Video - Man Pulls Gun - Your Opinion

If the man who pulled the gun felt so threatened, why did he pull over and exit his vehicle WITHOUT his gun pulled ? If the man felt so threatened, why did he approached the two "aggresors" and confront them and then assault the women ?
If the man felt so threatened why did he put his gun away and then turn his back to them ?

 

Yes.

 

because potato

 

Sadly, this . . .

 

I'd argue it is in this case. There are better courses of action before pulling over and pulling a gun because you feel someone is following you. He decided to pull over and exit his vehicle and escalate the confrontation. I would have remained in my vehicle, called the police and driven to the closest police station. He claims he was hit. I couldn't tell in the video but it appears the physical confrontation started after the man with the gun shoved the female holding the camera.

Then again, I'm not trigger happy. He's lucky the people "stalking" him didn't have a firearm. His draw was slow and could have gotten him shot in a reaction to him pulling his firearm. If I'm going to pull a gun I'm going to draw fast and shoot faster and make sure I have a damn good reason for why my magazine is missing some rounds.

How fine the line is all depends on the local prosecutor.

 

Should have had gun drawn and not gotten out of his vehicle.

Either way seems like the guys with the camera had it coming.

 

My reading skills suck. Thank ca public education

 

If he felt his life was threaded yes pull a gun. Not an easy argument though when you pull the gun and then turn you back on the guy you just pulled a gun on.

That said if some A$$ was following me like that I would just drive straight to the police station with the police on the line. When a gun gets pulled it’s a game changer.

Cool heads prevail.

I had a good friend get shot and paralyzed by a crazy hot headed bastard with a gun. Long story but the guy is now injail for taking the law into his own hands.


That said I do have a concealed carry permit and always have a gun with me.

 

Ppl with video camera appear to be douches.

 

as does the guy with the pistol

 

X2

 

FUCK YES! exercise your rights.
dont know pens laws, but if he was packing he prob has a permit, and if i were being tailed like that, i woulda stopped earlier, and woulda had the gun drawn as i exited the vehicle. id be threatened by somebody doing that, and he deserved a gun pulled.

2nd amendment. FTW.

 

Yep, they're all a bunch of dummies and neither party was doing anything intelligently. What the hippies felt they were going to accomplish by following him who knows but maybe we missed something not captured on video prior to the beginning but either way they seemed to have wanted the plate number and the woman had it long before and made it clear she had it numerous times before he decided to follow him down the street in which they had the confrontation. The old man handled it incorrectly too but the hippies should have known something would come about by following him that aggressively. For shits sake if it was over rats with wings (pigeons) than they are really retarded. Get a friggin' hobby that won't lead you to being killed over something so stupid. They accuse him of assaulting the woman but lets be honest all he did was shove the camera out of his face. The funniest part was hearing the fucktards gps re-directing them with each aggressive turn.

 

As a peace officer... I'd have arrested the old man after watching that vid. Good thing his buddy didn't call the police like he told him to. Also he attempted to detain the hippies illegally. Following someone and filming them is douchey but not illegal. Getting out of his car and engaging like that tells me he was not afraid and he said that HE was trying to intimidate THEM "any chance he can get". Yep, Id arrest the old guy and seize his permit. You cant go provoke a fight while armed and then claim you are afraid.

 

Oh, I think one could make a reasonable argument either way. The person was indeed followed for some distance and may (or may not) have been hit/struck by that person following him. Further, we do not see what happened (what those following the man did) in the moments leading up to what is shown in this video. Finally, in "stand your ground" states (may or may not apply here), one does not have an obligation to flee (drive to a police station or whatever) from a threat. It's certainly not unreasonable to believe a person following and hitting you is a threat. With all that in mind, I think it would be difficult to make this, however foolish you believe his other actions were, fit the legal definition of brandishing.

-

 

I'm extremely uncomfortable with videos like this. We're only seeing part of the story. This short video doesn't include everything leading up to the final confrontation shown. That provides a very convenient opportunity for the video editor to omit anything the supposed "victim" did previously (verbal threats, erratic driving, etc) to encourage the reaction finally shown or otherwise appear in a less favorible position. Video tactics like this could be used to make absolutely anyone look bad.

 

Then you'd be arresting someone based on only a small piece of evidence. Read my previous comment just above.

 

In Texas getting out of your car to pursue and engage makes castle doctrine not apply. Following in a car is not illegal. The following car never hit the lead car nor made any attempt to hit the lead car. We dont have "brandishing" we have intentional failure to conceal and deadly conduct. The old guy is guilty of both.

 

I have arrested people on less evidence. Of course you fully investigate but the odds that the old guy can justify his sctions are ultra remote.

 

This is the Pennsylvania State statute for the use of deadly force.While pulling the weapon isn't considered use of deadly force,I think they go hand in hand and should be considered when in any situation. He was completely in the wrong for pulling that gun. PERIOD. I saw no reason for him to stop like he did,I saw no reason that he would be " in fear " for his life or safety. He was faced with a woman with a video camera and the man driving. Although they were following him I doubt that they would pose much of a threat,and he had the gun out halfway across the street.

The statute : ( Notice article ii )

" The use of deadly force is not justifiable under
this section unless the actor believes that such force is
necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily
injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force
or threat; nor is it justifiable if:
(i) the actor, with the intent of causing death or
serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against
himself in the same encounter; or
(ii) the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity
of using such force with complete safety by retreating or
by surrendering possession of a thing to a person
asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a
demand that he abstain from any action which he has no
duty to take, except that:
(A) the actor is not obliged to retreat from his
dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial
aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by
another person whose place of work the actor knows it
to be."

Had he pulled the gun and used it,he would have been in deep chit.


Taken from this website :

http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/crimes-and-offenses/00.005.005.000.html