Posted on 03/03/2008 4:15:19 PM PST by kiriath_jearim
KAUFMAN — A family is on an “emotional rollercoaster” as they deal with the death of a wife and mother who was killed as she drove a teenager to the hospital — after he was shot by an elderly neighbor while walking across the man’s lawn.
The 41-year-old pediatric nurse was pronounced dead at the scene after the Nissan pickup she was driving collided with a Ford pickup Saturday night in Kaufman.
According to a Texas Department of Public Safety report, June Nalls was driving west in the 3000 block of Texas Highway 243 en route to Kaufman Presbyterian Hospital when she collided with a truck driven by Agustin Renteria, 27.
Renteria was arrested and charged with felony failure to stop and render aid.
DPS officials in Terrell said Nalls’ son Devon, 16, was transported with minor injuries and Brandon Robinson was air lifted to Parkland Hospital in Dallas for the gunshot wound under his left arm and injuries sustained in the accident.
Sgt. Bryan Francis of the Kaufman County Sheriff’s Department said his agency was contacted in reference to the shooting about 10:40 p.m. Saturday in the 5000 block of Texas Highway 243.
Francis said deputies learned that a 74-year-old home owner saw people unknown to him on his property and fired a single shot through the window.
“Deputies later discovered the individual having been shot in his left side along with a friend ran to the house next door where he was staying. The friends’ mother (Mrs. Nalls), the friend and the shot individual got in a small pickup and began driving toward the hospital,” he said.
The woman’s husband, Mark Nalls, told police his wife thought it would be “riskier to wait for an ambulance” than to drive the teen to the hospital.
Family spokesperson Brian Nalls said his family is well known in Kaufman and June’s death has impacted the community.
“There’s a lot of attachment to the Nalls name, and this is directly affecting the entire community,” Brian Nalls said.
He said the family cannot understand why the neighbor fired at someone outside his home.
“The family thinks this is partly a tragic incident, but shooting wildly out of windows is not a good way to protect your home,” he said.
Brian Nalls continued saying it was not in the neighbor’s character to act without regard to human life.
“That is probably why the boys felt safe crossing his yard, because they knew him,” he said.
Authorities have said the teens were not committing a crime when the shooting occurred.
Nalls said the funeral is set for Wednesday at Parker-Ashworth Funeral Home in Kaufman.
The family has yet to set up a tragedy fund, but added that Mark Nalls is on disability after being crushed by an electrical transformer while he was restoring power to the Gulf Coast in the aftermath of Katrina.
“It is like the rug just keeps getting pulled out from under this family,” Brian Nalls said.
My license lapsed years ago but my daughter and I plan to be licensed this summer. I stopped carrying a pistol in my car years ago because I thought it a violation to carry across city or county lines. Are you sure we can carry in a car without a license? thx.
I thought he hit the target, that's hardly shooting wildly.
Authorities have said the teens were not committing a crime when the shooting occurred.
They were trespassing. Late at night. Dumb. Could get you shot.
Fawn, you need to stop watching CNN!
You come here without a firearm, you'll be issued one at the state line!
No, it was never illegal to carry across county or city lines. However, the statute only mentioned “travelling” and was not actually defined. Some places said that travelling could only be if you crossed two or more county lines and were not going on a trip to work, other jurisdictions said travelling was any time you were in your car and actually moving BUT that if you stopped to get gas, food, or whatever, you had to secure the weapon in the trunk. Still other DAs defined travelling as any time you were on a journey, period.
The 05 Legislature fixed that after much pressure from the TSRA and others (and after Houston got hammered by the Feds for ignoring other state gun laws, city DAs.) Here is the 05-06 update:
http://www.gunlaws.com/tgogup3.htm
“Traveling” defined at last, almost, after more than 125 years
HB 823 — Amends Penal Code 2.05, 46.15
Analysts at the NRA, along with the Texas State Rifle Association’s Legislative Committee describe these two new amendments this way:
“Texas H.B. 823 prevents the police from routinely arresting a law-abiding person who is transporting a concealed pistol in his motor vehicle. This is accomplished by clothing a law-abiding person with the presumption of being a traveler. The traveler presumption may be rebutted by the state by presenting proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In plain terms, a law-abiding person should have no problem transporting his pistol in a motor vehicle provided the pistol is concealed.”
Texas Attorney Sean Healy has an eight-page paper
attempting to describe the new situation, read it here.
NRA short version (6/05):
“Legalizes the carrying of concealed handguns in private vehicles without a CHL.”
Background: Since 1871, carrying a handgun in Texas, despite the Hollywood version of history, has been nearly totally banned for the public (long guns are unaffected by all this). A person who is “traveling” with a handgun is one of the very limited exemptions under the law. However, under this arrangement, mere possession of a handgun was presumed to be guilt of illegal carry, and it was up to you to prove your innocence after arrest, by proving you were traveling.
“Traveling” was not defined. Scores of county and state court cases generated numerous definitions of what constitutes “traveling,” many not even similar, many conflicting with each other. See 60 of them summarized in The Texas Gun Owner’s Guide. Gun owners had no way of knowing if they were legal or not, abuse was rampant, it was a mess.
A primary function of written law is to give fair warning of what behavior is subject to punishment. The law therefore must give people a clear, understandable, unambiguous description of what the law is. When it fails to do so, it is invalid in court. That’s the principle at least. It has not been sufficient to save Texans from over a century of guessing whether they were truly traveling when they did so armed, and being arrested and convicted for simple possession of their private property.
