Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'Carry Issues' started by TBO, Feb 24, 2012.
What does OH law say?
Sounds Right, he gets what he gets, shouldn't have been stealing...packing a C.C.W, sounds to me he had an era in judgment. He was afforded the right to carry to defend oneself, unfortunately he is now a Inmate.
HTC 4 Tapatalk
Good for the jerk. He got what he deserved. He should have been aware of the law before hand and more importantly, he shouldn't have been stealing anything period.
At least that will give him something to think about while he's locked up and discovering why they call it the pokey!
If he didn't like the rules, he shouldn't have played the game.
It's his own fault. The law holds the armed citizen to a higher standard and rightfully so.
He knew better. He did wrong and now will hopefully pay the price for it. We don't want his type carrying in Ohio anyhow. These are the kind of people that give CCW a black eye (pardon the pun.) We don't need more negative press for the law abiding legally armed citizens of this state.
Wow, that's one hell of a charge bump. Petty theft to armed robbery because of carrying. I honestly don't know what to think.....
Wonder if there was some kind of altercation between the man and the loss prevention officer that ended up with the charge, or if it was just the fact he had a gun on him?
Same question to you, Mike, does Ohio law require any action other than possessing a firearm?
Good. Perhaps other CCW holders might get the hint that this is not acceptable.
I was kind of hoping the vast majority of them already figured that part out...
If all it takes for armed robbery in Ohio is a robbery when armed, seems like the law is kind of screwed up.
In this case, he had plenty of opportunity to pull the gun on the loss prevention officer, but he chose not to, and allowed himself to be held for police.
That's certainly the opposite of using a firearm to commit a robbery in my view.
I'm certainly willing to change my view depending on more details, the article is pretty sparse. But I'm pretty sure it would have mentioned if he had brandished or threatened anyone with the gun.
By all means, revoke his permit, and charge him with petty theft. Based on the facts available so far, that'd be the fair outcome in my view.
Its nice to throw the book at folks, but not when there's limited space in the jails. Who are you going to kick loose to make room for this guy? Going to kick out a real armed robber to make room for the pretend armed robber? Kick a guy loose that actually robbed someone at knifepoint because you pretend this guy robbed someone at gunpoint?
Its the same in KY. If you're armed, its robbery. Shouldn't be a piece of crap thief.
Play stupid games...win stupid prizes!
Congratulations! You are a real winner.
Did he not know shoplifting was illegal? To me, there is a logic breakdown. How can a person apply for a permit to carry a gun (a responsible, civil act), and then turn around and steal from a Macy's? The two acts seem contradictory to me.
Since the two people who were asked the question will not answer it, I will.
With a statutory sentence of two to eight years.
I agree he should be arrested and tried, I don't think if he's convicted he should face two to eight years for exercising a constitutional right.
Sorry about his luck.
I despise shoplifters.
<<<Has no love for thieves and even less for CCW holders who are thieves.
Not to be argumentative here, but if the choices you make include petty theft, dui, or other irresponsible acts, then you should not be carrying a firearm. Constitutionally motivated or otherwise.
First it paints CCW's in a potentially bad light, and second it gives the anti-CCW crowd more ammunition for tighter legislation.
Second, the choice was his to make, and will be his to bear. He GAVE UP his right to carry with his arrest. It is likely that he won't do much time, but more than likely will forever lose the right to carry which is fine with me. His judgement skills and character appear sorely lacking.
Just my opinion, but stupid people should not carry firearms as stupid people make stupid mistakes...and sometimes those mistakes affect non-stupid people. I support the rights of non-stupid people of all persuasions.
earrings?? come on! grow a pair
Yeah....I'm not really supportive of your concept of a constitutional right. Kinda like saying that resisting arrest is exercising your natural right to self defense. Both acts are perversions of a right, not the exercise of it.
I'm not seeing where brandishing or threating with a gun is necessary to commit armed robbery. He was armed. He committed theft. He met the definition of armed robbery of the state.