Case laws that could affect your rights

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
You may know the latest firearm on the market. You
may have the best optic I mean, you may even
have a concealed carry license to carry. But are you
aware of the ever changing laws and case laws that
can affect your right to keep in bare arms? Today?
Today you will hear from the experts and much much
more on target is up next. Good afternoon, We're all

(00:21):
talk more broadcasting live from the studios of LAPD Firearms
Range and Training Facility that's located at nine nine nine
Triple nine, Bethel Road. I'm your host, Eric, and I
have JC. You know what I have. There's something I've
been wanting to tell you, and I wanted to kind
of tell you here on air to get your your
you know, inside reaction. I'm bidding on a gun on
gun Broker for the first time in a long time.

(00:42):
I mean I have not bid on a gun on
gum Broker for a minute, right.

Speaker 2 (00:46):
I remember I think of the last one.

Speaker 1 (00:48):
Yes, this one, And you're gonna say, why, Eric, why
this one is a merwin out Herbert. Okay, it's an
oldie eighteen hundreds, eighteen hundreds. The significan against this one.
If I do indeed win the auction. It is the
first issued firearm stamped on the back to Detroit Police Department.

Speaker 3 (01:10):
Oh really, Oh this would make a nice feather. Yes, no,
I get the gun. Yeah, the gun itself isn't anything spectacular.
I mean it's nothing, you know, extremely pretty, but it
is significantly uh neat in the historical value to it.

Speaker 2 (01:26):
So yeah, I still like your Baltimore.

Speaker 1 (01:29):
I know, so a lot to see. This could be
the gun of the week coming up on a on
a different on a different episode of Ontarget. Guys. We
are the owners of LPD Firearms Range and Training facility
in our active in law enforcement, but for one hour
on Saturdays put together a group of firearm experts to
discuss new products in the market, training tips, and oftentimes
political topics surrounding this second Amendment. Our commitment has always

(01:51):
been though, to bring you facts about our industry and
help customers and listeners with safe, responsible ownership of firearms.
I want to start by thinking some of our past guests.
You know these A lot of these guys, John, they
come on on Saturday, it's their day off and they're
outside of work. But I wanted to thank a couple
of weeks ago, AJ from ain points for coming on,

(02:12):
great discussion, great product If you missed that episode, definitely
one worthwhile going back and checking out. Most recently, our
friend from car Arms jumped on with us. He hadn't
been on since twenty seventeen, Frank, and it was I
mean their product line. You think of car Arms, you
don't think of you know, you think of a very
small product line. But they're also part of Magnum Research

(02:35):
Auto Ordnance and and Bob, I'm going to hit you
up with this. They are also part this conglomeration. They
have a revolver that they're known for. The company is
BFR Revolvers. Okay, BFR and the revolvers, Bob, These are
we talking about revolvers comeing calibers such as the four
fifty Marland, the four sixty. We're talking big bullets. So

(03:01):
the b f R company of course stands for big
framed revolvers. You know, yes, yeah, they were. It was
always good to hear about those two revolver.

Speaker 4 (03:12):
But then I think, at first I think it was
the big I'm trying to remember the name of it,
but yeah, I'll think of it, but it had a
different name yet. So it's been on the definitions about
three different different iterations.

Speaker 1 (03:25):
Yes, but always good and thanks to have a fine, big,
fine revolver final right, Oh yeah, yeah, they're they're big.

Speaker 2 (03:33):
Get them in forty five seventy.

Speaker 1 (03:35):
That's incredible for a revolver. Guys today on the show, though,
today on the show, I'm gonna admit right up front,
today on the show, sitting with us right now is
one of my favorite people. Not because of his fine
looks for physique, I mean that all plays into a Bob,
don't get me wrong, because it's it's what you do
and how you constantly challenge me in our industry and

(03:57):
law enforcement officers on on law, on case law and stuff,
and Bob that is so valuable. We're so blessed to
have you here today, Bob, me and her back on
with us.

Speaker 5 (04:07):
Thank you for the opportunity. Eric, I look forward to
being here again.

Speaker 2 (04:12):
Thank you.

Speaker 1 (04:12):
Yeah, it is. It's always good, I mean. And so
what we're going to talk about a little bit later
in the discussion today is there are so many things
that are constantly changing in the firearms world. I look
back John, just the last ten years that we've been
on this show, and there has been so much to change.
I mean you look at constitutional carry and the standard ground.

(04:34):
I mean, there's been so many things that affects how
you go about carrying a firearm or owning or possessing
a firearm, and Bob, there are some big changes I
mean potentially on the horizon or in the works and stuff,
and that's why we wanted to bring you here to
talk about some of those here shortly. So, so we're
gonna get to that. JC has a little bit of
news before that, and we have a Gun of the

(04:55):
Week sponsored by Black Wings Shooting Center. You know, Smith
and Wesson hit it out of the ballpark with the
Bodyguard three eighty. Recently, John that grip on it and
so forth has just it's gone crazy. Well they're Smith
and Wesson Shield, which has been an enormously popular concealed
carry handgun from the beginning. Well, they've kind of merged

(05:18):
the two together and they just introduced a firearm that
kind of takes the best of both of those worlds.
So that's going to be the gun the wick We're
going to that. Surely it's one that you might want
to listen to because it has a lot of neat
things going for it.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
Does, so it does.

Speaker 1 (05:34):
I always like to thank our sponsors US Law Show.
They're in here again today. I actually have a special
going on. You sign up for them, you get twenty
dollars to spend right here at the store. So definitely worthwhile.
If you're not signed up with them, and I think JC,
I think we got you signed up recently, so.

