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

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819272]what point are you even arguing[/QUOTE] "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." ?

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819268]The point just makes no sense at all.[/QUOTE] How doesn't it make sense? Are you intentionally construing and ignoring the parts of my arguments? Do I need to spell it out in alphabet soup for you? You don't pull a gun on people when you do not have the intention to kill them. It's CCW 101. That weapon, when drawn, is to be used to kill. It is not to be used as a threat. When you bring that out, you are making a display with your [B][I][U]INTENT[/U][/I][/B] to cause violence towards another human being. When a guy draws a gun on someone during a carjacking, he has intent to kill them. When a a guy draws a gun on a group of unarmed individuals, he has intent to kill them. I don't give two hot shits on a Sunday afternoon if he did or didn't. In the eyes of the law, he is guilty.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819267]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] But in your scenario something actually happened. In the real scenario, nothing happened. No one was hurt. There's a huge difference. One guy acted irresponsibly. I don't see that as a good enough reason to throw him in jail, which will undoubtedly wreck his life. A fine, taking his gun away, barring him from protests, and doing community service sounds just right to me.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819279]A fine, taking his gun away, barring him from protests, and doing community service sounds just right to me.[/QUOTE] Far too little. The man broke the law and should be stripped of all rights regarding his firearms and access to them.

Don't pull your gun unless the alternative is you/someone dying. Be prepared to be sued into poverty anyway(followed by a pitch to buy self-defense insurance). Is basically what they taught me when I took class for my license. Basically, would I rather be dead or in potentially ruined? I guess this dude chose ruined.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51819274]"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." ?[/QUOTE] so your point is that we should be able to pull guns on someone because the exhibit completely subjective body language with no clear intent (ex raised fist, brandishing a weapon). In a large crowd. In one of the largest cities in the United States. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Bertie;51819279]But in your scenario something actually happened. In the real scenario, nothing happened. No one was hurt. There's a huge difference. One guy acted irresponsibly. I don't see that as a good enough reason to throw him in jail, which will undoubtedly wreck his life. A fine, taking his gun away, barring him from protests, and doing community service sounds just right to me.[/QUOTE] you're missing the point. The harsh sentence is supposed to act as a warning so the next time a situation happens like this the person will think twice before brandishing a gun or shooting it for that matter.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51819281]Far too little. The man broke the law and should be stripped of all rights regarding his firearms and access to them.[/QUOTE] That is precisely what I said should happen. By "taking his gun away" I didn't mean just confiscate the gun and let him off to go buy another one. He should be punished financially for being a nuisance, he should be punished for mishandling his lethal firearm by being revoked of any access to them, and he should also pay back for the nuisance he has caused by doing mandatory community service. Bar him from protests too so no more shit like this will happen, at least with relation to him. Now you've completely eliminated any danger from this man. Throwing him in prison just means another mouth for tax payers to feed, and American prisons don't exactly have a reputation of taking downtrodden individuals and making model citizens out of them. It's just a waste of money time and effort. Pushing for him to get thrown in prison looks like a childlike demand to see him punished to me. It serves no real purpose. [QUOTE=Kyle902;51819285] you're missing the point. The harsh sentence is supposed to act as a warning so the next time a situation happens like this the person will think twice before brandishing a gun or shooting it for that matter.[/QUOTE] I'm not down with the idea of completely fucking someone up just to make an example out of him.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819300]That is precisely what I said should happen. By "taking his gun away" I didn't mean just confiscate the gun and let him off to go buy another one. He should be punished financially for being a nuisance, he should be punished for mishandling his lethal firearm by being revoked of any access to them, and he should also pay back for the nuisance he has caused by doing mandatory community service. Bar him from protests too so no more shit like this will happen, at least with relation to him. Now you've completely eliminated any danger from this man. Throwing him in prison just means another mouth for tax payers to feed, and American prisons don't exactly have a reputation of taking downtrodden individuals and making model citizens out of them. It's just a waste of money time and effort. Pushing for him to get thrown in prison looks like a childlike demand to see him punished to me. It serves no real purpose.[/QUOTE] again this serves as warning to people so that the next time a situation like this occurs its less likely to escalate to lethal force.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819300]It serves no real purpose.[/QUOTE] It teaches him an important lesson, and shows everyone else what you do when you try to play John Rambo. This guy can cry and bitch and moan all he wants about "oppression" in the prison system, but he plainly and clearly broke the law in one of the most serious manners possible. Picking up trash and not having guns doesn't teach him anything.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819279]But in your scenario something actually happened. In the real scenario, nothing happened. No one was hurt. [B]There's a huge difference.[/B] One guy acted irresponsibly. I don't see that as a good enough reason to throw him in jail, which will undoubtedly wreck his life. A fine, taking his gun away, barring him from protests, and doing community service sounds just right to me.[/QUOTE] No, there isn't. It doesn't matter whether you use the gun or not, when you pull out your gun your intent is to kill the person. [QUOTE]The charges for just showing a gun are normally along the lines of brandishing. If you point the gun or even if you show it in some circumstances, the charges could go much higher, including assault with a deadly weapon. In the US, you are generally entitled to use your gun [B]when it is a proportional response to whatever conduct the other person is engaging in[/B]. Even in stand your ground states, your right to use a gun in response to a threat must be reasonable in response to the threat you believed you were experiencing. [B]In some states, there is an obligation to retreat from a threat of violence[/B]. In other states there is not. (Unless you are in your home, where as far as I know, you are never required to retreat in the US.) Guns belong in their holsters unless the owner believes that he is in imminent risk of serious bodily injury. For safety's sake, a gun should only be pulled out when you are truly prepared to use it and have good reason to do so.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]You will be arrested and charged with brandishing a weapon. If you pointed the weapon at the person, you would have committed the civil crime of assault. You could also be charged with assault with a deadly weapon depending on the state. [B]In order to draw your weapon, you have to be in fear for your life. You can't just "feel threatened" because someone is "bigger than you" or "louder than you" or "generally intimidating." Even if they are harassing you, you still can't draw your gun.[/B] You can [B]only[/B] meet force with equal force. You have to be in fear for your life before you can draw your gun. And even then, if you're the only person armed, expect that you will get FAR more attention than your aggressor. Your assertion that you were "threatened" could potentially be used as a defense against the aforementioned charges, but the finding that you were in fear for your life would be a point of fact for the jury to decide. If they don't find you in fear for your life, then it's you who was the actual aggressor.[/QUOTE] [URL="https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-law-regarding-pulling-a-gun-on-someone-because-you-felt-threatened"]More responses from people who claim to be lawyers here.[/URL]

