Article: Man Charged - Gun Fired after concert

[ejector]

What leaps out is in this article is intoxicated..

I believe it was it was TXI who mentioned one drink - and you could be considered intoxicated, not to mention toast when it comes to media.

Correct me if I am wrong - but as I recall TXI mentioned there is no set limit to being intoxicated, so assume it's soley up to a LEO to determin if you are intoxicated.

Assume weapon discharge and mis-handling of weapon a person could argue for a light punishment, but alcohol and folks like MADD on the rampage.. no dice.

Queston to ask yourself when you're carrying, before you order that "one beer" - is it really worth it ?

http://www.wlwt.com/news/14284649/detail.html

ANDERSON TOWNSHIP -- A man was charged after police said he accidentally fired a gun in the parking lot of Riverbend Music Center on Friday night.

Jeffrey Stringfellow, 26, was at the sold-out Brad Paisley concert and after the show ended he returned to his car.

That's when police said he took a pistol out of his glove box and while charging it, he accidentally shot himself in the foot.

Stringfellow was transported to the hospital and treated for his injuries.

He was then released to police and charged with using weapons while intoxicated and improperly handling a firearm.

Police said he did have a valid concealed weapon permit.

Stringfellow will be arraigned on those charges Monday morning.

[frankie_the_yankee]

Where does it say the guy only had one drink? Maybe he had a number of drinks. Maybe he was intoxicated.

And nobody ever said it is "solely up to the LEO" to determine if someone is intoxicated. There are certain criteria that must be met in order to establish that under the law. Stephan Rothstein articulated some of these criteria in one of his posts on the subject.

It's not like you're automatically intoxicated just because the LEO says you are.

One drink does not make a person with normal response to alcohol intoxicated.

[Sangiovese]

Musta been one of those new-fangled electric pistols, or else he wouldn't have had to "charge it."

[seamusTX]

Do they sell alcohol at concerts these days?

Alcohol is far from the only thing that can cause intoxication.

- Jim

[HighVelocity]

The police on-scene may not have enen known that Stringfellow was intoxicated but when he had bloodwork at the hospital the police would have to be told about the alchohol content in his blood.

[frankie_the_yankee]

Another thing that has been overlooked so far is that this guy apparently unloaded the gun when he stashed it in the car. Why would anyone do this? When I disarm, I simply take my holstered gun, fully loaded, holster and all, and stash it in a hidden place (like the glovebox, console, etc.). I don't unload it.

If someone were worried that their car might be broken in to at a particular location where they would have to leave it, they should just leave their gun at home (if they know they can't take it inside).

Nothing is gained by unloading it.

[seamusTX]

Another thing that has been overlooked so far is that this guy apparently unloaded the gun when he stashed it in the car. Why would anyone do this?

The answer is that they don't want to leave a loaded weapon available to a potential thief. Some people take the magazine with them. Some take the slide.

I agree that loading and unloading in a vehicle is risky. Furthermore, a concert is rich picking for car thieves, because they know people will be away for hours.

- Jim

[stevie_d_64]

Another amazing and poorly written article of a shooting incident...

What amazes me is the assumptions of all the folks involved in this "investigation" that results in a rather quick demise of this persons freedom...

Sure, there is no doubt that the person shot themselves in the foot...I bet that hurt like the dickens! I'm sure they had a good time at the Brad Paisley concert, where I am sure there was nothing more than alcoholic beverages floating around there in some way shape or form...I don't think there was much puff-puff-passing going on there at that event...(just my opinion...)

The guy apparently was not carrying or in posession of a firearm while supposedly taking in "drink" (but that is certainly only a technicality)...

Also, when we hear of more serious incidences of supposed intoxication that involves the injury or death of people in an accident or other incident, the toxicology results (made public) are always many days or weeks after the incident...But in this case a guy comes in with a hole in his foot, they do a full panel screening on him, and boom...He is charged with being in possession of a firearm while intoxicated...

Never mind he was "first and foremost" behind the wheel of a vehicle preparing to start it and drive off in the "same" apparent level of intoxication....

The fact that he shot himself in the foot is only what stopped him from driving off and potentially having another type of incident if we are to believe the fast and furious results of this investigation...

Question...I have not had this happen to me, but if you are injured in a discharge of a firearm, (whether it is self-inflicted or not) and you are being treated at a hospital for that injury, is it common practice to automatically (without your concent "or warrant" while being treated) to have blood drawn for the specific purpose of determining intoxication and or being under the influence in this case???

Is probable cause enough to warrant the interruption (however slight) of critical medical treatment in any degree in an investigation like this???

I dunno...Sunday mornings tend to bring out some annoying tendencies in my deductive reasoning skills...Or something...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

I am not excusing the negligence on the part of the injured, nor am I being overly critical of the investigation...