Some Texans regained the ability to bear arms in 1995, when the CHL law was passed and signed by Governor (now President) Bush. It provided much needed relief from the long denial of rights. About 1% of all Texans have obtained a government license and can carry as they travel around the state. The other 99% are still under the ban that began in 1871.
What the law does is create a definition of “traveling” at last, for carrying a firearm in a private motor vehicle only. It is actually a definition of a presumption of traveling, which the state would have to disprove in order to go after you for possession of a handgun. HB 823 is a somewhat roundabout way of decriminalizing a law-abiding person’s carry of a concealed handgun in a vehicle without a permit. Technically, it leaves the offense intact, and makes it hard for the state to come after you.
It seems to get the job done. But until the courts get a hold of a few people trying to bear arms in their vehicles under this law, the true effect is unknown, and who wants to be in the first few test cases, right?
The switch to a real definition is a step in the right direction, even if it only applies in vehicles. (No one is talking about how you legally get to and from your wheels. There are already some narrow exemptions for things like going hunting, to the range, to a gun store, etc.).
Next however, if we’re lucky, the whole concept of criminalizing you and your personal property (firearms) for mere possession, when no criminal act is attached, will be abandoned altogether and our rights will take a giant leap forward.
The definition of “traveling,” for the exemption from a charge of illegal carry under 46.15(b)(3), is this:
A person is presumed to be traveling if the person is:
(1) in a private motor vehicle;
(2) not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic;
(3) not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing a firearm;
(4) not a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01; and
(5) not carrying a handgun in plain view.
NOTE: Since the site posted the above, we’ve had test cases and they’ve held up.
A cop on “COPS” said it....I just remembered where I heard it. I was shocked because I thought Texas was very lenient with gun ownership.
Whether you are a Danish journalist or some kid, it is a good practice to stay off others property.
More to this story than reported.
It may have been a very old COPS episode - we’ve only had CCW since the mid 90s.
Thanks Spktyr. I placed a pistol back into my car today, strictly for self defense. We have many illegal aliens in this area who are becoming very testy due to the shortage of work. However, in my own research, I found that Harris County (Houston, TX) officers have been instructed to ignore the new law and if they discover a handgun, regardless of the “traveling” clarification. This article:
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2005/09/texas-new-carry-law-what-does-it-mean.html
best captured what I found on the complexity of Texas’ new law. Two principles seem to apply. First, you can beat the rap but not the ride. Secondly, you’ll prevent a shitload of aggravation by keeping your license up to date (which I obviously have not). My daughter plans to remedy the latter problem for both of us this summer. Here’s the salient paragraph from that article:
...So the Legislature passed HB 823 creating a “presumption” that the driver is “traveling” unless one of five things is true: (a) the weapon is in plain view, (b) the defendant is a convicted felon, (c) it’s a public, not a personal vehicle, (d) the defendant committed a Class B misdemeanor or worse, or (e) the defendant is a gang-banger. (Conflict alert: I testified at the hearings in both chambers in favor of the bill on behalf of ACLU of Texas.)...
Predictably, it was Houston (Harris County) that chose to defy the new interpretation and continued to run toters in. It’s disappointing that law enforcement and the judiciary continue to disobey the law. Even with a license, we’re at risk for the ride. thx. Tom
Better judged by twelve than carried by six.
That said, the Harris County DA has NOT been prosecuting such cases as they know they won’t win. They offer plea bargains and such for lesser charges instead, and if the person won’t take the deal they string it out for months and then eventually drop the case.
It’s the same deal with San Antonio. SA has a law against carrying of long arms within the city limits. It’s never actually fully prosecuted because they *know* that if they go to trial on it they’re going to lose AND have a huge civil rights judgement lodged against them. Houston has had it happen already:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=5th&navby=docket&no=9820497CV0
Francis said deputies learned that a 74-year-old home owner saw people unknown to him on his property and fired a single shot through the window.
Well, the old man appears to be in the clear. Damn shame about that stupid teenager and even worse about what basically amounts to a hit and run.
Also, something to consider in terms of the car gun. You should have something low maintenance, highly rust resistant and preferably polymer framed if you live someplace like Harris County where they’re going to take you for a ride despite the law. Over and above the fact that a car’s environment isn’t great for a firearm, if you get taken for a ride, the police will confiscate your weapon, test fire it at least two or three times, and then “store” it in a box, uncleaned, for as long as it takes to “resolve” your case. In the case of a vindictive PD or DA, they may even “lose” your gun - so don’t use something with significant emotional or collector value.
Finally, places like Houston/Harris County just don’t seem to learn. They’re eventually going to slip up, the case is going to make it to trial, they’re going to lose and be on the losing end of a civil rights violation suit again.
Thanks for great advice. I live north of Dallas but based on this exchange, I’m headed for the next gun show to procure a throwaway BFCS (Big Friggin Criminal Shooter). Right now, my car is protected with a nickel plated SW revolver, .357 magnum. I agree it’s probably too good to sit in a car and deteriorate.
BTW, did you see Renteria is an illegal alien? Here’s the Kaufman story:
http://www.kaufmanherald.com/articles/2008/03/07/news/news02.txt
The operative paragraph says, “...Renteria told an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent via a phone interview that he is in the United States illegally, said Dallas ICE agent Roy Hernandez. “We confirmed he’s here illegally,” Hernandez said. Once Kaufman County is done with the charges against Renteria, he will be released to ICE who will begin deportation, Hernandez said....”
FYI, Dallas pretty much doesn’t care and they’re pretty good about getting your gun back to you quickly.
In addition, Dallas has historically taken the position of “the law means *exactly* what it says, we’re not going to mess with it” so you can “travel” without fear here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.