Man who pulled gun on crowd of BLM protestors found guilty - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819184]what possible purpose could having over 100 rounds on your person have unless you're going to the range or hunting? It sure as fuck aint self defense.[/QUOTE] Honestly that's the one part I don't really have a problem with. You're free to carry as much fucking ammo as you want. There really doesn't have to be a reason besides "that's how much ammo I had on me"

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819176]Which he was not. He was not in the right to draw his firearm. He was not in the right to brandish it. He was not in the right to muzzle-sweep dozens of unarmed civilians. He was not in the right to prepare to kill those that posed no threat. He overreacted, did something that could have seriously hurt or killed innocent people, and now he pays the price. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Stop deflecting.[/QUOTE] I just don't think it's as black and white as you're presenting it. He had a group of 4-5 guys walking in on him and the guy with the big camera, even after someone yelled, "He has his hand on his gun!" People don't just walk at you like that, as you're backing away, with good intentions. You can even see the big guy in front of the camera take off his backpack like he's about to start fighting. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=duckmaster;51819185]Violent protestors that never raised their fists at the man, violent protestors that nearly could have been killed by a man with over a hundred rounds at his disposal, yeah clearly the protestors are completely in the wrong, clearly the man waving his gun around is the victim here.[/QUOTE] You mean like the guy who threw his backpack off like he's about to throw a punch?

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819191] You mean like the guy who threw his backpack off like he's about to throw a punch?[/QUOTE] I'm more concerned about the dumbshit who pulled a gun on people who posed no immediate threat

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819199]I'm more concerned about the dumbshit who pulled a gun on people who posed no immediate threat[/QUOTE] How do you know that? Honestly, how can you possibly know that they posed no immediate threat? It takes about 3 seconds to go from nothing to full on brawl and at least one guy looked like he wanted to start a fight.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819191]I just don't think it's as black and white as you're presenting it. He had a group of 4-5 guys walking in on him and the guy with the big camera, even after someone yelled, "He has his hand on his gun!" People don't just walk at you like that, as you're backing away, with good intentions. You can even see the big guy in front of the camera take off his backpack like he's about to start fighting. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] You mean like the guy who threw his backpack off like he's about to throw a punch?[/QUOTE] The 4 guys that were walking at him one of which had his hands up. When the camera pans back on him hes at least 10-15 feet away from the " Violent " Protestors, he was not under any immediate danger from anyone.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819191] You mean like the guy who threw his backpack off like he's about to throw a punch?[/QUOTE] Ah yes, throwing my backpack off - the universal symbol for fighting. I make sure every time I go to class that I place my backpack gently on the ground, lest the lab session begins and ends with a brawl.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819200]How do you know that? Honestly, how can you possibly know that they posed no immediate threat? It takes about 3 seconds to go from nothing to full on brawl.[/QUOTE] You're grasping at straws. But please, continue defending the man who put people's lives at risk because he wanted to be the big hero with a gun.

[QUOTE=aydin690;51819162]You called the protestors thugs but i'm the one making sweeping generalizations. OK, bud.[/QUOTE] I called the specific ones walking towards him in a clearly threatening manner both before and after the incident the thugs. I didn't call the whole group of protesters thugs. Maybe body language works different over the ocean, because some of those dudes - guy with the keffiyeh specifically before the incident - looked like they were about to send a fist right through his face. I'm not saying he's innocent, I did in my first post but I retracted that a while ago. What I'm saying is he's understandable, and didn't actually hurt anybody, and this doesn't seem to me like a remotely justified reason to send anyone to prison. Since there seems to be a basic disagreement there, I don't know how worth it is to keep engaging in the discussion. I think sending this "autistic conspiracy theorist trump supporter" to prison over what happened is extremely retarded and wouldn't make the streets safer nor 'rehabilitate' him in any way, so what's the point? Take his guns away, since he proved that he can't handle them under stress, make a court order disallowing him from appearing in any further protests since he has shown an inability to handle the situation, and he's already not an issue anymore. Slap a fine and some mandatory community service and you're done. Why prison?

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819191]I just don't think it's as black and white as you're presenting it. He had a group of 4-5 guys walking in on him and the guy with the big camera, even after someone yelled, "He has his hand on his gun!" People don't just walk at you like that, as you're backing away, with good intentions.[/quote] because he escalated to the situation by pulling the gun out. They didn't follow him when he put distance between the protesters and himself until he pulled the gun. [quote] You can even see the big guy in front of the camera take off his backpack like he's about to start fighting.[/quote] so someone taking their backpack off is a clear indicator of intention but carrying over 100 rounds of ammo with you to a protest isn't? [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] [quote] You mean like the guy who threw his backpack off like he's about to throw a punch?[/QUOTE] What would you do if a gun was pulled on you? Heres a hypothetical. Suppose I'm some bystander watching the protests and I see this altercation happening. The dude pulls his gun out and starts waving it back and forth in the direction I'm in, which is a clear and obvious threat to my person. Would I be justified in pulling my gun on him?

