Concealed carry rifle?

[twoclones]

It does sound like something ugly may have been prevented with this arrest. Then again, with bond at $7,500 it may have been postponed.


<broken link removed>

$75K bail set for Va. man facing NJ weapon charges
By GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press Writer Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press Writer
12 mins ago

SOMERVILLE, N.J. – A New Jersey judge set bail Tuesday at $75,000 for a Virginia man facing charges after authorities seized rifles, a grenade launcher, a night vision scope and a map of a U.S. military facility from a motel room where he was staying.

Lloyd Woodson, 43, of Reston, Va., appeared briefly before Superior Court Judge John Pursel in Somerville on Tuesday afternoon, shackled and dressed in a jail jumpsuit.

He did not speak during the two-minute proceeding except to acknowledge the judge. No defense lawyer was present, and Woodson was not asked to enter a plea.

He would need to post a bond of only $7,500 to get out of jail as he awaits trial. People seen as major threats usually have a higher bail amount set; prosecutors have not said how close they believe Woodson came to using his weapons.

FBI agent Bryan Travers said it appears he did not have terrorist connections, and he has not been charged with any federal crimes.

Woodson was arrested in Branchburg early Monday by police responding to a complaint about a suspicious person.

Somerset County Prosecutor Wayne Forrest said Woodson was wearing a bulletproof vest and carrying a semiautomatic Bushmaster rifle concealed under his green, military-style jacket when officers encountered him at a Quick Chek store in Branchburg shortly before 4 a.m. Monday.

According to a court document, a police officer asked him if he was OK. He responded: "I'm getting some food for my kids," then fled.

Officers chased him out of the convenience store and found him hiding in bushes. They tackled him when he tried to run again. The officers used pepper spray to subdue him.

Forrest said the rifle Woodson was carrying had a defaced serial number and had been altered to fire .50-caliber ammunition.

Detectives later searched the room where Woodson had been staying at the Red Mill Inn in Branchburg. Forrest said they seized another Bushmaster .308-caliber semiautomatic rifle with a defaced serial number, a 37 mm Cobray grenade launcher, a second bulletproof vest, a Russian-made night vision scope, a police scanner, the maps, and hundreds of rounds of .50-caliber and .308-caliber ammunition.

Woodson was being held at the Somerset County jail. Prosecutor's spokesman Jack Bennett said his office did not know whether Woodson had a lawyer. Tom Rosenthal, a spokesman for the state public defender's office, said it had not been assigned his case.

Forrest said investigators from the FBI and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives have joined the probe.

Read More

 

[matt_w]

Sounds like he wanted to get caught if he was walking around with a rifle under his "military style" coat.

 

[Cougfan2]

Sounds like he wanted to get caught if he was walking around with a rifle under his "military style" coat.

OMG! We have to ban dangerous "assault coats".

 

[matt_w]

OMG! We have to ban dangerous "assault coats".

At least it was green. If it was black it would be classified as a "tactical style" coat, and the cops would of had to shoot him on sight!

By the way, some of this story is sensationalized. "a 37 mm Cobray grenade launcher". I think this is actually a flare launcher.

Cobray Long Slide Police Model 37MM Flare Launcher with M203 Top Handgard and M203 Leaf Sight. Mounts under AR-15 or M16 in exact manner as the M203 Grenade Launcher.
...
Will shoot 37MM Star Burst Distress Flares, Smoke Grenades and reloads.

 

[NK777]

Okay so this guy was a wacko but why did the police pursue him before they had anything except that he was a weird looking dude? I'm not saying a lot of people arn't lucky this guy is off the streets or anything, I'm just saying it's weird.

 

[twoclones]

I'd say the police approached him because they were called and they pursued him because he fled. Apparently he hadn't seen the Flex Your Rights video which says "Never run from the police."

 

[Member 5605]

What an idiot.

 

[phathom]

That brings up a good question I've been wondering about a concealed long gun.

To my understanding, if you do not have a concealed weapons permit you cannot have any weapon (hand gun or long gun) in the passenger compartment of your vehicle loaded, but you can have it in your trunk or something where it is inaccessible to you while you are driving.

Does this apply if you have a concealed weapons permit, like are you able to keep a loaded rifle or shotgun in the passenger compartment, like behind the seat if you have a concealed weapons permit? I know you can have your handgun on you, but what about long guns? I assume you could presumably carry whatever you wanted loaded in your vehicle with a permit, but I just wanted clarification on this.

I also know you can open carry pretty much whatever you wanted in the state of oregon, with the exceptions of government offices and whatever, I know it's probably not the brightest thing to do, but could you say wear a shotgun or rifle on your back on a sling open carry, just walking around town legally?

BTW: Grenade Launcher!?!? Wow! I mean if it was a legitimate grenade launcher and not a flare gun that they blew out of proportion.

 

[Redcap]

That brings up a good question I've been wondering about a concealed long gun.

To my understanding, if you do not have a concealed weapons permit you cannot have any weapon (hand gun or long gun) in the passenger compartment of your vehicle loaded, but you can have it in your trunk or something where it is inaccessible to you while you are driving.