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819302]again this serves as warning to people so that the next time a situation like this occurs its less likely to escalate to lethal force.[/QUOTE] Why do you think all those things I listed won't push people away from doing this thing? People aren't scared of all that, they're only scared of going to prison?

I can't believe that a [I][B]firearms violation[/B][/I] could be punished by "community service" in some views.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819315]Why do you think all those things I listed won't push people away from doing this thing? People aren't scared of all that, they're only scared of going to prison?[/QUOTE] people won't be dissuaded by a slap on the wrist.

You can't brandish your concealed weapon legally. This case probably would've gone a different way if the guy was physically hit while he was walking away, and in response pulled his gun. But you can't just pull out your piece because you got guys following you.

I'm discussing this in greater detail with one of my Facepunch chums and understanding things better. Sorry for bailing mid-discussion. Thanks to all those who kept it cordial.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819101]If you enter a hostile situation that you can just not go to with the expectation that it'll escalate to lethal force then you are by definition not using self defense.[/QUOTE] if you let fear decide for you, you've let your opposition win.

Regardless of whether he was justified or not, he brandished a fire arm in a public space with no immediate danger.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51819054]Eh. Not necessarily.[/QUOTE] How many fucking bullets do you think you need for self defense dude? Over 95% of self defense incidents are resolved within 0-1 shots being fired. Having 120+ rounds isn't a self defense mechanism, who the fuck does this guy plan on protecting him self from in a firefight that requires him to discharge over 120 rounds, from a handgun no less, and have it not be resolved/the police arriving on scene? Please, do tell me of all the situations where law abiding citizens with no ill intentions are going to get into at least 10+ minute firefights that give you the time to reload at least 5 times without a second shooter to cover your reload and continue pumping out shots like crazy in between? Only an absolute loon carries 120+ rounds of ammunition in their pockets for "self defense" just to go down the street.