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819172]Listen, I'm not saying this guy acted perfectly. It looks to me like he overreacted, but that's very different than saying he actually intended to gun down a bunch of protestors.[/QUOTE] That's the whole point. The gun is a last resort. You don't use it to threaten people whenever you feel like it. When you pull out a gun the situation is being elevated to life or death and now somebody from the crowd might pull out their gun and justifiably kill this idiot. The whole thing could have gotten out of hand quickly. That's why he got 10 counts of "unlawful use of a weapon".

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819208]Why prison?[/QUOTE] Because he drew a fucking gun on unarmed, innocent people, and proceeded to brandish it on those who posed no threat, and muzzle-swept a crowd. That is intent to cause bodily harm.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819205]You're grasping at straws. But please, continue defending the man who put people's lives at risk because he wanted to be the big hero with a gun.[/QUOTE] What does this even mean? You're creating these huge psychoanalytic conclusions that are based on a minute of video and about 5 words. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819221]Because he drew a fucking gun on unarmed, innocent people, and proceeded to brandish it on those who posed no threat, and muzzle-swept a crowd. That is intent to cause bodily harm.[/QUOTE] Please prove that they posed no threat since you're so adamant about the fact.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819223] Please prove that they posed no threat.[/QUOTE] thats not how burden of proof works. You made the claim that they were a threat, you prove it.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819223]What does this even mean? You're creating these huge psychoanalytic conclusions that are based on a minute of video.[/QUOTE] Ok fine, let's be more down to earth then! Let's be more up your alley, hm? What makes this man innocent in drawing a weapon on a crowd, and proceeding to muzzle-sweep them when they are backing away? What makes this anything [I]but[/I] intent to cause bodily harm.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819229]thats not how burden of proof works. You made the claim that they were a threat, you prove it.[/QUOTE] No, I actually didn't make that claim. I said we don't know and that it was a possibility. These situations develop extremely quickly. It only take a second to go from a seemingly peaceful group in an argument to mob violence. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819230]Ok fine, let's be more down to earth then! Let's be more up your alley, hm? What makes this man innocent in drawing a weapon on a crowd, and proceeding to muzzle-sweep them when they are backing away? What makes this anything [I]but[/I] intent to cause bodily harm.[/QUOTE] How about the fact that he didn't cause bodily harm when he was in the position to do so? Generally, you do something when you have both the intent and ability to do so.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819223]What does this even mean? You're creating these huge psychoanalytic conclusions that are based on a minute of video and about 5 words. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] Please prove that they posed no threat since you're so adamant about the fact.[/QUOTE] If a crowd of people allows you to move 10 feet and isn't chasing after you pretty good chance they are no threat.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819221]Because he drew a fucking gun on unarmed, innocent people, and proceeded to brandish it on those who posed no threat, and muzzle-swept a crowd. That is intent to cause bodily harm.[/QUOTE] Again, a hasty, panicked action, one that ended in 2 seconds, there wasn't even a finger on the trigger, he clearly just wanted them to back off considering he put it right back in almost immediately. He was scared. Do you have absolutely zero empathy? Why is this: [quote] Take his guns away, since he proved that he can't handle them under stress, make a court order disallowing him from appearing in any further protests since he has shown an inability to handle the situation, and he's already not an issue anymore. Slap a fine and some mandatory community service and you're done.[/quote] Not enough?

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819231] How about the fact that he didn't cause bodily harm when he was in the position to do so? Generally, you do something when you have both the intent and ability to do so.[/QUOTE] Did you purposefully skim over the word "intent".

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819237]Did you purposefully skim over the word "intent".[/QUOTE] ... Uh, I specifically used the word. So, no, I didn't skim over it. You claim that he had intent to cause harm, yet he didn't do so. Why?

