Well, I think it's nothing. She misplaced the gun. Lots of folks misplace stuff. Innocent mistakes happen all the time. Anybody wiith a healthy mind would know that and forgive her.

The screeners made a mistake too. Maybe they should also be charged with a felony, and have their name in the paper. Or, life could go on without spending days being indignant about it, I think. Nothing happened, it's still nothng. "Gun crimes" are intended to prosecute folks we happen to catch BEFORE they act out. That doesn't apply here.

I must disagree with tman, in that there should not be metal detectors and screeners in the first place. We should have the ability to move about our government without hassle. This type of security stops nothing, other than allowing the screeners access to a nice selections of pocket knives and nail clippers. But, hey, that is just me.

While I agree in theory there are a whole BUNCH of hills to die on before anybody gets to fight for that one.

I think that indignation is being sublimated and laid on a poor lady who . . . hey lets face it, had a reason to go to a courthouse (and I don't know anybody not paid to be there who is ever thrilled about it and not somewhat preoccupied. She was either a victim, a witness, there to pay a fine in these difficult finacial times or she was related to somebody, in any case court is somewhat disruptive & traumatic to folks who have infrequent contacts with "the system" by merit of their lawabiddingness). Put another way, had the screeners done their jobs, she could have taken her hardware out and locked it in the car after saying adequate "holy crap and mea culpas, here check my permit, thanks" and that should have been the end of it. But the screeners weren't doing their jobs & somebody has to PAY. It is classic sublimation.

Interesting theory, but let's keep on point. She seems to have broken the law, they did not.

"she seems to have broken the law". It also seems accidental. The "law" is not perfect, that's why we hire Ofiicers, Prosectuors and Judges to administer the law. They are supposed to excercise discretion on behalf of the rest of us. Otherwise we could just have a bureaucrat with a computer decide her fate.

It's unforunate when these "professionals" are too insecure to use their discretion in such an obvious situation. A traffic violation is more serious than this felony charge, at least with traffic there is at least arguably a public safety component.

Yup. This appears to be -- and, let's be fair, that's all we got at the moment -- just about a perfect case for a prosecutor to properly exercise discretion by dropping a case. No apparent intent to hurt or scare anybody; no harm done, except deserved harm to the reputation, such as it is, of the mall ninjas running the checkpoint. It's hard for me to see how the interest of justice can be served, at all, by pushing this forward.

Instructors: there are at least two lessons in this that you really ought to be passing on to your students.

1. Forgetting where the gun is is possible, and a really, really bad idea. Get in the habit of frisking yourself before going through a metal detector.

2. Send out those notices to the sheriff, and to the DPS Commissioner -- regardless of whether or not you think you'll ever be going into a courthouse, or a building in the Capitol Complex. It's just a couple of stamps, and having a notice on file might do you some good, if you ever make a mistake and stumble into a situation like this.

I wonder whether it would be worthwhile for instructors to distribute a sheet of address labels preprinted with the DPS and each of the county sheriffs' addresses for ease of compliance. If the logistics could be thus simplified, permit holders who carry frequently could send out notifications on a broad enough basis to avoid prosecution of an inadvertent mistake.

I don't think you'd avoid prosecution in all cases, but you might avoid convictions.

The crux of this case is that the woman, a concealed carry permit holder, forgot she had her handgun in her backpack. I am a fairly recently retired detective from a large metro department and I think tossing around "not being stupid again" by a peace officer is a bit insulting, unless of course you are an officer who can honestly say that you have known where every weapon of yours has been every second of your career. I have never met an officer, that I know of, who, even if only once, didn't look for one of his weapons where he thought he left it, only to discover that he left it in a different, equally safe location. Many officers I know of have accidentally left weapons in far worse places than in a backpack. That is the bottom line reality of this matter, there was an honest mistake made. No different than the uncountable honest mistakes made by peace officers, prosecutors, and judges every day of the week.

Yup. It's too bad that non-LEOs don't get equal protection under the law. A sworn officer would get a slap on the wrist, not a felony charge.

A sworn officer would not be breaking the law at the courthouse..


I have on occasion, left my sidearm in places that I shouldn't. Under my seat in the squad car, after leaving the jail (I now lock my car keys in with the gun in the gun locker), locked in the desk at work (had to walk to the jail), and more than twice a year I leave for work with my pistol still sitting in the lockbox at home. None of this is intentional, and the last one has happened frequently enough that my wife AND kids ask me if I have my gun fairly regularly.

