Supporters of concealed carry often make the argument that law-abiding citizens can be trusted with guns. But human beings are emotional creatures, and even law-abiding humans get emotional from time to time and react poorly. That was the case last month when Michael J. Bukosky pointed a gun at another driver during a road rage incident here in Waukesha.
Locals may remember that Michael Bukosky’s pregnant wife, her daughter, and her daughter’s friend were killed in an auto accident on April 25, 2008 by a man who had received his third OWI days before the incident. It was an unimaginable loss, and the community grieved with Bukosky.
So it would be understandable if Bukosky were sensitive to the driving habits of others and felt the need to somehow protect himself while on the road.
While his behavior on January 4, 2013 may have been understandable, it was completely unacceptable.
Here’s what happened, according to a criminal complaint via JS Online:
“Two drivers had just exited I-94 about 6:30 p.m. on Jan. 4 when one cut off the other as they pulled onto N. Grandview Blvd. heading south.
They each sped and slowed down, changed lanes and swore at each other once they came to a red light.
But then Michael J. Bukosky, 36, pointed a gun at the other driver and said, “That’s right – don’t (expletive) around in a concealed carry state.”
The other driver then pulled his car over and called 911, as did Bukosky, who had assumed that the other driver was packing heat, too.
Bukosky told police he thought the other driver was reaching for a gun, so he pointed his own weapon at him and yelled, “No, no, no.”
It was an inaccurate assumption; the other driver was unarmed.
Police confiscated a Ruger handgun with seven rounds from Bukosky. No weapons were found in the other man’s car.
Bukosky was charged Thursday with pointing a firearm at another, a misdemeanor. His initial court appearance is set for Feb. 11.
Luckily, nobody was injured (or worse) in this case, and that’s a big relief. But the outcome is not always the same in all incidents in which road rage and concealed carry collide.
The argument that we can trust law-abiding citizens with concealed carry is logical, neat and tidy.
But life is not neat and tidy, it’s messy. And humans are not predictable, we’re complex. That’s just the reality.
Image via Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort
Some comments from a pro-gun conservative..
Don’t point fingers at the NRA and bark “Wrong again, NRA” just because their statement that “An armed society is a polite society” is inapplicable to a mental case…by way of comparison, how many times has the signs around schools declaring them to be “Gun Free Zones” been tragically wrong?
NRA’s statement absolutely is applicable in general society, in that a Bad Guy will certainly think twice before deciding to assault a park-goer, or rob a convenience store, when the populace armed. Research conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice on convicted criminals reveals that 40% of them had in fact decided NOT to commit a crime at one point, simply because they suspected their victim was armed.
The article doesn’t mention whether or not Mr. Bukosky actually has a concealed carry license, which leads me to believe he doesn’t (trust me, if he did the lamestream media would be all over it like flies on stink). So we can’t connect his behavior with anyone who actually has been background-checked.
And if he DOES have a concealed carry license, it should be summarily revoked for felony “Assault with a deadly weapon”, which is in fact what he should be charged with, not some politically correct misdemeanor BS about “pointing a firearm at another”. He’s shown himself to be an unpredictable and dangerous threat to everyone around him, and should be forever prevented from owning any firearm.
But hey, that’s just me, coming from a state (Texas) where EVERYONE on the road has a gun in the car (at least I THINK they do), and where the average concealed carry license holder is 26 times more law abiding than the average citizen (go ahead, look up the statistics on license holders).
OJB
Hi OJB,
You and I have very different perspectives on this topic, and part of that may be that you’ve lived in a state where concealed carry is the norm (Texas), whereas concealed carry is still very new here in WI, where I’ve lived my entire adult life. I felt safer with the way things were before the concealed carry law was passed, in part, because of cases like the one I shared in this blog post (which happened, by the way, in my neighborhood).
It will be interesting to see if more information comes out about this case, because from this report we can’t say for certain whether Bukosky has mental health issues or if he has a conceal and carry license. My educated guess is, from the way the JS article was written, that he does have a conceal and carry license and that he hasn’t been found to be mentally ill. Usually that kind of information is disclosed if it is known to be true. But again, at this point it’s unclear.
I agree with you that the classification of this crime is BS, that it should not be a misdemeanor but a felony, as it is in other states.
I was wondering what you’d have to say about this case, OJB. It’s interesting to hear your perspective and rationale.
Lisa
Hi Lisa,
It’s a shame there’s no “thanks” button in your blog, I’d have already hit it a couple of times for you…thanks for your open-mindedness, and your level-headedness (is that a word?). It’s a pleasure reading your stuff, because 1) you’re not an extremist and 2) you at least listen to others’ point of view.
Stay safe on the roads,
OJB
Ditto OJB.
