HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Woman's excuse for firing...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:17 PM

Woman's excuse for firing gun: Sheriff Clarke said it was OK

Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinal Online

A 36-year-old Milwaukee woman had a ready excuse when Milwaukee police approached her Saturday about firing a gun on the 2300 block of W. Burleigh St.

Makisha Cooper told police that Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. had said it was OK for her to arm herself, according to a criminal complaint accusing her of endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon while intoxicated and carrying a concealed weapon.

Read more: http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/after-firing-gun-woman-tells-cop-that-sheriff-david-clarke-said-it-was-ok-er8inmv-188904701.html



Awesome...

56 replies, 6236 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply Woman's excuse for firing gun: Sheriff Clarke said it was OK (Original post)
Evasporque Jan 2013 OP
CBGLuthier Jan 2013 #1
askeptic Jan 2013 #30
CBGLuthier Jan 2013 #39
Threedifferentones Jan 2013 #52
dballance Jan 2013 #51
Kalidurga Jan 2013 #2
nick of time Jan 2013 #3
Evasporque Jan 2013 #6
nick of time Jan 2013 #7
Evasporque Jan 2013 #11
nick of time Jan 2013 #12
Evasporque Jan 2013 #15
nick of time Jan 2013 #18
Squinch Jan 2013 #23
nick of time Jan 2013 #26
LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #55
Squinch Jan 2013 #8
nick of time Jan 2013 #10
Squinch Jan 2013 #13
nick of time Jan 2013 #14
Squinch Jan 2013 #16
hack89 Jan 2013 #31
Squinch Jan 2013 #32
nick of time Jan 2013 #33
Squinch Jan 2013 #35
nick of time Jan 2013 #36
Squinch Jan 2013 #37
nick of time Jan 2013 #38
Squinch Jan 2013 #40
nick of time Jan 2013 #41
Squinch Jan 2013 #42
nick of time Jan 2013 #44
Squinch Jan 2013 #45
nick of time Jan 2013 #46
hack89 Jan 2013 #34
Evasporque Jan 2013 #17
nick of time Jan 2013 #19
Evasporque Jan 2013 #20
nick of time Jan 2013 #22
Evasporque Jan 2013 #28
nick of time Jan 2013 #29
Squinch Jan 2013 #21
nick of time Jan 2013 #24
Squinch Jan 2013 #25
Evasporque Jan 2013 #27
Bonduel Jan 2013 #47
Squinch Jan 2013 #48
LanternWaste Jan 2013 #49
Kingofalldems Jan 2013 #4
safeinOhio Jan 2013 #5
samsingh Jan 2013 #9
slackmaster Jan 2013 #43
dgibby Jan 2013 #50
JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #53
jpak Jan 2013 #54
Doctor_J Jan 2013 #56

Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:20 PM

1. ahh another LEGAL "responsible" gun owner

They are all so fucking cute.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CBGLuthier (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:43 PM

30. So I guess every driver is responsible when a drunk person drives, using your inference?

Yes, all 30 million gun owners are irresponsible because you have an example of one...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to askeptic (Reply #30)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:31 PM

39. why do gun nuts not realize that guns are not fucking CARS

weird that delusion you all seem to share.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CBGLuthier (Reply #39)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 07:06 AM

52. No one has ever claimed guns are cars.

The delusion is mistaking a comparison for an equation. And gun nuts are people who have gone nuts over banning civilian guns, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to askeptic (Reply #30)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:10 PM

51. Nowhere in that post did he make the IMPLICATION that would extend his comment beyond

the one gun owner. Nowhere.

By the way, "inference" is something one does on the receiving end. As in you wrongly inferred he was applying his statement to all gun owners. Implication is what is done at the transmitting end. As in I implied XYZ with my statement ABC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:21 PM

2. Not even close to what the message was...

That being said it was still a very irresponsible message for a sheriff to send. Essentially telling people that LE isn't really there to help them in an emergency, just to mop up afterwards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:24 PM

3. Show me where the Sheriff said it was ok to be armed while intoxicated?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:46 PM

6. I don't write 'em...I just link 'em....nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:49 PM

7. That's fair.

 

But the thread title is misleading to say the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:59 PM

11. not really....that is exactly as written by JSonline and what the person said to police...