Speaker 4 (05:50):
Yeah, I haven't found the confirmation yet. Yeah, I'm hoping
that that's in there.

Speaker 1 (05:53):
Yep. So that's a good thing if you're not signed
up for that. Jackson Negress Windows are good partners over
They are Black Wing Shooting Centers. We talked about it
the last couple weeks, but on October nineteenth they have
a defensive shotgun class coming up with Greg Elifritz. I mean,
anytime you can get into class with with mister Elifritz
is a good thing. Something to consider over there, Rivers

(06:14):
Edge Cutlery. If you don't have it marked on your calendars,
you should. On September thirteenth. On thirteenth is their twenty
second anniversary party at their beautiful facility in Hilliard. Definitely
worthwhile checking that out. We're going to try to sneak
over there later in the day. But something you should
do as well. And of course LPED Training Facility all
who make the show possible. Speaking of LPED Training Facility,

(06:37):
John Vince does a lot of our classes. He gets
the best ratings of anyone. It has now elevated our
ratings to a four point seven out there on Google,
which is just I think it sets as a part. Yeah,
just amazing. Just our classes and our instructors are just phenomenal.
They are, They truly are. They have been from the beginning.

(07:00):
Were blessed to have him and so he's ran the.

Speaker 2 (07:01):
Market for that for over twenty years. We were teaching
it the right yeah, together and yeah, he's a great,
great individual and great training yep.

Speaker 1 (07:08):
And I'm remiss if I don't thank La. Of course
back there at the studio, always pulling the levers for
us and keeping things rolling there at the home base.
If you missed the show, you can always catch the
podcast six ten WTV dot com, iHeartRadio, Facebook and YouTube
where the show is archived out there each week. JC,
you got a little bit of.

Speaker 4 (07:28):
News for us, well news wives. We have a couple
of things. We're just we're so honored to have him
talk about this. So I actually didn't want to take
up too much time. But one of my friends who
moved out to California and just said he was so happy.
I could not believe it was twenty six years that
California had a.

Speaker 2 (07:47):
One gun per month a.

Speaker 1 (07:50):
Purchase that's all you can do, you twenty six years,
that's been in playwenty six years.

Speaker 4 (07:54):
This is what gets me. I guess we talk about
California and there DRACONI is that they have draconian laws
that they come up with. But twenty six years. I mean,
so if you want to buy something for the family, well,
I can buy one this month, but honey, I can't.
You know, you can't get any protection carrying until next month,
and then my son maybe the next It's it's stupid.

(08:16):
Well finally it came to final, final, final, rest, and
so now it is a dead issue. They're not going
to peel it anymore, and they're going to accept the
fact that there is no thirty day.

Speaker 1 (08:28):
That's just the price they pay for having no crime, right,
I mean, that's just a little bit of what you
give up to have a crime free.

Speaker 4 (08:35):
Such a strange state that and they're trying to proceed
with the micro.

Speaker 2 (08:41):
Engraving of the firearms.

Speaker 4 (08:44):
So eventually they want to have every single firearm and
in the state of California have to have micro stamping
where you can tell what cartridge, which shell whatever came
out of that, which gun did it belong to, and
like a lot of and we've discussed this before, but
these states, it's these blue states when you look on
the map. So now Massachusetts said, well, gee, if California,

(09:05):
that must be a good idea. So now they're introducing
legislation so to require micro stamping on there. It's such
just such a good idea. Even the inventor of that
says it doesn't work, you know all the time, and
it's very easy to uh, to just slightly alter a
firing pin or whatever it is. It's making the mark
that on that that cartridge, you replace parts.

Speaker 1 (09:26):
It's it's it's crazy.

Speaker 2 (09:28):
But this is what they want to do.

Speaker 1 (09:29):
And it's just like they spent shell casing that they
did for how many years And we reported on how
many cases were it was it even ever used in?

Speaker 2 (09:37):
Yeah, it was.

Speaker 4 (09:38):
Present here and I think it was presented in twelve cases,
but never used in the actual it was presented and
it was cautioning them, what twenty six million dollars a
year to get staff and you remember the days that
came in and you get two empties, Right, we have
a new gun and be like, what's isn't there it
comes with two empties. Well that's for the states that
have this because they keep one on file.

Speaker 2 (10:00):
Uh, you know, so they.

Speaker 4 (10:01):
Have storage of cartridges for everyone who just craziness and
they said we've only you know, they said it just
doesn't worth it and they dropped it. But you know,
it's it's what the Blue States want to do anyway
to try to disarm you.

Speaker 2 (10:13):
They will they.

Speaker 1 (10:14):
Will do something else too, JC on a on a
future show, what we're going to talk about it. There's
getting more attention on these forced reset triggers. So if
you've seen that out there, a lot of attention on it.
They've been out for a long time. They kind of vanned,
unbanned and back and forth. But it's something we're going
to discuss at on a later show because it's getting
more and more attention. And it is and we can.

Speaker 4 (10:35):
Throw binary triggers exactly because it's a different mechanism. To me,
it sounds a little more almost dangerous. But I haven't
found anything where they had, you know, had banned nationwide
binary right triggers. That's one where when you pull the
trigger once, but when you release it it fires again
because there's a that's a little bit different, but then

(10:55):
they reset one.