Does this apply if you have a concealed weapons permit, like are you able to keep a loaded rifle or shotgun in the passenger compartment, like behind the seat if you have a concealed weapons permit? I know you can have your handgun on you, but what about long guns? I assume you could presumably carry whatever you wanted loaded in your vehicle with a permit, but I just wanted clarification on this.

I also know you can open carry pretty much whatever you wanted in the state of oregon, with the exceptions of government offices and whatever, I know it's probably not the brightest thing to do, but could you say wear a shotgun or rifle on your back on a sling open carry, just walking around town legally?

BTW: Grenade Launcher!?!? Wow! I mean if it was a legitimate grenade launcher and not a flare gun that they blew out of proportion.

37mm is NOT a grenade launcher.

 

[Gunner3456]

14A.60.010 Possession of a Loaded Firearm in a Public Place. - Printable Version

A. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm.


B. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm and that firearm's clip or magazine, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the clip or magazine.

C. The following are exceptions and constitute affirmative defenses to a violation of this Section:

1. A police officer or other duly appointed peace officers, whether active or honorably retired.

2. A member of the military in the performance of official duty.

3. A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

4. A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building under ORS 166.370.

5. A government employee authorized or required by his or her employment or office to carry firearms.

6. A person summoned by a police officer to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace, while such person is actually engaged in assisting the officer.

7. A merchant who possesses or is engaged in lawfully transporting unloaded firearms as merchandise.

8. Organizations which are by law authorized to purchase or receive weapons from the United States or from this state.

9. Duly authorized military or civil organizations while parading, or their members when going to and from the places of meeting of their organization.

10. A corrections officer while transporting or accompanying an individual convicted of or arrested for an offense and confined in a place of incarceration or detention while outside the confines of the place of incarceration or detention.

11. Persons travelling to and from an established target range, whether public or private, for the purpose of practicing shooting targets at the target ranges.

12. Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.

13. A person authorized by permit of the Chief of Police to possess a loaded firearm, clip, or magazine in a public place in the City of Portland.

14. A security guard employed at a financial institution insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation while the security guard is on duty.
​

D. It is unlawful for any person who possesses a firearm, clip or magazine in or upon a public place, or while in a vehicle in a public place, to refuse to permit a police officer to inspect that firearm after the police officer has identified him or herself as a police officer. This Section does not apply to law enforcement officers or members of the military in the performance of official duties, nor persons licensed to carry a concealed handgun or persons authorized to possess a loaded firearm, clip or magazine while in or on a public building or court facility.

Well I guess none of us could ever be convicted. We would never "recklessly" fail to remove ammo. We would DELIBERATELY fail to remove it.

 

[Cougfan2]

Well I guess none of us could ever be convicted. We would never "recklessly" fail to remove ammo. We would DELIBERATELY fail to remove it.

Touche!

 

[tionico]

yeah, that "recklessly fail" bit is a tricky one, and I rather expect it to be the rope upon which a charged person will hang. Do they mean, as Gunner suggests, that one can "recklessly" fail to unload it, or "deliberately fail" to unload it, or "negligently fail" to unload it, or perhaps deliberately LOAD it and maintain it in such condition....

or do they mean that the simple fact it IS loaded involves "recklessness" in so doing?


I'm certain there are court precedents already set..... and my guess is, if you're caught with a loaded long gun and/or magazine in your car, or a public place, either you'd best have a specific hunting or fishing destination in view, or a concealed handgun permit. else you'll be checking out the welding craftsmanship at the local Greybar Hotel.

 

[Gunner3456]

From Findlaw.com:

"reckless adj. in both negligence and criminal cases, careless to the point of being heedless of the consequences ("grossly" negligent). Most commonly this refers to the traffic misdemeanor "reckless driving." It can also refer to use of firearms (shooting a gun in public place), explosives, or heavy equipment."

I think the prosecutor would have his hands full in court.

If the legislature meant that all cases of leaving a gun loaded was automatically "reckless," then they could have left the (in this use adverb) out, and simply said - and see how the meaning changes by omitting just the one word "recklessly":

"A. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, having failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm."

 

[Buano]

14A.60.010 Possession of a Loaded Firearm in a Public Place. - Printable Version

A. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm.


B. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm and that firearm’s clip or magazine, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the clip or magazine.

C. The following are exceptions and constitute affirmative defenses to a violation of this Section:

1. A police officer or other duly appointed peace officers, whether active or honorably retired.

2. A member of the military in the performance of official duty.

3. A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

4. A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building under ORS 166.370.

5. A government employee authorized or required by his or her employment or office to carry firearms.

6. A person summoned by a police officer to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace, while such person is actually engaged in assisting the officer.

7. A merchant who possesses or is engaged in lawfully transporting unloaded firearms as merchandise.

8. Organizations which are by law authorized to purchase or receive weapons from the United States or from this state.

9. Duly authorized military or civil organizations while parading, or their members when going to and from the places of meeting of their organization.