[QUOTE=space1;51819483]if you let fear decide for you, you've let your opposition win.[/QUOTE] can you reply with something substantial or is that all you've got?

[QUOTE=Bertie;51819235]there wasn't even a finger on the trigger[/QUOTE] That's just proper trigger discipline. The dude clearly wanted to stir shit up for an excuse to shoot someone. Pulling a weapon on a group of [B]unarmed[/B] civilians is intent to kill. Someone yelling at you is not a reason to pull a gun. Someone following you because you pissed them off is not a reason to pull a gun. A valid reason to pull a gun would be if someone pulls a gun on you, says "you're about to get shot," or actually attacking you, and no a backpacking being thrown does not equal being attacked. Not to mention carrying 100+ rounds is suspicious alone. I have no idea why anyone would carry more than a mag or two at most. Yes you're allowed to carry as much as you want (state law providing) but there's an acceptable amount and there's an absurd amount.

[QUOTE=F.X Clampazzo;51819631]How many fucking bullets do you think you need for self defense dude? Over 95% of self defense incidents are resolved within 0-1 shots being fired. Having 120+ rounds isn't a self defense mechanism, who the fuck does this guy plan on protecting him self from in a firefight that requires him to discharge over 120 rounds, from a handgun no less, and have it not be resolved/the police arriving on scene? Please, do tell me of all the situations where law abiding citizens with no ill intentions are going to get into at least 10+ minute firefights that give you the time to reload at least 5 times without a second shooter to cover your reload and continue pumping out shots like crazy in between? Only an absolute loon carries 120+ rounds of ammunition in their pockets for "self defense" just to go down the street.[/QUOTE] id also imagine having like 20 magazines in various pockets is going to be enough of a hinderance as to be impractical in daily life

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51819694]id also imagine having like 20 magazines in various pockets is going to be enough of a hinderance as to be impractical in daily life[/QUOTE] That's like 6 magazines

[QUOTE=Levelog;51819706]That's like 6 magazines[/QUOTE] that was hyperbole. [editline]13th February 2017[/editline] imagine having 6 magazines, a phone, and a wallet in your pants and then a holster somewhere on your person as well. idk about you but that shit would get annoying p. fast

-dumb-

[QUOTE=duckmaster;51819245]Just cause you didn't do something doesn't mean you weren't going to.[/QUOTE] Shit man, just because I haven't killed anyone, doesn't mean I wasn't going to, better lock me up. [QUOTE=Kyle902;51819711] imagine having 6 magazines, a phone, and a wallet in your pants and then a holster somewhere on your person as well. idk about you but that shit would get annoying p. fast[/QUOTE] What even is this? He can carry how many fucking things he wants in his pockets, as long as it's not illegal.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;51819730]I have this weird feeling that people wouldn't be defending this if they weren't BLM.[/QUOTE] That's a lovely hypothetical you have there.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;51819730]I have this weird feeling that people wouldn't be defending this if they weren't BLM.[/QUOTE] nah I'd be shitting on this dude if he pulled his gun at a KKK rally. You don't wave a fucking gun at a large crowd of people in a crowded downtown setting.

[QUOTE=Waffle cones.;51819740]back on topic, it's pretty clear what the guy's intention was, coming as excessively prepared as he was.[/QUOTE] Yes, he was a crowd gunner, a mad man with a gun, look at all the people he killed.

[QUOTE=Arrk;51819731] What even is this? He can carry how many fucking things he wants in his pockets, as long as it's not illegal.[/QUOTE] I never said it was illegal? I just said it would be awkward and annoying as fuck. I get annoyed when i have change banging around in my pocket.

[QUOTE=Arrk;51819745]Yes, he was a crowd gunner, a mad man with a gun, look at all the people he killed.[/QUOTE] do we really have to go through this with another person? You don't brandish a gun in public and you most certainly do not wave your gun at a crowd in the middle of a busy ass fucking protest. This dude is so in the wrong that I'm almost 100% certain that a random bystander with a CCW would be more justified pulling their gun on HIM then he was pulling that gun on the protesters.