Speaker 1 (10:57):
Anyway, another thing we're going to talk about too in
a couple of weeks, Derek de Brosse or another attorney.
We have two attorney friends jac that wow that too,
but two that attorney with Derek de Broce is going
to jump on with us because there is a lot
of talk, a lot of talk about what the administration
is doing to help people get back their gun rights

(11:19):
who may have had it taken away years and years
and years ago. So there's actually going to be something
in place. Finally, I think it's always been on the
books but not funded if I remember correctly, and I
think this goes back to maybe Obama years where they
unfunded it, so there was a process in place. You
get denied, but sorry, we don't have any method of appeal,

(11:42):
and so I mean there's different things there. So he's
going to jump on with us too. If that is
something you've been wondering about. In a couple of weeks.
We were going to have him any other newsworthy things
they're jac.

Speaker 4 (11:52):
Well, actually I have a whole stack which I have
left home on my printers.

Speaker 1 (11:58):
Okay, okay, So I have an idea. Why don't we
Because we have Bob here and he is so full
of information, Let's grab the gun out of the week
real quick and do that. I'm excited to do that,
and then we will then in that second segment we'll
go a little bit early and get to some of
this stuff because I know there's so much information when

(12:20):
it comes to case laws and everything. So we think
about that. Jacon, Oh, it sounds perfect. Cool. So the
gun of the Week this week's sponsored by our good
friends over a black Wing Shooting Center, is a Smith
and Wesson. Now Smith I wasn't came out with the
Bodyguard two point zero. I don't know, six months ago,
maybe nine months ago now I lose track of time.
But part of its appeal was this grip angle and

(12:42):
people saw that and said, wow, that just feels good
in your hand. Well, the shield and the shield plus
has been around for a long time now and it's
been a staple in the concealed carry industry. But they
have now kind of combined the two into a new
gun called the M and P Shield X And basically
what it is it takes all the attributes of that

(13:03):
Shield plus with the grip angle of the Bodyguard three eighty.

Speaker 2 (13:08):
It's a it really is amazing.

Speaker 4 (13:11):
In the in the progress, there's a lot of people
who bought the Shield and then that was great, and
then the Shield plus it's a little fatter, held a
lot more rounds instead of like, you know, seven rounds
plus one, then all of a sudden you had thirteen
plus one and that's great. But now what they have
done with this new one is really really made improvements.

Speaker 1 (13:29):
Yeah absolutely, yeah.

Speaker 2 (13:30):
Oh oh yep, am I allowed to ago?

Speaker 1 (13:32):
Yeah yeah, yeah, sure, yeah, okay.

Speaker 4 (13:34):
All right, since it's tape looks very familiar. That one
of the differences there are several differences. It's got a
longer grip because it comes with two magazines, a thirteen rounder,
a thirteen plus one and a fifteen rounder. So they're
what they're doing is it's already had the the three
sixty five Max and then the then the Hellcat had

(13:55):
the Pro where they've added grip links so when you're
grabbing it, you have no problem even with fatter hands
to to have three you know, fingers on this because
they've extended the length of the grip is actually thinner.
The original one is not much but one point one
for the for the shield plus, but but zero point
nine width.

Speaker 1 (14:15):
For it's thinner.

Speaker 4 (14:18):
And they put the bullets, and they flattened the front
of the trigger guards changed where now it's more square,
and they've actually put some grooves in there for the
people that like to place their finger out there to
help control the recoil. One of the things I really
liked is I didn't I didn't understand why they did
such a what I call a poor job on the
shield plus with the front serrations which are like less

(14:40):
than a quarter of an inch and they're just now
they're wrapped all the way around, so one of the
people don't want to do a press check or even
change in the magazine when you want to let it
go and not pull back from here. So they're there
are many more, they're bigger. It's also optic ready on
the front. Now the rail that was the other yeah,

(15:01):
big thing, so they have a two sloted rail. Because
of that, they had to make the dust cover longer,
but that's okay because the barrel is also a half
an inch longer. Out of a three point one, it's
a three point six, so they made it longer, so
it is.

Speaker 2 (15:17):
A little bit bigger. Okay, let's get rid of the
bad news.

Speaker 1 (15:20):
First.

Speaker 4 (15:20):
We won't fit in the same holsters that the shield
plus face and the magazines are not even the thirteen
round magazine. It's not interchangeable solely because of the plate
on the bottom the thirteen rounder from the plus well
not those magazines will not fit in the X. The
body itself is great, it's just it's just how it connects.

(15:44):
Of the fact that I said, it's optics throughouty. They
also changed the site. They put a tritium site but
also a nice big circle for daytime usage. It's got
a you jewel you shaped a rear site, so some
people don't you know that, but if you don't like it,
you can put a red dot on there. But it's
no problem for for for me. Got a flat trigger

(16:07):
and the trigger pull is much less, so semi flat.
They called it a flat but it's got a little
bit of curvature, but not nearly the curvature that the
that the plus or the or the standard will do.
If you notice back, they really because of the grip
angle change. Now the beavertail is just almost like no
chance of getting slide bite.

Speaker 2 (16:28):
You fit way up in there.

Speaker 4 (16:30):
And it also lowers the bore axis for the heights
of the bore actions just the measurement between the center.

Speaker 2 (16:35):
Of the boar and the highest area of the grip.

Speaker 4 (16:38):
So you can ideally you'd like to hold it by
the slide, you can't do that, but but they get
it up there. It's just really just really really well done.
They've done some little touches like for putting your finger
on the side and holding it. They have some some
tactile areas there that they've put in.

Speaker 1 (16:58):
It's really nice. I mean, it really is. Is kind
of an upgraded plus and they're in the source today.
Prices over just over five hundred, but certainly in line
with other things that are out there and worth it.
So if you want to check one out, stop buy.
We have them in stock. I think with them without
the manual safety one.