So the title is not misleading it is reporting...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:01 PM

12. But it is misleading.

 

JSonline is making it seem as if the Sheriff said it's ok to carry and shoot a gun while intoxicated and he never once said that.
But regardless, she broke the law and now will have to face the consequences for her actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:08 PM

15. I think everyone can read that she took it as it is okay for her to have a weapon and use it...

to protect herself....and Sheriff Clarke encouraged people to "take charge", "help me out"....she wasn't going to get any help protecting herself from her crazy ass niece by calling 911, Clark said so...don't expect your call to be responded to in time....so she didn't even try, went out and got her gun and shot at her niece from the yard....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:13 PM

18. And now she's going to pay the price

 

for her illegal act.
How she interpreted his statement is on her, not him. Any reasonable person should know not to get drunk and carry and shoot a fucking gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #18)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:27 PM

23. So, it would seem, we are not distinguishing between reasonable and unreasonable people with our

current gun laws.

Hmmmm. Maybe we need more restrictions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #23)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:29 PM

26. Hey, I'm all for background checks on all firearms purchase's

 

limit mag capacity to 10 rounds, better mental health care, better reporting by the states of felons to the NICS, just to name a few.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 10:51 AM

55. Did the sheriff say it was not okay while intoxicated?

If the qualifier wasn't included or any other statement that precludes intoxication the public are going take it as being open ended. Too many people can be that stupid. People will believe that they will not be subject to prosecution when LEO declare they will not follow certain laws such as in Arizona regarding federal gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:56 PM

8. Clearly its what this responsible gun owner heard.

I wonder why people don't trust the responsibility of those responsible gun owners?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:59 PM

10. Obviously she wasn't a "responsible gun owner" now was she?

 

And now she'll have to answer for her irresponsibility in a court of law, won't she?
Sounds like the law is working as it should.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:03 PM

13. That's fabulous! Imagine if she HAD shot someone. Then it would be even keener to know

she was going to have to answer for her irresponsibility in a court of law.

Gosh, the law is working great. Just glad her rights to shoot off a gun on a public street while drunk have never been compromised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:07 PM

14. What right to shoot off a gun on a public street while drunk?

 

I seemed to have missed that "right", maybe you can point it out to me?
Bottom line: she will now have to answer for her illegal actions, probably lose her firearms rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:11 PM

16. What law do we have that would prevent her from doing what she did?

We have lots of laws to deal with responsible gun owners AFTER they shoot something up while drunk. But nothing to prevent them from shooting something up while drunk.

Yep. She'll lose her firearms rights. For all those who are shot by responsible gun owners who subsequently lose their firearms rights, I'm sure that makes everything all better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:46 PM

31. What laws actually prevent people from breaking them?

for example, we have no law that prevents a drunk from getting behind the wheel of a car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:47 PM

32. It is illegal to drive a car while drunk. It is not illegal to carry your gun while drunk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:49 PM

33. There are laws in just about every state

 

making it illegal to carry a firearm while intoxicated.
I don't know where you got the info that it's legal to carry while drunk, but that's just plain false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:59 PM

35. Nope. 4 states have laws that explicity state that guns are allowed to be carried in bars. 20 more

states do not address the question, making it allowable since no law forbids the practice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/us/04guns.html?_r=0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #35)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:02 PM

36. Carried in bars, not drinking.

 

States that allow it also allow for businesses to not allow it, and if you're carrying, you aren't allowed to drink.
Show me one state that allows you to carry while drinking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #36)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:25 PM

37. Maine, Virginia, Minnesota....

That's what I found with a quick look. I'm guessing there are more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #37)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:28 PM

38. They allow you to drink while carrying in a bar?

 

They allow you to be drunk in a bar while carrying? I think not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #38)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:32 PM

40. Yep. Utah too, it seems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #40)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:35 PM

41. Sorry but you're wrong.

 

You cannot be drunk in any state and carry a firearm. You can have a certain BAL and carry a gun in some states, which, IMO, is wrong, but you cannot be legally drunk and be carrying a firearm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #41)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:36 PM

42. You can drink while carrying a gun in those states, and presumably others.

The original question was about drinking and driving a car. You can't. But it seems you can drink and carry a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #42)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:42 PM

44. You can have a certain BAL and still drive a car,

 

which is stupid but still legal. If it were up to me, any BAL should be grounds for a charge of DUI, same with carrying a firearm with any BAL.

