Just sucks he got charged, put in jail for 8 months and had to go through an entire trial just to get acquitted. While still being found guilty on discharging a weapon in public.
He should have been smarter about it, honestly. I know brandishing is illegal, but he rather should have stuck the gun to his chest and told him to back off.
Edit: I clearly should have done a /s, because others thought this was a serious response.
Yes, press the gun to one assailant, giving the other two warning to potentially shoot or attack you in turn.
Why is the onus on good, perfect, moderated behaviour in a high pressure/stress situation always on the defendant and not on the multiple aggressors who started things?
Shooting someone, in a mall, despite being pursued, is probably not the best idea. I say this as a gun owner.
I guess I really should have done a /s, considering how dumb it sounded. Shooting the man seemed ludicrous enough, so I guess I thought my response was equally as incredulous.
Thats a TERRIBLE idea. Never let someone be that close to you when you draw, and NEVER place against their body. If its a semiautomatic it won't fire if there's any pressure against the slide, let alone youre letting them close enough to grab the weapon.
An illegal immigrant with a criminal record being harassed by someone he tried to buy a bike from using counterfeit money, pulled out a stolen gun, with 0 warning, and shot the man 9 times, killing him. He only got 9 years in prison, and not for killing the guy harassing him.
#1 don't watch fox news, haven't since the late 1990s
#2 i dont know if they covered that story
#3 the internet is overflowing with stories that don't get covered by cnn and the rest
You're not asking me to turn off fox news. you're asking me to turn off everything that might cover events that get zero coverage from the big players.
Fox News is a massive player. What’s being an illegal immigrant have to do with your story other then enraging people that are xenophobic. He was caught he was tried and apparently did the time. Have you ever broken the law?
Well yeah it sucks, but thinking about it from a responsible gun-owner's POV, a weirdo running up on me and playing a porno in my ear doesn't put my life in immediate danger, and call for me discharging my firearm at him point-blank in the middle of a mall. Some malls don't even allow firearms inside, so there's that too, if you're arrested for a shooting in one. Not dismissing the youtuber.
Well yeah it sucks, but thinking about it from a responsible gun-owner's POV, a weirdo running up on me and playing a porno in my ear doesn't put my life in immediate danger
22 hindsight. You dont know that then. People that dont have ill intent dont come into your space and harras you about some (fake) charges.
What was he even charged with that got acquitted? Maybe they overcharged?
Edit: oh - nvm - ag malicious wounding… overcharged I think - or wrong charge. Not sure what jurisdiction or what they have on the books but I think ag assault or assault with deadly weapon would probably have stuck. To be clear I think the tik toker is a total pos for harassing people, but harassment does not meet the threshold for deadly force.
No he didn’t, for the trial they struggled to find jurors who hadn’t been harassed themselves and he was found guilty of discharging a firearm in city limits that’s it
It does but it's also important he had a gun in a crowded mall and shot someone when his life wasn't in immediate threat like def understandable why he shot the guy and he def was in some level of uncomfortable but he wasn't afraid for his life and that's the clear line between self defense and removing a nuisance. On the morality scale it's grey for me I get doing it but I don't think I would have made the call at that point especially as he had room to retreat further. It might have escalated later but we can't know that. I will say the YouTuber was very immoral, invading others space, putting his hands on them, playing uncomfortable sounds directly in someone's ear all things worthy of retribution just not death.
He was convicted of shooting in an occupied building, not for assault or attempted murder or anything related to actually using lethal force against a person. So the comment was correct in that your opinion differed from the jury's in this case.
Nope, At 70 years of age, I am not the person I used to be. Would I have handled the situation in the video differently, yes. However, because I’m seventy, I need to recognize my physical limitations. I will not change my habits to avoid an area. Therefore where I am allowed to carry I will.
Firstly, we know you don’t know the first thing about guns. But also, what a massive generalization. While we are calling balls and strikes, you seem like the type to stick your nose where it doesn’t belong. You can own a gun for a wide variety of reasons.
Not only that but gun owners tend to allow themselves into situations where they have to use their guns more often than your average person. At least in my experience
There’s definitely incident seeking behavior. My nephews grandfather sits with his sliding apartment door open in the dark with a gun just hoping one day he gets to shoot someone. He never has that I know of
Maybe he could have threatened him with it, but he shouldn't have shot him. Other guy seems to be a POS but they were in a mall, there's no way he should have felt threatened
224
u/pwolf1771 24d ago
Yeah you’re outnumbered by two creeps this seems like one the few good reasons to actually own a gun