Speaker 4 (17:17):
And as I said, it's not it's hard to put on,
but that's okay because that's not that it's taking it
off is where you want to make it right, but
you can forego that, just get one what does not profound.

Speaker 1 (17:28):
So j C. Let's jump to a break, because when
we come back on the other side, Bob, you're going
to be a Are you ready, You got all your notes,
you're prepared. So on the other side of the break,
we're gonna geit. Our good friend Bob me to talk
a little bit about case as we're on Target broadcasting
live from the studios of LPD Firearms and Arranger. We'll
be back right up to the break. Welcome back to

(17:50):
on Target. I'm your host, Eric joined today in the
LPD studios. I got JC is to my left and
my good friend, my good friend, Bob says to my right.
You know you've heard on this show oftentimes that we
discuss new products and techniques in the market. It's part
of what we talk about every week, new products, not
necessarily just with firearms, but optics and anything's related to

(18:12):
the Second Amendment in the firearms industry. But we also
talk about self defense and your right and your rights
and how you can use that firearm. But we've always
talked that it's important to keep you updated on how
those laws change. It changes significantly, John, I mean, we
looked at the last ten years, the things that have
changed here just in Ohio, constitutional carry and your right

(18:33):
to stand your ground. I mean, there's so many things
that have changed, how you carry, how you interact with
law enforcement. So that's why we wanted to bring Bob
in today to talk about that ever changing landscape and
to go through some case laws that are going to
affect us at some point, if they haven't already started to.
So with that, Bob, it is so good to have

(18:53):
you back. I'm so happy you're here. I enjoy I mean,
you know, I tell you this all the time and stuff,
but when you teach our classes in law enforcement, I
enjoy every one of them. Everything you say, I'm kind of,
I guess a nerd on some of those case laws.
I love to hear your take on them and stuff.
And so that's why we have you here today.

Speaker 5 (19:09):
Well, thank you again for the opportunity. I look forward
to going through what's where we're at today. Right, And
a lot of twenty five.

Speaker 1 (19:18):
Goes back to a big Supreme Court case from a
couple of years ago.

Speaker 5 (19:22):
Yep, that's true. And so the laws are constantly changing
and case laws constantly changing. It has throughout our lifetime
and continue and it will continue. But what we've seen
here in the last couple of years is that these
changes are coming much more rapidly, not only through statute
but by case law, and that the most recent significant

(19:47):
case was issued June twenty third of twenty twenty two
by the United States Supreme Court in a case called
New York State Rifle Pistol Association versus Ruin, And the
crux of the case was that our friends in New
York said that if we were New York residents and
we wanted to carry a firearm, we had to apply

(20:11):
to the state and demonstrate a special need that we
had some concern that we were in fear and we
needed to carry it self defense, And so we would
apply to the state and they would say, yes, you
have a special need of being in self defense. You
get a one year license to carry that fire arm.

Speaker 1 (20:32):
And it was this way for years and years, right right.

Speaker 5 (20:34):
I don't know the exact number, but it was a
long long time. So the New York State Rifle and
Pistol Association got a couple of their members and their
names are Brandon Koch, c koh and Robert Nash to
apply for and they were subsequently denied licenses because they said, well,
I'm not really in fear, I just want to carry

(20:56):
it as my second Amendment right. Bruin was the superintendent
of New York State Police who evidently had this authority
by statute, New York statute, and denied them because it
didn't comport with the statute. And so Coach Nash and
New York State Pistol Association they file a suit and

(21:20):
eventually goes all the way up to the US Supreme Court.
And initially I didn't think too much of it because
there's it really didn't have a direct impact at that
time on Ohio right because we we had we had CCW,
we're eventually at the same time we get our constitutional

(21:45):
carry statute. So what impact does this U. S. Supreme
Court case. Well, let's back up a moment and and
take a look at at two brief excerpts out of
New York's out of the Bruin case. So the US
Supreme Court they held in favor of the two men

(22:07):
to say, hey, New York, you cannot create a special
need to exercise a constitutional right. And so to that end.
They specifically said that only if a firearm regulation is
consistent with this nation's historical tradition, may a court conclude
that the individual's conduct falls outside the second Amendments unqualified command.

(22:32):
So the historical tradition dates back to the ratification of
the Bill of Rights that occurred on Thursday, December fifteenth,
seventeen ninety one, where there was twelve amendments and the
first ten get ratified, and of course this is the

(22:54):
second and they were as you go back and read
the Federalist papers, the amendments were listed in order priority
to the founders. So you look at the first Amendment
has five rights in it, and then we get to
the second Amendment, and so it was it was a
right that that was near and dear to the founders.

(23:14):
They did not want the government coming in and taking
the firearms away from the people to allow them to so.
So then later in the holding, uh, they the court
gave out really squishy language as far as what about
modern day firearm laws that have been that have been

(23:39):
either somewhat new or maybe for decades, how are we
going to evaluate those with this historical tradition that is
an originalist concept originalists. People view the Constitution as it was.
We we view it as it was uh as it
was ratified back in seventeen eighty eight, the Constitution itself

(24:02):
and then the Bill of Rights in seventeen ninety one.
Do we view it through that lens or do we
think it's an ever changing document which just means that
the progressive looks at it. Well, how do we apply
it today today? But there's tension there, and just let
me give me one more moment here, yep, to give
that example. We have the freedom of speech, but does

(24:24):
that only apply to the printing press or does that
apply to maybe something over electronic communications today? So that
would be one example of that tension.

Speaker 1 (24:35):
So let's hold that thought because we got to jump
to the news real quick, and when we come back
on either side, we'll continue that discussion on Bruin and
how that has set this stage for so many things
that we are seeing today in the courts. We're on Target.
We'll be back after the news. We are live from
the studios of LAPD, Firearms and Rains. We'll be back shortly.

(24:57):
Welcome back on Target. I'm your host. Eric joined today
in the LED studios. I got my good friend, JC
to the right. I got my I was gonna say
even better friend, but I gotta I gotta watch that.
I got my really good friend. Bob Meter to the
to my right. Actually Jac to my left, Bob to
my right. Bob is here today talking a little case
law with us. It's so important when it comes to

(25:18):
Second Amendments to know what you can and can't do.
And one of the things you started, Bob before the
news we're talking about Bruin case and how that is
kind of set the stage for a lot of things
coming down the pike. But you know, there's laws that
are out there and then there's case law. And you
talk about this all the time in our law enforcement training.
The case laws govern how you how you go about

(25:39):
your business, you know, especially in law enforcement. So it's
so important to pay attention to these Supreme Court cases
and to these district court cases because it can have
a direct effect on how you live your daily life,
and especially in this regards to the Second Amendment. So
you were saying in Bruin it kind of set the stage.
It was with the New York Pistol and Rifle Club

(26:00):
versus Bruin, New York at the time, you really had
to show that you're in fear for your life to
get a concealed carry permit, and this is the case
in twenty twenty two. That really challenged it.

Speaker 5 (26:11):
Right, And just to continue, the last part that I
wanted to go over for the audience was that they
gave some really squishy language as to how we're going
to take some of our long standing statutes and apply
them today. So, yes, there has to be a historical tradition.
But what they said was, even if a modern day

(26:35):
regulation is not a dead ringer for historical precursors, it
still may be analogous enough to pass constitutional muster. So
what that legalese means is that even though there may
not be something back in seventeen ninety one or the
long standing history of our country, it still might be

(26:56):
able to pass constitutional muster. But the problem is what
is there? You know, how how do we how do
we sometimes apply it and then sometimes not apply that?
And uh and so because of that, we've we've just
had a slew of cases. I'm I came prepared to
talk about a couple that I think are are instructive

(27:17):
for us in Ohio and uh and and talk about
and you know, you guys will I'm sure we'll have
a lot of great comments and and uh in questions
that we can so. But uh, the first one is
a state case. So in the in Ohio, after an

(27:37):
entry level court, an entry level court is going to
be a uni court court of common Please, the person
can appeal, and when you appeal in Ohio, you appeal
to what's called a district court. There's twelve of those
in Ohio. So if it comes out of where you're
at your district court, it's binding, you have to follow it.
If it comes out of one or the other eleven,
you don't have to follow it. It's called persuasion. If

(28:00):
your court will look at it, they may or may
not go that same direction. So this particular case is
out of the first district. In the first district includes
only Hamilton County, Cincinnati area. So, uh, mister Brown was
was a convicted felon. Uh he was in uh indicted

(28:22):
for robbery, and well he was not a convicted felon,
but he was indicted for robbery, and uh he was
he was then uh caught with a firearm and uh
so he was under indictment for the robbery. As condition
of his bond, he had to pay money to to

(28:43):
get out to assure his appearance in court. What bonds
for and he did that. He met that condition of
the bond. But there was no other restriction. Uh so
uh they he's he is found with firearm and they
charged with weapons under disability.

Speaker 1 (29:01):
So a condition of bond can be that's what the
judge deemed. It could be you need to stay away
from the victim, or you need to you can't be
around firearms, or the condition of bonds can be a
whole slew of things that that has to be met
along with the money. It could be you have a
drug test you have to do periodically. So there's is
the judge's discretion discretion for this and stuff. So in

(29:23):
this case, having a firearm or not being around firearms
was not a condition to bond. But he's indicted. Now,
he's indicted on a burglary charge, which is a.

Speaker 5 (29:33):
Felony robbery robby. Yeah, and he but but there's a
statute in Ohio it says, if I'm under indictment, I
can't carry a firearm, right right. If I'm indicted, it
doesn't matter what it's for. If I'm indicted, I can't.

Speaker 1 (29:46):
And it says that even on the forty four to
seventy three are you under indict you're currently under indictment,
So it's even he even goes up to that level.

Speaker 4 (29:52):
So for any any reason, you're just under indictment for
any felony.

Speaker 5 (29:56):
For felony indictment, you get indicted for felony. So if
I'm yeah, so if I'm indicted for forgery, okay, one
of the and we'll get into this, but convicted felon okay.
So the one I like to use is Larry Householder,
our former Speaker of the House, that is in prison
for bribery and all kinds of other financial crimes, white

(30:19):
collar crimes. His crimes were not violent. So when he
comes out, we could we go back to the long
standing tradition back in seventeen ninety one. Could I be
a convicted felon and carry a firearm in seventeen ninety one?
What do you think?

Speaker 1 (30:36):
Probably?

Speaker 5 (30:36):
So, yeah, there's no there's no restrictions for that back
in seventeen ninety one. So at what point do we
turn on and then turn off the long standing tradition? Right?

Speaker 1 (30:46):
And so in this Brown case. So he's caught with
the firearm, he's under indictment, but it's not a condition
of the bond, correct. So he gets charged.

Speaker 5 (30:55):
Under weapons under disability, and he appeals and the first
District Appella court said, boy, they took a lot, They
burned a lot of income this case. But anyhow, they
ended up going back through just like they did in Bruin.
They went back and did the long history of the
Second Amendment and because there was no long standing tradition,

(31:18):
we're good to go.

Speaker 1 (31:18):
And this I think you even mentioned when you did
your debrief on this that it was back to sixty
eight or something. It's just the one I'm thinking of
back in sixty eight in Ohio. Okay, that was something different.

Speaker 5 (31:29):
Okay, that was there's so many.

Speaker 1 (31:32):
Yes, right, so in this case it comes out it
gets oh.

Speaker 5 (31:37):
Wait, no, that you are correct. That was this one
because they evaluated the Ohio statute that says that if
I'm under indictment, then I can't carry a firearm, and
that was past nineteen seventy two, okay, And so they
said they the first District held that that's not long
standing tradition. Of course, what they never said was well,

(32:00):
if you know, we're you know, to coming up to
two hundred and fifty years for America. Okay, that's long
same tradition. Okay, fifty years isn't like where where?

Speaker 1 (32:12):
Where?

Speaker 5 (32:12):
Where in that? Where are we then?

Speaker 1 (32:14):
So this one? I mean, guys, jac I mean, we've
talked about this a lot. So we're saying, now if
this and this is only in the district one, right,
first teristic and stuff, so it's not it's not binding
throughout all of Ohio, but you can almost surmise if
it came up in a different district, this could be
something that goes to the Ohio Supreme Court, right, and
this could go up to a higher level. Right, But

(32:36):
we're saying that the court is saying that it is
not long straining tradition to prevent somebody who is under
current indictment to not be able to possess a firearm. Now, Bobby,
you and I have talked about this, and I think
this is really interesting in this. You know, from the
law enforcement side, you're like, what the heck are we doing?
This guy was indicted, but we know that the grand

(32:57):
jury you can indict. The thing that all gets around,
you're gonna die a ham sandwich. You can get a
grand jury to indict almost anything. And is that enough
to take away somebody's constitutional rights? I fall, I fall.
I think in the faction that says no, it's not.

(33:18):
I mean, they haven't been convicted of this and exactly,
and so I have I almost have a problem with
somebody under indictment being that being taken away. Now the
fail safe here, and this is why we made mention
of the bond. The judge, as a condition to bond

(33:38):
can say, and you can't be around firearms, and that
is binding. That would that would be binding and stuff.

Speaker 5 (33:45):
So limit the individual from carrying the fire So.

Speaker 1 (33:48):
We might say, we might concede and say, hey, if
you're under indictment, that's no longer going to be a
precursor of you having your your second minimal rights taken away.
But if the judge deems it appropriate depending on your
conditions and circumstances, they can make that a condition of bond,
and boom or right back there. I don't I don't
really have a problem with that. I mean, I don't know,

(34:10):
and Bob, I know you're I mean, I don't know.

Speaker 5 (34:11):
If you write I understand the ideology. But this is
just such a significant change from what we're used to
significant and so yes, the challenge with the grand jury
is that the defense has no opportunity to to to
raise any issues about about the indictment. Uh. And I'm
confident that this has gone through this particular case has

(34:34):
gone through the Oha Prosecutor Association, and people are being
more attentive to asking for conditions a bond of no firearm,
especially when he's indicted for robbery, right, you know, I
mean if I'm indicted for drug possession or I'm indicted
for a white collar crime of embezzlement, you know, should

(34:56):
that be a condition of my bond? You know, I
think that becomes an arguable point. You know, I'm a
firearms collector and I work here at L E. P D.
And I got convicted of or I'm indicted for embezzlement. Uh,
should I be able to Is that enough take away
my my second Amendment?

Speaker 1 (35:15):
Right?

Speaker 5 (35:16):
Because are we going to limit any of my other
constitutional rights?

Speaker 1 (35:19):
By the way, exactly exactly? So yeah, yeah, arguable it
is so Bob Along that's kind of similar line state
versus Hall. This had some kind of some similarities, correct,
is this though, Uh where he was charged with assault.

Speaker 5 (35:38):
Right he is? Uh, he had appending misdemeanor of offense
of violence and uh yeah for negligent assault. So he's
charged with negligent assault. And uh And as you know,
when we we got constitutional carry a couple of years
ago through the state legislature, there is part of that

(36:01):
statute it said that if Bob meter is I have
a pending charge of negligent assault, I am no longer
a qualified adult. The qualified adult part is that where
I cannot carry that concealed Okay. That differs from uh,
the last case, which was barring the individual under indictment

(36:23):
from having a firearm at all. Okay, So that's that's
the okay, As we like to say, it's the same thing,
only different. Ok So, so yes, I just.

Speaker 4 (36:33):
Have a question for the listeners. It's kind of just
a ticket, a backstep, but it's pragmatic. Well, if you
are an indictment and you're not supposed to do they
actually go, okay, you're under nightmentes, let's send the police.
We want to search everything in your house and take
every firearm.

Speaker 1 (36:44):
Is that how that works? Uh?

Speaker 2 (36:47):
Yeah, no, I didn't think so.

Speaker 4 (36:48):
But but technically you're not allowed to have it. But
like you said, the gun collector, who may say, look,
this is a forgerit thing. I'm under indictment for that.
Yet I have, you know, all of these firearms? Do
they ask you? Do they go check?

Speaker 1 (36:59):
I just was curious about that, because, yeah, I don't
know what that problem how the judge probably could you know,
surround them?

Speaker 5 (37:07):
If I currently have the firearms, I may have to
surrender to them pending the.