I have also recently sent a handgun through a security checkpoint prematurely (as some of you are aware). It's not a good feeling. I appreciate and can empathize with this woman's situation. She did it to herself, however, and she must take responsibility. She is no different than anyone else, and I am surprised that you all believe that, as a permit holder, she should be excused for allegedly committing a felony.

I worked courthouse security for 6 years and heard all of the explanations for why "prohibited items" were found. "I forgot it was there" ranks right up there with "my dog ate my homework" in this particular situation, as far as I am concerned.

If she had sent her letter to the Sheriff, it's not a felony. The laws themselves say that you can carry in a courthouse, with notification.

However, it IS a violation of the court order, so it's contempt of court. Can that be chargeable without intent?

But, unfortunately, I don't think she sent in her letter. That does make it a felony, whether she meant it or not.

This is where prosecutorial discretion should apply. If that is lacking, then judicial discretion should.

What she should have done is just walk up to the deputy, and ask where the lockers were, before ever getting into the line.

I'm not big on excuses, and as somebody who argues -- frequently, and publicly -- that folks with badges are too often given a free ride when they break the law, I'm certainly leaving myself open to the argument (which, Tman, you haven't made explicitly -- and it would be okay if you did) that I'm engaging in some special pleading when I argue (and I do) this particular person should be given a slap on the wrist ("Don't do that again. Case dismissed.") because, while she doesn't carry a badge, she does -- like most of us here, including tman -- carry a little plastic card in her wallet.

Yup, if Tman (or I) were to carry a gun past the metal detectors at the HCSO, neither one of us would be guilty of a crime. In his case, it's because he's got a badge (well, actually, it's because he's got the status as an LEO of which the badge is evidence); in my case, it's because I've got the same plastic card as this permit holder does and because, long ago, I sent in a single sheet of paper to the former HennCo County Sheriff, giving my required notice. (I might or might not be in violation of a judge's order; that's another issue.)

And that's why I think that the slap on the wrist is appropriate, in this case -- because the difference between what she did and what I hypothetically would have done is just that sheet of paper. It doesn't symbolize any special status for me -- it just makes me a permit holder who has given notice to the sheriff. I don't get hit with a felony charge....well, actually, I might -- but I've got an awfully good defense; it's the same one that Tman has: the law that forbids carry in a court excepts people like me, and like him, and a few other folks. The only reason it doesn't except her is that she hasn't sent in that sheet of paper.

So, yeah: I think letting this go is appropriate, under the circumstances if -- and only if -- you believe her story: that it was just a matter of forgetting where the gun was. (I do.) That's not an okay thing to do, but I don't think that the combination of that and the lack of having sent in that letter is an offense to public order that in any way rises to one that should be handled by a punishment that includes becoming a convicted felon. I'm not saying that forgetting where one's gun is is okay; it isn't. I'm certainly not saying that permit holders should, as a general policy, be given a pass when they break the law; I don't think that they should. Special rules for "special people?" Nah. That's not okay in HennCo, any more than it is in Ramsey.

But I do think that the interest of justice pretty clearly argue that a permit holder who is in violation of the law simply by failing to give notice really isn't, by virtue of that, the sort of person who should become a convicted felon.

I don't -- at all -- blame the HennCo CA's office for not dropping the charge immediately. They have a responsibility to satisfy themselves as to the facts of the case, before deciding what they see the interest of justice is. And if they reasonably determine that she's full of it -- that, say, while they can't necessarily prove it in court beyond a reasonable doubt, she really was trying to sneak a gun past security for some nefarious purpose -- they'd be right to push the charge. But if they do determine that this was really just a mistake, I think the only reasonable thing to do would be to drop the felony charge.

Joel stated it best...but as another thought...

The airport snafu, while entirely innocent on your part...didn't you technically commit a crime? And I'm betting one that could have started with an "F" in its classification had you gotten a different set of TSA agents...

Obviously you didn't mean to do it...

She's going to need to lawyer up and accept whatever punishment the court hands down. That's the penalty for her screwup, and yes, it is her screwup. I'm just pointing out the old, "...there but for the grace of God go I..."

-Mark

Hey Gibbs, welcome to the forum!!