Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge who waved gun(in road rage incident) says action not misconduct

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 07:46 PM
Original message
Judge who waved gun(in road rage incident) says action not misconduct
An Erie district judge told a state disciplinary panel Wednesday that he accepted responsibility for waving a handgun at another motorist when he pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct, and that he does not believe the 2009 incident and other activities cited by the state's judicial watchdog amount to professional misconduct.

-----

Nico Brandelli , 21, a student at Mercyhurst College in Erie, testified that Carney's car approached from behind at a high speed, blinked its headlights and passed Brandelli on the right. He said the two drivers exchanged obscene gestures before Carney "held out a silver handgun." Brandelli said he backed off and called his father, who alerted state police.

"I didn't know who this could be," Brandelli said.

Carney, 57, said he was hurrying home after attending a Pittsburgh Steelers game with a friend so the friend could work the midnight shift. He said he blinked his lights to get the other driver's attention and was frightened by Brandelli's angry reaction. He said he pulled his .38-caliber gun out of the car's console and held it up behind the half-open car window for two or three seconds to end the confrontation.

http://www.timesonline.com/news/state/judge-who-display...

Hello judge - some judges if the rest of us did in PA would be called brandishing and we could well lose our CCW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's just about the most goddamned irresponsible thing you can do with a gun.
Namely, playing "My dick is bigger than yours".

Because, on top of all the other mother-scratching reasons why it's a bad and/or dangerous and/or insane idea to pull out an effing firearm and brandish it when you life is clearly not in jeopardy- there's always the chance that the other guy has a bigger dick, with a scope, and all of a sudden your quaint way to come off like a "bad-ass" has you wishing you'd just fucking let it slide.

The best way to win...is not to play. As a parent, this type of lesson is one I see kids learning on the playground and adults still learning in real life.

Oh, and dudeman should not be a judge anymore.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. I bet no normal CCW license holder would be treated that nice. Nor should they be. The judge....
should have been charged.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. But he is a JUDGE, above all of us peons.
He is the law and as such is above the law. To do such a thing would lower him to the level of common folk. That can not be allowed as doing so would show that he is no more than the common folk that he lords over.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

Do I need the sarcasm do-dad? :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
31. So true. Cops get away with too much also. Pisses me off. n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
3. "Equal protection of the laws" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YllwFvr Donating Member (757 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:14 AM
Response to Original message
4. So it makes me wonder if its the summary or the misdemeanor
charge. Neither is a prohibiting offense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. Another "law abiding citizen" using a gun for intimidation. Yet, some want more guns in public.

And many want easier access to permits, or blanket concealed/open carry laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. The judge should be convicted of brandishing and sentenced just like anyone else.
You or I, however, should not be punished for his offense.

Your solution--punish the innocent by assuming their guilt-- is even worse than letting this guilty judge go free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Right, because banning guns in public means....
there won't be any guns in public.

:sarcasm: , if I must.

What else should we ban public possesion of, so that there will never be any abuse of it again, O Great Pumpkin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Just saying. To hear you guys tell it, gun carriers don't use them to intimidate.

If you can't trust a judge with a .38 and a permit to be responsible, how you gonna trust someone who buys Hi-cap mags, tactical weapons, and drools all over the latest and greatest killing apparatus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I don't trust people
who can't open their mouths without spewing insulting snarl.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. Sticks and stones.
As long as they aren't armed they can't hurt you. I'd rather take the mistrusted snarl than the "trusty" shooter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #19
26. The auto complete on the phone demanded "snarl"
rather than what I typed, which was snark.

And unarmed people can kill you unless you're Chuck Norris.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Lots of things can kill you including your karma
In my world, the last thing I think about killing me is another human. Much more likely to be a virus, an earthquake, a tsunami or my own carelessness and stupidity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. You're lucky.
Many others are not. Think about them occasionally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. I do recognize my good fortune and I am grateful for it.
And I also think of those less fortunate. I just don't see how carrying concealed or even open weapons is going to improve society. I accept that it may work out positively every now and then, but the price we pay, as a society, for endorsing such behavior, does nothing to further our civilization, let alone our image in the eyes of others. On the contrary, our "gun culture" serves only to reinforce our negative image in the minds of peace loving people around the world. A world that we are still an important part of, in spite of our declining credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. We'll just have to live with the cool kids not letting us sit at their table at lunch hour.
Is that really the best you can come up with- The disapproval of unnamed others?


I suppose it is, as the "more guns = more crime" meme didn't pan out, and the 'moral harm' argument is best left to its

originator, Robert Bork.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #32
40. If that's how you want to see it, so be it.
Puerile is as puerile does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #29
45. Image is subjective.
"I just don't see how carrying concealed or even open weapons is going to improve society."

It won't. But writing laws as if it were never necessary does considerable damage. It shows a disconnect between the culture envisioned by those in power and the way people's lives are actually lived. Ideologues creating an a priori idea of reality and forcing others to live in a world that does not exist requires totalitarian control. I can't think of cultural tragedy that didn't start there.

The ideology you express, since it isn't attached to reality in any way, cannot result in any sort of workable legislation since it cannot be fairly applied to the way people actually live. It is an interpretation of the issue based not on reality, but on appearances. You can't legislate good taste. You can't compel people to be advocates for your personal feelings about what constitutes civilized behavior. To do so would require you to brutalize them. And that's why we have a second amendment right along with all the others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #19
46. That's not the way it works in this universe. Trust me, I'm a native.
Edited on Sat Apr-09-11 05:08 PM by TPaine7
"As long as they aren't armed they can't hurt you."

Many people have been killed by unarmed folks. Most earthlings know this. Where do you hail from; where did you get your fanciful ideas?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. If it's an insult, it is only aimed at those who are into that kind of stuff. Are you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Get back to us when "hi-cap" magazines, tactical weapons, and drool are illegal.
Unless you want to claim that a particular person is incompetent IN GENERAL (no special gun incompetency), then legal activities are none of the government's business.

And of course guns are, and should be, used to intimidate. And if intimidation doesn't stop a would-be rapist, kidnapper, murderer or assailant, then gunfire should be used.

What's wrong with intimidating with a gun? I would think you would prefer it to shooting and possibly killing with a gun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
20. What's wrong with intimidating with a gun?
Everything, unless used in self defense. You think it's OK to wave it around at other drivers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. I was responding to a(n at least apparently) categorical--and false--statement.
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 02:31 PM by TPaine7
9.... To hear you guys tell it, gun carriers don't use them to intimidate.


I make no such claim. As a matter of fact, I claim that they both do and should intimidate with guns. I gave examples of when they should.

Of course there are times when one shouldn't intimidate with a gun, such as the case spoken of in the OP. That's why I said in an earlier post that the judge should be convicted just as you or I would be, had we committed the offense.

What I take exception to is the idea that it is categorically wrong to intimidate with a gun--you know, the "violence is always wrong" and "violence never solves anything" school of thought.

If the poster I was responing to was talking about carriers ILLEGALL AND IMMORALLY intimidating with guns, I do admit that that happens. It happens with judges and off duty police as well as CCW permittees. It happens very rarely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. How do you plan to know
when it needs to be used to intimidate and how? My crystal ball's still in the shop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. Intimidating unarmed folks is hardly proper. I guess public carriers are different.

Another reason to restrict permits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Intimidating unarmed folks is extremely proper
UNDER THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES.

I hope you are never on the jury of a 95 lb woman being tried for shooting a 295 lb thug who was attacking her, or a 75 year old man who used his gun to defend himself against 5 strong men in their 20s.

Please divulge your belief system completely and fully in the jury selection process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. Are you a 95 lb women or 75 yo? If so, I get it. At least most women don't carry hi-cap mags, and
tactical apparatus, and other crap marketed to kill more folks than anyone needs for self-defense.

And, just for the heck of it I'll throw in that many older folks' kids better be ready to take the guns away from dad when he goes on Aricept or something similar. If not, a caregiver is in danger.

If you are a 95 pound woman, please stick a small caliber gun in your purse. If not, I think you ought to leave your guns at home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. If you could somehow demonstrate that high-cap mags were dangerous,....
....unusual, or not in common use, you might have a real point.


Merely repeating the claim they are dangerous, and never once producing empirical, compelling evidence that they are so, is

sheer argument from authority.


You have every right to express your opinions on the suitabilty (or lack thereof) of gun ownership and restrictions thereon. You

have no reasonable expectation of having those opinions treated as gospel.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. Seems simple, one who carries hi-cap mag in public is either poor shot or bent on blasting away if
Edited on Sat Apr-09-11 08:32 AM by Hoyt

someone says "boo." It's not strictly for self-defense. You have to explain everything to you guys.

BTW -- Are you a 95 lb. women or 75 years old?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. How do you
get so much vitriolic bullshit in so few words?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. Been around obsessed gun carriers most of my life. They all spout same rationalizations and fears.

Talk about BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. You seem more obsessed
than any gun owner I ever met. And I've met a bunch of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #30
39. "Are you a 95 lb women or 75 yo?"
Edited on Sat Apr-09-11 12:10 PM by TPaine7
No, nor is that relevant.

I tried to find examples extreme enough to convince EVEN YOU that it is sometimes proper to use a gun against unarmed opponents. I succeeded.

But anyone is justified in using a gun against unarmed opponents. A marine attacked by a group of teenaged thugs would be justified; Bruce Lee attacked by a large gang of "wilding" youths would be justified; if Superman were real and he was attacked by 5 toughs bent on murder--in a place where kryptonite made him ordinary--even he would be justified in using a gun to prevent them dragging him to an area where the radiation would be lethal.

"If you are a 95 pound woman"--no, if you are a human being with vulnerabilities. If you aren't God in disguise, you have a right to keep and bear arms (provided you're sane, law abiding and old enough). (If you're God, you can carry too, you just don't need a permit.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
right2bfree Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
41. Branishing a gun is illegal in most states. You will only escalate a bad situtation with a gun. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. Using a gun to intimidate a would-be rapist, kidnapper, murderer or assailant
Edited on Sat Apr-09-11 04:25 PM by TPaine7
is not brandishing--at least not in the legally forbidden sense of the term.

Self defense with a gun is not illegal brandishing, except to the most rabid anti-gun extremists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Juvenile post to say the least
and you fancy yourself a writer, a journalist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
16.  And you expected better from him? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
right2bfree Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
43. Exactly! Another "law-abiding" citizen again, only its a judge this time.
lock him up, period!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. The law is written with hundred dollar bills. It helps to have a white collar, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
17. When people say they want existing laws enforced, this is the perfect example
This judge is dangerous and broke numerous laws. There is no reason he shouldn't be locked up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. +1 - at least pull his LTCF
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 11:12 AM by RamboLiberal
If he has one. Or maybe on that too he thinks he is above the law. If he didn't have one in PA the glove box carry was illegal too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #18
47. I'd be in favor of some sanction on his driver's license as well
I don't think I'd want someone like that operating a motor vehicle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
right2bfree Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #17
42. I agree. Lock him up. A gun wacko is a nut, judge or not. Felony branishing, off the bench for him!
No breaks for judges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
east texas lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
38. Ah, the LA passing/turn signal...
Not a good move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 30th 2014, 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC