used to being interviewed in those same stressful situations. For most of us, a stressful interview is a job interview - now think about what it means to be way more stressed and the penalty of saying something stupid isn't a lost opportunity - it's a court appearance and possibly a jail sentence.

And if firearms are involved you get to start off with your guns and permit possibly being seized. I lost my permit in CT for being charged, not convicted. I started a conversation with the prosecuting attorney when I thought it was going to be simply a matter of fines - I terminated it when he said he intended to put me in jail. I walked out and hired the best attorney I could find. If the same thing happened today - I'd walk into that initial conversation with an attorney. I was "lucky", my charges were nolled. It still took me about 8 years to get my permit back.

It's difficult because most of us think that we can have a "reasonable conversation" - and "straighten everything out". That's just not correct when the police are considering you as a suspect - and if you've just shot someone - you're way past the point of being a "suspect" or "person of interest".

In the OP's scenario - it's simple - STFU and get an attorney.
 
I think these threads do more harm than good. Fact of the matter is in that instant you need to act to save your life or your families lives. At that moment I don't give a shit what the gov does to me, I just want to save them. Having comments from internet lawyers bouncing around in your head telling you how f***ed you are, could slow down your response/reaction. YMMV
 
Back
Top Bottom