10. A corrections officer while transporting or accompanying an individual convicted of or arrested for an offense and confined in a place of incarceration or detention while outside the confines of the place of incarceration or detention.

11. Persons travelling to and from an established target range, whether public or private, for the purpose of practicing shooting targets at the target ranges.

12. Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.

13. A person authorized by permit of the Chief of Police to possess a loaded firearm, clip, or magazine in a public place in the City of Portland.

14. A security guard employed at a financial institution insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation while the security guard is on duty.
​

D. It is unlawful for any person who possesses a firearm, clip or magazine in or upon a public place, or while in a vehicle in a public place, to refuse to permit a police officer to inspect that firearm after the police officer has identified him or herself as a police officer. This Section does not apply to law enforcement officers or members of the military in the performance of official duties, nor persons licensed to carry a concealed handgun or persons authorized to possess a loaded firearm, clip or magazine while in or on a public building or court facility.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

Well as a lawyer not licensed in that state I can only give my general impressions of such a law: It's crap.

An officer cannot arbitrarily stop people for inspection without running afoul of the 4th Amendment guarantees of no unreasonable search & seizure. He must have an articulable & reasonable suspicion of a crime to initiate a stop.

Ignoring the Constitutional right to be armed (most cops & legislatures do anyway), we are left with gibberish.

A cop has a right to inspect any gun unless you have a concealed carry permit, but he has no way of knowing you are without such a permit, so he never has grounds to initiate an inspection.

A loaded gun is illegal when the owner recklessly failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm — but only if not one of the exceptions carved out in the statute. The cop can't tell if you are not covered by one of the exceptions UNLESS YOU TELL HIM, so unless you immediately confess he has no grounds to even stop a person & ask questions.

Recklessly is needed for most sections. It's reckless to have a gun unloaded if it's needed!

What's left? An ambiguous piece of legislative crap that our Supreme Court would likely strike as violating the Second Amendment, and under which stops are likely to all be unconstitutional. Yes, crap.

What state has such a stupid law??

 

[tionico]

welll said, Gunner, but I'm still getting my Oregon concealed handgun license, at least in part so I'll always have that first affirmative defense against the charge of "recklessly" failing to unload the magazine, despite the FACT that, if I have it loaded, its cause I fully INTENDED to have it so.

Lawyers cost too much, and I absolutely HATE feeding them. And prosecutors are merely lawyers hired by the revenue hungry jurisdiction that would have arrested me.......

as I always say" DON"T feed the bears, ANY of em.

 

[PinkhamR]

Does New Jersey even have a CCL law ??? I doubt they allow open carry there. JMO

 

[Gunner3456]

&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;

Well as a lawyer not licensed in that state I can only give my general impressions of such a law: It's crap.

An officer cannot arbitrarily stop people for inspection without running afoul of the 4th Amendment guarantees of no unreasonable search & seizure. He must have an articulable & reasonable suspicion of a crime to initiate a stop.

Ignoring the Constitutional right to be armed (most cops & legislatures do anyway), we are left with gibberish.

A cop has a right to inspect any gun unless you have a concealed carry permit, but he has no way of knowing you are without such a permit, so he never has grounds to initiate an inspection.

A loaded gun is illegal when the owner recklessly failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm &#8212; but only if not one of the exceptions carved out in the statute. The cop can't tell if you are not covered by one of the exceptions UNLESS YOU TELL HIM, so unless you immediately confess he has no grounds to even stop a person & ask questions.

Recklessly is needed for most sections. It's reckless to have a gun unloaded if it's needed!

What's left? An ambiguous piece of legislative crap that our Supreme Court would likely strike as violating the Second Amendment, and under which stops are likely to all be unconstitutional. Yes, crap.

What state has such a stupid law??

Good info, thanks, and good point about the alternative possibility of "Reckless."

As to which state, Sheepdog posted it and he's from Oregon, but I suspect this might be a draconian City of Portland ordinance, now that I think about it. He or someone else will have to tell us.

Oregon itself has very gun friendly laws, is a "must issue" CWP state and the wording in our constitution is even better than the US constitution for the right to keep and bear arms. There's none of that "well regulated militia" debate.

 

[Buano]

New Jersey has a concealed carry law but I don't remember any law against a loaded firearm in public.

 

[Gunner3456]

As I read it, opencarry.org says you can't open carry in NJ without also having a CHL. They say you have to be wealthy or connected to get one of those. They rank NJ as one of the top 5
most restricted states. <broken link removed>

 

[tionico]

I checked, and the quoted statute restricting the carry in public of loaded weapons IS a City of Portland, Oregon, statute. It has no force anywhere else in the state. I'm not sure the state laws...... so would have to check them.

Yes, I've heard New Jersey is a very restrictive state.. right down there with California, New York, Illinois, and a few other nazilike places. Sheesh, you'd think firearms roamed the streets at night, just WAITING for opportunity to pick themselves up, point at something, and squeeze off a few rounds just to be diablolical. I hope MacDonald goes the way we hope it does.... it will but done to most such over-restrictive situations.