On edit: you can't have any kind of BAL if you hold a commercial driver license, that's Federal law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #44)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:50 PM

45. You can't drink while driving a car. You can't have an open container, and you can't drink.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #45)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:52 PM

46. Ok, I see what you're getting at.

 

And you are correct, you can't have an open container while driving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:55 PM

34. You would be wrong about that

You cannot carry a gun in public while intoxicated.

Damn near every concealed carry law in America makes that very clear.

Most states make it illegal to carry or use a firearm while intoxicated

https://www.google.com/search?q=firearm+intoxication&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:12 PM

17. nobody is saying what she did was right....

everyone is trying to point out that what Clark said was 100% irresponsible....

He said "Defend yourself until we get there.."....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:16 PM

19. What's wrong with defending yourself until police arrive?

 

I live in the boonies where it will take police anywhere from 15-25 minutes to arrive, should I have to wait for police to arrive or should I defend myself?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:23 PM

20. have you been drinking?....nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Reply #20)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:25 PM

22. Haven't had a drink in over 30 years.

 

Don't even drink beer or wine. But thanks for asking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:34 PM

28. so it would be safe to assume then you would not be drunk when defending yourself...

I would say then...makes sure of your target, is it the last resort and then if so shoot to kill....so you only have to have one story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Reply #28)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:39 PM

29. That's a very safe assumption.

 

I hope I never have to fire a weapon in anger again at any human being. I'm a peaceful man who just wants to run my farm and live out the rest of my life in harmony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:24 PM

21. Sherriffs telling people to defend themselves till police arrive results in drunk people

firing off guns in public streets.

As we see here...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:27 PM

24. No.

 

She was irresponsible in her interpretation of what he said and now she will pay the price for her stupidity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #24)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:28 PM

25. So I guess our current gun laws are not effectively distinguishing people who are responsible

enough to own guns from people who aren't responsible enough to own guns.

So I guess we need more restrictive gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #25)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:29 PM

27. ding ding ding....winnnaaahhh! (To Squinch post above)

lol


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #25)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:20 PM

47. None of our laws can really distinguish who is responsible and who is irresponsible

 

Someone can operate a crane responsibly for 30 years. Then one day crash it into an office building killing 15 people. There are laws against that but they don't tell you if that person is responsible or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonduel (Reply #47)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:26 PM

48. So we should keep selling guns to anyone who shows up at a gun show or estate sale?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:38 PM

49. Every mountain is un-climbable until someone climbs it

Every mountain is un-climbable until someone climbs it. Everyone is reasonable until they engage in an unreasonable act.

"Sounds like the law is working as it should." Not so much the law, but the indictment is working, else the drunken yahoos hunting near my place every weekend would not be drunken yahoos hunting every weekend near my place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:29 PM

4. K and R for the 'guns are just tools' idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:37 PM

5. It's not the hammers you have to worry about,

it's the nail guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:58 PM

9. sounds reasonable - the sheriffs stupidity is beyond belief

and he's a role model for other idiots

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:40 PM

43. Drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:35 PM

50. A really good defense lawyer

would be able to get her off based on what that idiot sheriff said. If anything, she might get a slap on the wrist, depending on the make -up of the jury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 07:33 AM

53. One thing Sheriff Clarke said: Take a gun safety course

I've taken a couple of gun safety courses. I don't remember the part about using a gun to settle arguments with a niece. Not even if you're sure the niece is wrong.

Fortunately, nobody was hurt by the aunt's stupidity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evasporque (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 10:18 AM

54. More guns, more douchebags - got it?

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #54)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:14 PM

56. Well, sort of

I would say, More guns, more douchebags with guns. Unarmed douchebags are less of a societal problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread