He Must Have Really Loved That Dog

Eugene Volokh points to an Ohio Circuit Court of Appeals decision in regards to a man who was stripped of his right to bear arms for five years for handing a gun while intoxicated. I just had to laugh at the opinion:

We have herein affirmed appellant’s conviction and in no way seek to diminish the danger of using a firearm while intoxicated, and we further recognize that appellant acted injudiciously in firing his weapon into the ground, at night, as a “memorial” to his deceased dog.

It’s amusing that the court had to opine over Cletus getting drunk one night and and firing a twenty-one-gun-minus-twenty, or maybe twenty-one-gun-minus-nineteen (depending on how soused he was) salute into the ground. The Court ruled that six months was the maximum that he could have his right to bear arms stripped from him “corresponding to the maximum jail sentence period for a first-degree misdemeanor.” As the court notes, Cletus wasn’t trying to hurt anybody, and it was in a rural, unincorporated area.

5 Responses to “He Must Have Really Loved That Dog”

  1. ParatrooperJJ says:

    The court also ordered his firearm to be returned.

  2. Bitter says:

    Dogs are just that lovable. Unlike cats.

  3. I agree with Bitter!

  4. tjbbpgobIII says:

    He was in a rural unincorporated area? Who in the f – – k pressed charges? I thought an officer had to witness a misdemeanor before charges could be brought in circumstances like these!

  5. Anon R. D. says:

    Good stuff. (Not the gent’s behavior, but the court’s care about a fundamental right.)