Speaker 1 (37:12):
To the place you just can't remove them from.

Speaker 5 (37:14):
Law enforcement, would be inhibited from crossing the threshold and
coming in.

Speaker 4 (37:19):
Yes, yeah, that's what did I find that curious? I
get asked us by some friends and thinks, hey, what
have happened?

Speaker 1 (37:25):
So this one? So the state?

Speaker 5 (37:27):
Friends, do you hang out with?

Speaker 1 (37:28):
Good guys have acquiring minds? Want to know?

Speaker 2 (37:31):
That's all.

Speaker 1 (37:33):
So when the state versus Hall, then I mean, you know,
it's kind of similar, kind of not. I mean, is
it enough to warrant taking away someone's right to carry? Right?

Speaker 5 (37:43):
And well, yeah, I think the ideology behind it is
not to carry at all, to carry concealed. So that
was what the issue was, because he was carrying concealed,
not that he possessed a fire right. So I think
the the ideology behind the statute was that, hey, if
I have a violent if I have a pending of
a violent charge, you probably don't want me doing ritual

(38:06):
radiation or something.

Speaker 1 (38:08):
But again, the judge, as a condition of this, could
have set that he can't be around firearms right at all.

Speaker 5 (38:16):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (38:16):
I don't know that one. That one is a little
bit I'm not sure what that. You know, you can't
carry concealed, but you can carry open. I mean, is
that solving anything. I mean, if I'm gonna go do harm, okay,
let me strap it to the outside. I'll go do harm,
you know. So I'm not sure how that how that
plays out. One of the other ones, and this one,

(38:37):
this one's is interesting to me. The US versus bridges
this one. Yeah, John, I think you and I might
have talked about this a little bit, but this is
this is very interesting in their argument, even though I
looked at it and I said, Bob, this is ridiculous.
But nonetheless, you know, basically bad guys shooting at the

(38:59):
police with the glock switch. Yeah, and then when he
gets busted for having a unlicensed you know, machine gun,
appeals it correct.

Speaker 5 (39:10):
He appealed that part of it.

Speaker 1 (39:11):
Yeah, and he appealed it on the basis of Bruin, right,
I mean, was.

Speaker 5 (39:16):
Correct because there was no historical you know, limitation about
the machine gun. And so this is that part of
Bruin where they're like, well, you know, we probably there
might be some things because certainly machine guns didn't exist
in seventeen ninety one. So anyhow with this, and I

(39:36):
think where you want to go with mister Bridge's argument,
he was like, well, hey, everybody has machine guns for
home protection.

Speaker 1 (39:44):
Right, that was his defense. It was common. It was
a common uh you know, I got the language.

Speaker 4 (39:49):
Ye.

Speaker 1 (39:51):
Now maybe in his neighborhood, yeah, maybe, but he said.

Speaker 5 (39:55):
The court says, mister Bridges merely asserts that machine guns
continue to be in many homes for self protection.

Speaker 1 (40:01):
Today, which is totally bogus in so many ways. You
and I talked about that, Bob, I mean, and the
fact that the machine guns, full the automatic weapons are
under NFA, so it's extra hoops to get them, and
you're precluded from owning them if you don't have one.
I mean, you can all have to be maybe four
nineteen eighty six. So there's a finite number of them.

(40:22):
I mean, the truth of the matter is a true
machine gun and rightful you know, lawful hands are collectors items.
I mean they We're just talking about this the other day.
The cheapest you can get into a machine gun right
now is ten grand. Cheapest. I mean that's for one
was yeah, exactly, wow, ten grand, and that is that

(40:44):
is the cheapest. I mean it's probably pushing thirteen fourteen now,
and that is a basic fuadom. They were in the
hands of collectors. There is nobody, I guarantee you the
people who have these do not have them for home defense.
They are collectors, they're put away their investments. And so
his argument when I read that, I'm like, maybe in
your neck of the woods where they're putting these glocks,

(41:04):
which is.

Speaker 5 (41:04):
On that's where I was going to go and defense,
mister Bridges that it may be common for glock switches
in high crime areas.

Speaker 4 (41:12):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean yeah, even the part isn't
NFA if you didn't own the gun, but you owned
a glock switch.

Speaker 2 (41:19):
Right.

Speaker 4 (41:21):
Printer, Oh, yeah, must some people are on the street
song for twenty bucks and you know, and there.

Speaker 5 (41:26):
Again, John, who are these people?

Speaker 2 (41:28):
You know I read about them in the paper.

Speaker 4 (41:31):
I do all the news stories, so I can tell
you though court care professional professional.

Speaker 1 (41:36):
Yeah, yeah, guys, let's jump to a break. On the
other side, we're going to continue our conversation with Bob
uh an attorney who knows a lot about the case,
laws and stuff. But when we come back, I want
to talk a little bit about I want to debate
a little bit, talk about something we've talked about before,
but really marijuana, how that affects your rights as a

(41:57):
gun owner. Maybe a little bit about how to interact
with officers these days under Ohio law, if you have
a firearm in your car and you're stopped, or a
consensual search. That's always good stuff I think to go
over because people we get those questions all the time
and it's changed, I mean it changed with constitutional carry,
how you interact with law enforcement. So I thought we'd
get to some of that. So we're all talking about

(42:17):
We're badcasting live from the studios of LPEDD Firearms Arrange,
and we'll be back right after the break. Welcome back
to on Target. I'm your host. Derek joined today in
the LAPD Studios. A live LPD Studios that's at nine
ninety nine, Bethel whod I got JC to my left,
my good friend Bob to my right. We're talking case laws.
We're talking Bruin, We're talking about how these affect your
rights to carry a firearm. Bob, you had a case

(42:38):
that just came down that you said that is very interesting.