What my concern is that the assumptions of the players involved is what is potentially driving a great many intrusions into our lives and we can't seem to get common sense, or respect for our rights to triumph over what is being chipped away more and more everyday...

When things like this happen the tone I see in the media and non-carrying public in general is a continued personification that all of us in this community are a bunch of drunk and irresponsible wannabees...

[stevie_d_64]

Another thing that has been overlooked so far is that this guy apparently unloaded the gun when he stashed it in the car. Why would anyone do this? When I disarm, I simply take my holstered gun, fully loaded, holster and all, and stash it in a hidden place (like the glovebox, console, etc.). I don't unload it.

If someone were worried that their car might be broken in to at a particular location where they would have to leave it, they should just leave their gun at home (if they know they can't take it inside).

Nothing is gained by unloading it.

This is also why we have discussed at great length the methods to further slow down the inevitable thief in this case by getting a supplemental gunsafe in your vehicle or home...

Most folks here get the idea and we have had fantastic results from those discussions...

I think we do very well in that regard,but there is still a great majority outside discussions like this that don't...And thats ok, eventually something will happen to get folks to thinking about this type of security...

[seamusTX]

Also, when we hear of more serious incidences of supposed intoxication that involves the injury or death of people in an accident or other incident, the toxicology results (made public) are always many days or weeks after the incident...But in this case a guy comes in with a hole in his foot, they do a full panel screening on him, and boom...He is charged with being in possession of a firearm while intoxicated...

I don't see any mention of blood tests.

A police officer can determine that a person is intoxicated by his or her behavior (staggering, slurred speech, etc.).

Sometimes people admit to drinking or taking drugs. There was a story in the news this week about a guy who was driving around drunk, calling 911, and saying things like, "I'm hammered. Come and get me."

- Jim

[Liberty]

Never mind he was "first and foremost" behind the wheel of a vehicle preparing to start it and drive off in the "same" apparent level of intoxication....

I didn't se anything indicating he was going to drive. Do people really go to concerts alone? Maybe it really is a stretch but I assumed from the story someone else must have been with him.

[frankie_the_yankee]

Here's another story on this. At least we know what kind of gun he had, and where it was stashed.

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ ... 1056/COL02

A 26-year-old country music fan from Nicholasville, Ky., faces two gun charges after he shot himself in the left foot Friday while loading his semi-automatic pistol in his car in the parking lot of Riverbend Music Center following a Brad Paisley concert.

Jeffrey Stringfellow held a Kentucky Concealed Weapon permit but accidentally fired his Rock Island .45 caliber pistol after he took it from the glove box of his 2002 Honda Civic.

Stringfellow was transported to University Hospital by an Anderson Township life squad. Following treatment, he was taken to the Hamilton County Justice Center.

He was charged with using a weapon while intoxicated and improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle.

Still no info as to what cause the cops to charge him with "using a waepon while intoxicated".

[Right2Carry]

Taking blood from you and using it to determine alcohol content without your permission? Couldn't that be construed as a violation of your 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination?

I have always believed that you could invoke the 5th when asked to perform any field sobriety test, breathilizer, or blood test. I may be wrong on this but I would never take one of those tests and would invoke my 5th amendment rights under the constitution. Sure I might have my license suspended for 6 months to a year for failing to do so, but hey that is better than a DUI conviction. This is only my opinion which most of the time doesn't amount to much.

[seamusTX]

Taking blood from you and using it to determine alcohol content without your permission? Couldn't that be construed as a violation of your 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination?

Convictions based on blood tests that were taken without a warrant have been upheld in state courts. Police have some latitude in performing warrantless searches if they have probable cause.

Let's try this one more time: Neither of these news articles says they guy was charged on the basis of a blood test. I searched Google news, and there are no other articles about the incident.

- Jim

[ejector]

Where does it say the guy only had one drink? Maybe he had a number of drinks. Maybe he was intoxicated.

And nobody ever said it is "solely up to the LEO" to determine if someone is intoxicated. There are certain criteria that must be met in order to establish that under the law. Stephan Rothstein articulated some of these criteria in one of his posts on the subject.

It's not like you're automatically intoxicated just because the LEO says you are.

One drink does not make a person with normal response to alcohol intoxicated.

So what is the definition of intoxication? I believe it's any introduction of alcohol. My point is even if he had one light beer,if you commit an offense you betcha "intoxication" will highlight your case/media. Hence my statement - is it worth the one beer when you are carrying?

Hopefully someone smarter than me can help with respect to LEO making the call ---> in Texas doesn't the LEO onsite have the power to make the intoxication call?