CHL Related Court Cases

Another fall is upon us and such beautiful weather. Hunters are headed for the woods, fishermen are headed for the streams and some just out to enjoy the changes and colors. Still doing 3 to 4 CHL classes a month with good attendance – we have a ‘Learn to Shoot’ in one month and a Sharpening Shooting Abilities in the next.

Have put off this letter as there just seems to be so much going on it is hard to decide what actually will affect our carrying and what is just fluff.

Might not affect our carrying, but just a heads up as in June the decision on the Bruce Abramski case definitely put a different thought process on those who purchase guns. Mr. Abramski purchased a handgun knowingly for his Uncle who could have purchased the gun but was not present where the gun was being sold. The Uncle forwarded a money order for him to make the purchase and he forwarded the gun to his Uncle. He stated on the 4473 that he was the “actual transferee/buyer” and the court held that he knowingly made a false statement “with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale” of a gun under §922(a)(6). Pp. 7–22.

The court held that he did make a misrepresentation under §922(a)(6). Pp. 7–22 saying that the statute would mean little if a would-be gun buyer could evade them all simply by enlisting the aid of an intermediary to execute the paperwork on his behalf. The Court further held that the dealers record which must be kept under §924(a)(1)(A). Chapter 44 showing the “actual buyer” were false. Therefore his “straw buyer” conviction was upheld.

Another sign showing that we need to be cautious in filling out Federal Forms for gun purchases and keep good records of our actions and why they are legal. Hopefully this can be appealed or something maybe on “intent in the situation” but it could be a difficult fight.

In the McCullen v. Coakley case much concern was made about a person who I might ask to stop impeding me and stop shouting at me, but continues to come towards me loudly and aggressively...does “stand your ground” protect you.

Shooting someone who is simply impeding you, shouting at you, and moving towards you loudly and aggressively (absent any visible means of causing death or injury), is probably a crime and might be “murder” or attempted murder, aggravated assault or at the least involuntary manslaughter.

“Stand your ground” means that, if you reasonably believe that you face imminent death, serious bodily injury, rape, kidnapping, or (in some states) robbery, you can use deadly force against the assailant. In non-stand-your-ground states when you face such threats outside your home, (and, in some states, your business), you can only use deadly force against the assailant if you lack a perfectly safe avenue of retreat.

You are NOT allowed to shoot someone who is simply shouting at you or moving towards you loudly and aggressively. The actor must reasonably believe he is in fear of imminent death, serious bodily injury, rape, kidnapping, or (in some states) robbery. In your home possibly, but not on a public street. Again we come to that “reasonable man”. The prosecution might try to show that your fear was not just unreasonable for the situation but was insincere or planned.

Therefore you want to choose your fights, if possible look at the whole circumstances, and then get “good” representation and legal advice. In Texas under PC §9.31. SELF-DEFENSE the actor’s belief that the force was immediately necessary is presumed to be reasonable if he knew or had reason to believe the other person was unlawfully and with force entering or attempting to enter or with force was removing or attempting to remove the actor from his occupied habitation, vehicle or place of business or employment, was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery or aggravated robbery as long as he did not provoke the fight, was not engaged in criminal activity other than a Class C misdemeanor or traffic regulation. You cannot use deadly force in response to verbal provocation alone. Further, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

We find that most people who decide to carry, complete the process of study and get a CHL License, and begin to carry are more alert to situations around them and become more cautious of the areas they go into because of the reminder of the handgun and its responsibility.

Open carry may be the next project in Texas and we will not oppose it but personally we feel that carrying concealed is a much wiser choice as there is a lot of public out there who do not like and some who are just afraid of guns. We do not want to become a target because of our gun nor do we want to be part of the problem for a lot of nervous people. Wish we could leave the laws alone for a while and let the public see that we are responsible in what we do. So far the licensees as a whole have done well in their actions. Always a few who will push the envelope but very few actually have lost their licenses because of misuse.

November 4th is the day to vote. Be sure you check out the candidates in your area and vote wisely. Could be a lot of changes in the near future so keep alert and involved. Thanks to all of our public servants who strive to keep Texas great and a place we all want to live and a special Thanks to all our Military, active, reserves and veterans, who keep this country strong and respected throughout the world.

Ross and Dottie Bransford Bransford Inc. d/b/a chl-texas.com 512/750 9843 or 512/627 3501

www.chl-texas.com Email ross@chl-texas.com

Comments are closed.