Speaker 5 (42:42):
Right. So this case is out of the Fifth Circuit
that's out West and includes Texas and mister Hermant HARMANI
H E.

Speaker 1 (42:54):
M A N I.

Speaker 5 (42:57):
Admitted to being a regular consumer of cannabis and having
a firearm. So his because there's not a long standing
tradition back in seventeen ninety one of being a regular
drug consumer. This case, the court found in favor of
him because there was not a long standing tradition, he

(43:18):
can have a firearm INBA cannabis user. So the United States,
as the Attorney's Office, has now appealed this to US
Supreme Court that they have not accepted it. That's called
accepting socerari. So we'll see. But this may be another
significant case down the road about cannabis use. And then

(43:40):
of course in Ohio, we have our own rules about.

Speaker 1 (43:43):
That right And if you are listening, if you're listening
on to WTV and Today and stuff. You got to
go back and listen to watch it on Facebook because
we just had a great conversation outside of on air
about this during the commercial break and stuff. So definitely
go back and check that out. But Bob in this
talking about here locally, we get the questions a lot
of times here at the store on the streets when

(44:04):
I'm out there in law enforcement and stuff. You're driving
down the road, minding your own business and you might
have just consumed some some marijuana. Okay, officer pulls you over.
Now you also have your gun in the car. Okay,
officer pulls you over, and he or she says, man,
I think I smell burnt cannabis, and uh, what are what?

(44:31):
What are the officers allowed to do at that point?

Speaker 5 (44:36):
Well, at that point, there's a case from two thousand
called State versus More Supreme Court of Ole House says
that smell of marijuana does establish probable cause. Now, my
interpretation of that currently because it says the smell of
marijuana that would at the time, up until our our
new recreational that would have included both packaged or raw

(44:56):
and freshly burnt. I believe now the only application is
limited you freshly burnt. So if you're saying that I
consume cannabis and then I get stopped and the officer
smells cannabis, Uh well, I guess my impairment would be
at the top of that list. And then but under
your fact pattern, is this fresh packaged or is this.

Speaker 1 (45:19):
This is burnt? The officer has been uh schooled in
it that they can differentiate. They've gone through the boometer class.
They know the difference between burnt cannabis and freshly packed cannabis.

Speaker 5 (45:29):
We just trained that.

Speaker 1 (45:30):
Yeah, and so with that, the offer can can look
in the car right as a means of of of
looking at that potential crime that has taken place.

Speaker 5 (45:41):
The officer may look in the passenger compartment only okay, Yeah,
and he's looking or she's looking for evidence of freshly burnt.
Can't open the trunk, can't open the hood, okay.

Speaker 1 (45:53):
Uh So in that case, in the in the in
the course of doing that, they find a firearm. And
by Ohio law, if you're under the if you're accnaally,
if you're under the influence, but if you're a user
and there's evidence of them being a user and you
have that firearm.

Speaker 5 (46:10):
Right, and that's what HARMANI is exactly. The issue is right,
he's a regular consumer and not a firearm So yeah,
that wasn't a traffic stop. That was in his home.
But there was more to it. But essentially he admitted
to being a user and having a firearm right right.

Speaker 1 (46:26):
So there's so much more to come down this before
we go, bab I wanted to hitch up on one
other thing because we get it all the time. Prior
to constitutional carry or permitless carry in Ohio, if you
had an Ohio HL license and you were stopped by
law enforcement or had a consentual encounter, it was mandated
that you, as the concil carry holder notified promptly notify

(46:49):
the officer that you had a firearm in your possession.
That changed when constitutional carry passed, and that is put
a different wrinkle on it. So in that same scenario
you get pulled over, this time they take marijuana out
of the mix. You have your firearm in the car.
You may or may not have it with under constitutional

(47:10):
carry versus Ohio SHL license, but at this point you
do not have a legal obligation to tell that officer
that was.

Speaker 5 (47:18):
A big change, right, huge change that was June thirteenth
to twenty two was when that became effective. And so
now if I'm stopped, you stop me. As a law
enforcement professional, I can I can have a bunch of
firearms in the car if you don't ask, I don't
have to tell.

Speaker 1 (47:33):
What happens if I ask and you say no and
I find out otherwise?

Speaker 5 (47:37):
Yeah, Now I believe it begins a cin M two.
It's a pretty low crime.

Speaker 1 (47:40):
But right, so you can it once I would asked, right.

Speaker 5 (47:44):
You could arrest me at that point.

Speaker 1 (47:45):
Okay, so once that's but as we always say, and
I know we're coming to the end here, as we
always say, though it is best practice, it is best
to tell that officer that you have it. It completely
helps the situation if you're stopped and you say, hey, sir,
I have it. That's on my hip, or having the
glove box as an officer walking up to the car. Now,
I don't want to say I let my guard down,

(48:06):
but I'm a little more at ease knowing that this
person has been honest with me and they told me
about the firearm. Bob, thanks so much for spending this
hour with us. I don't know where the time has went.
We needed about five hours segment of this. I know
we need to get you on the books for November
or something like that if your schedule permits and stuff. Guys,

(48:27):
thanks for spending the time with us. If you have
any questions, certainly reach out to us and ask. If
we don't know the answer, we can certainly go to
those who do. And so thanks for the time and
check us out there on Facebook and on YouTube. We
will see you next week and as I always, as always, guys,
let's be careful out there.