Attempting to connect the dots of Bukosky inncident to conceal & carry and the NRA is not valid and it does not add value to the current conversation regarding violence that has been going on since Newtown.
Actually, it appears the current violence conversation from Washington is nothing more than anti-firearms folks going after firearms folks, who in turn defend themselves, repeat, repeat, etc. I could continue with many reasons why this approach is naive and non-productive with regard to curtailing violence.
But, lets go with it. Let’s passed more laws, more restrictions, ban some items and even confiscate. What are we going to do when the next tragic event occurs? and the next and the next?
Another slice of reality is that as I type this, China has read the Feinstein draft bill and are in the process of making an AR style rifle that is a different size, or shape, or color that excludes them from the ban. This happened during the last ban too. And ban 30 round clips and magazines, China is making 30 round bullet holders, containers and reservoirs. The point is this stuff just does not work. Well intended yes, but, just not real world. And the only ones affected are on the side of the law, so why?
I hear privacy concerns/laws regarding mental health issues implying that is off the table and cannot add names to the FBI list for back ground checks. That’s a problem.
So here is where we are at, there are a helluva lot of people who will continue to send a monthly allowance to the NRA to defend their rights under the 2nd ammendment until this round anti-firearm nonsense has passed.
I for one would consider closing gun show loop holes, but, this is shaping up to be an all or nothing issue, therefore it will be nothing. Meanwhile, crime and criminals go unchecked. That’s not leadership from Washington, it’s little more than feel good campaign rhetoric.
Hi independent guy,
What’s interesting is that I hadn’t intended to mention the NRA at all in this post. What happened is this: I was looking for a graphic that fit my post and I came very close to not using one at all. I ended up using the NRA graphic reluctantly. In retrospect, my point would have been clearer had I left out that graphic.
However, this particular post IS about concealed carry, and it’s extremely relevant to the Bukosky story. Bukosky even told the other driver basically not to mess around in a conceal and carry state (see quote above). My point is that when people get emotional, they make mistakes. Bukosky got emotional. We’re lucky he just threatened the other (unarmed) driver instead of shooting him.
I agree that we should close gun show loopholes.
I also agree that the discussion about guns is Washington is dysfunctional. And I, personally, don’t have the answer to our problems.
But, and here’s where we differ, I just don’t think that adding more guns to the mix is a good solution.
As our friends over at BB know, when the topic is a hot button issue (guns/control) a few speak up (Walmart/ machine guns ring any bells?), and it isn’t crime and criminals. It’s law abiding folks who feel tread upon.
Adding more guns to the mix? That is not an objective, but, a reactive by product I think. Most do not want increased security in airports either, but, 911 occured and so it is largely accepted as the most effective method to insure air travel is a safe as possible. In addition, terrorism is being fought on other fronts. I don’t think there are any Americans who WANT increased security and/or officers in schools because schools are a safe zone of education for children. So in addtion to plugging some of the other societal holes in the dyke, security is an obvious potential solution. In current conversation I’m afraid it is the messenger (NRA) who being rejected more than the message.
Back to the original story line, Bukosky/conceal & carry,..there are plenty of Bukosky’s out there who have previously performed the same road rage manuever without a cc permit. So I guess in this case, yea the dots are present, but, one bad apple don’t spoil the whole bunch.
Independent guy,
The problem for me is, the bad apples have already spoiled the bunch, and now I have a hard time trusting even “law-abiding citizens” with guns.
I believe your fear is genuine, but, WI isn’t going to turn into the wild west.
Call me an optimist, but, I refuse to let the bad apples spoil the bunch. In anything.
In a certain sense, and I’ll bet in a practical sense the fact that cc has occured in WI hasn’t really changed much. The same people who were carrying concealed weapons before are carrying them today, only difference is that some of them are now legal to do so and it isn’t criminals. I don’t honestly think that the thousands of new cc permit holders now carry on any ongoing basis. But, they can if they choose, that’s the big deal.
I’ve heard off color jokes from fear monger friends regarding cc and settling bar room disputes with guns now and on and on. That stuff is just crazy. Now there are Crazy’s out there, but it is the same number as before and let’s assume they are crime and criminals (bad apples) and not cc permit holders.
In fact, “I know this guy”, who has a cc permit and who has voluntarily participated in a cc ground school class. Theory only, no application. Where the ominous responsibilities of a cc permit are explored. The what if’s, the potential protocols and much more. Even those that do not carry should be educated in this area to know exactly what is involved rather than speculate a worst case scenario that may be fictional.
I don’t understand all things, but, I think I do understand what cc means in WI in a general sense and as I said, it doesn’t really change the landscape so I don’t have a concern with trust of “law abiding citizens”.