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819235]Again, a hasty, panicked action, one that ended in 2 seconds, there wasn't even a finger on the trigger, he clearly just wanted them to back off considering he put it right back in almost immediately. He was scared. Do you have absolutely zero empathy? Why is this: Not enough?[/QUOTE] Because he broke the fucking law. He could have fucking killed people. You don't get a slap on the wrist when you nearly go the distance to take people's lives. Community service is for drunkards and hooligans. Not people who threaten to kill others. Sorry.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819223] Please prove that they posed no threat since you're so adamant about the fact.[/QUOTE] Response from an actual lawyer i found on the internet: [QUOTE]In most states in the US, "pulling a gun" on someone is illegal unless it is done in self-defense. Further, because a gun is a lethal weapon, it would likely fall under the same analysis [B]as if you had actually used the gun[/B] -- whether or not, at the time you pulled the gun, you had [B]a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm from your attacker[/B]. Additionally, most self-defense laws [B]require that you have not "instigated" the situation or "escalated" it unreasonably[/B]. Thus, if someone calls you some names, but otherwise makes no obvious attempt to attack you, it would be illegal for you to "pull a gun" on them -- and they may be within their own rights to respond with lethal force. Bottom line - unless you're both afraid for your life and willing to use it, "pulling a gun" on anyone is just a bad idea.[/QUOTE] This guy did everything wrong.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819241]... Uh, I specifically used the word. So, no, I didn't skim over it. You claim that he had intent to cause harm, yet he didn't do so. Why?[/QUOTE] Just cause you didn't do something doesn't mean you weren't going to.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819241] You claim that he had intent to cause harm, yet he didn't do so. Why?[/QUOTE] Because laws state that people can have intent to do something. It doesn't matter that he didn't, it doesn't fucking matter. It is considered a threat to someone's being, and thus is intent.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819231]No, I actually didn't make that claim. I said we don't know and that it was a possibility.[/QUOTE] no but you clearly insinuated it [quote]You mean like the guy who threw his backpack off like he's about to throw a punch? [/quote] [quote]You can even see the big guy in front of the camera take off his backpack like he's about to start fighting.[/quote] [quote]He had a group of 4-5 guys walking in on him and the guy with the big camera, even after someone yelled, "He has his hand on his gun!" People don't just walk at you like that, as you're backing away, with good intentions.[/quote] [quote]How about the fact that he didn't cause bodily harm when he was in the position to do so?[/QUOTE] how about the fact that he brandished a gun and pointed it in the direction of a large crowd, in the middle of one of the largest cities in the US. I hate to repeat myself but I must again ask, if I was in the direction he waved his gun around would I be justified in pulling a gun on him?

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819243]Because he broke the fucking law. He could have fucking killed people. You don't get a slap on the wrist when you nearly go the distance to take people's lives. Community service is for drunkards and hooligans. Not people who threaten to kill others. Sorry.[/QUOTE] Not a good enough reason to wreck this guy's life for me. Guess we're at a brick wall.

[QUOTE=aydin690;51819244]Response from an actual lawyer i found on the internet: "In most states in the US, "pulling a gun" on someone is illegal unless it is done in self-defense. Further, because a gun is a lethal weapon, it would likely fall under the same analysis [B]as if you had actually used the gun[/B] -- whether or not, at the time you pulled the gun, you had [B]a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm from your attacker[/B]. Additionally, most self-defense laws [B]require that you have not "instigated" the situation or "escalated" it unreasonably[/B]. Thus, if someone calls you some names, but otherwise makes no obvious attempt to attack you, it would be illegal for you to "pull a gun" on them -- and they may be within their own rights to respond with lethal force. Bottom line - unless you're both afraid for your life and willing to use it, "pulling a gun" on anyone is just a bad idea." This guy did everything wrong.[/QUOTE] Right, I get that. My point is that I'm not sure how you can possibly say that there was no reasonable fear of great bodily harm. He was surrounded by a large group of people who clearly didn't didn't like him, and at least a couple of them were exhibiting aggressive body language. We also have no reason to believe that he escalated or instigated the situation. The video doesn't show anything before the event.

Doesn't look like a lawful use of a concealed firearm to me.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819253]Not a good enough reason to wreck this guy's life for me. Guess we're at a brick wall.[/QUOTE] imagine if there was a big protest in paris and a dude pulls a gun on some protestors in a crowd he thought were intimidating. If he truly is panicked then he'll likely miss a few shots. Guess where those bullets (and depending on the gun the bullets that punched through our would be "thugs) are going to end up? If you're going to pull a gun in a crowd of people you'd better be pretty damned justified in doing so.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819246]Because laws state that people can have intent to do something. It doesn't matter that he didn't, it doesn't fucking matter. It is considered a threat to someone's being, and thus is intent.[/QUOTE] Intent means that you are planning to do something. It means that you've decided to do some act. It makes zero sense to say that he intended to harm those people, that he decided he was going to harm them, but he didn't do so given the chance. The point just makes no sense at all.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819254]Right, I get that. My point is that I'm not sure how you can possibly say that there was no reasonable fear of great bodily harm. He was surrounded by a large group of people who clearly didn't didn't like him, and at least a couple of them were exhibiting aggressive body language. We also have no reason to believe that he escalated or instigated the situation. The video doesn't show anything before the event.[/QUOTE] what point are you even arguing