Case law regarding drinking while carrying?

My attorney showed me an interesting piece of case law that you folks might be interested in regarding an "improper use of weapons" charge for carrying while drinking. I need to get the actual case from him, but a Colorado court ruled that the CCW law is writtin in such a way that you must be "intoxicated" (read: above BAC of 0.08), not simply "impaired" (BAC 0.05-0.079), or "under the influence of" (below BAC of 0.05).

I'll see if I can't get the exact case to post here. Have any of you seen this? If found to have a weapon in your possession while drinking you will almost certainly be cited and arrested, but it appears to be nothing that a few thousand dollars in attorney fees won't solve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

I've looked through the laws and I can't recal seeing the impared/intoxicated distinction made. If you do have a CCW on you however, you need to leave it at home / in the truck / wherever if your going to drink more then one or two imo, even if its perfectly legal. Been a few people with CCW's that have given anti-gun legislation massive ammo when they acted out while intoxicated or impared with their firearm. I dont care if your the nicest drunk guy, if there was a situation that you needed the gun and you were impared, you might have a 50/50 chance of hitting someone besides your intended target. If you can't leave the gun home, then dont drink.

---

The distinction isn't made in the legislation anywhere, but rather in case law ruling(s). Next time I speak to my laywer I'll ask him for the case, but a jury ruled that the wording of Colorado's CCW law is "significantly similar" enough to other laws that specify "intoxicated", not simply under the influence or impaird.

This is the statue:

Quote:

---

18-12-106. Prohibited use of weapons.
Statute text
(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if:

(d) The person has in his or her possession a firearm while the person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or of a controlled substance, as defined in section 12-22-303 (7), C.R.S. Possession of a permit issued under section 18-12-105.1, as it existed prior to its repeal, or possession of a permit or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article is no defense to a violation of this subsection (1).

---

Here is the case law and no I have not reviewed it.

Quote:

---

Failure to define "under the influence of intoxicating liquor", if error, was harmless, where defendant, charged with violation of this section, testified that he was too drunk to drive. People v. Beckett, 782 P.2d 812 (Colo. App. 1989), aff'd, 800 P.2d 74 (Colo. 1990).

Possession of a firearm while intoxicated is a strict liability offense, therefore, the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury that "knowingly" was an element of the offense. People v. Wilson, 972 P.2d 701 (Colo. App. 1998).

---

Take it for what you will I personally will have a drink with dinner ect. while carrying. I can't say that technically one could not be prosecuted for doing so.