Bruh opens fire on 2 guys approaching him in restaurant

[King Poetic]

A lot of you forgetting that shyt happen in New York, one of the strictest gun law states in the us..then u add in dude is a gang member

Self defense for this is thrown out the door

 

[Wildin]

brandishing is to intimidate, not in a self defense scenario


It shall be unlawful for any person to point, hold or brandish any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another, or hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public place in such a manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another of being shot or injured. However, this section shall not apply to any person engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense

im not gonna argue with you because im far from an expert on that shyt, maybe im wrong and the law prefers that he shoot (:mindblownj: )

Youre absolutely right, I'm glad you posted that, because that's what people ask about all the time with ccw and such.

My state is not a stand your ground state. My state is a duty to retreat state. So even though I have my ccw, my state prefers that basically I pull it out and manage the situation. However there are 4 components that supercede my states rights which allow me to shoot but even then it's never cut and dry. Imminent threat, grievous bodily harm, kidnapping, sexual assault.

Meaning if I see someone go pop the trunk then walk back toward the club, I could shoot them.
If I see a man stabbing another man, I could shoot him.
If I witness a kidnapping I could shoot.
If I witness a sexual assault or rape, I could shoot.

They want us to pull it out and say "Leave me alone!" Or "go away!" "Stop or I'll shoot!" We can't just pull it out and fire then say we were afraid for our lives nor do we have a castle doctrine, which means you can kick in my door while I'm sleep and I still cannot grab the heat off the nightstand and give you 6 doses of lead. .

 

[Wildin]

@nikkahs B. Wildin, the way self defense works in actuality, he not getting self defense for that, not in NY or most places. The threat of bodily harm isn't a license to kill. ...

You're absolutely right. The threat of bodily harm isn't.

Imminent danger is a reason to shoot.
And grievious bodily harm is a reason to shoot.


These two are national rules. Not individual states rights. But they are for ccw.

This dude likely don't have a ccw, so he will go down for whatever gun charges he gets but he won't be charged because he saved his life. He won't receive the same charges he would if he walked in to the restaurant and started shooting at random or targeted people.

 

[I Really Mean It]

Dude was going to jail regardless of if he pulled out or not. Once they started fighting, the restaurant would’ve called the police and they all would’ve been taken down, with him looking at even more years for the gun.

These are the perils of carrying around an illegal firearm. Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

He was moving sloppy in more ways than one: eating out in public when there's a gang war brewing. carrying an unlicensed firearm in a state that gives you a mandatory 3 years in prison for the possession of one without a license. Being the first to shoot at someone, which will compound the possession charge with an additional one for aggravated assault and attempted murder.

While the victims might have been strapped, the camera only shows him initiating an unprovoked shooting, and they probably ditched any firearms they had after bailing from the restaurant.

In a way, you're right. But I don't think he had a choice. In situations like that, when you're dealing with rivals, you don't wait to see if they just want to throw hands. He had no choice but to bust at them, unless he wanted to risk getting blood over his pancakes.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Where they black?

 

[Wildin]

. Being the first to shoot at someone, which will compound the possession charge with an additional one for aggravated assault and attempted murder.

Being the first to shoot isn't a crime anywhere. That's like saying you're guilty if you punch someone first. The American legal system doesn't work that way. He perceived a threat and acted upon it, we can see the two guys walked upon him. It's up to the lawyers to make the case of whether the shooter was paranoid and the two gentlemen were simply walking to their seats when they got too close to the table or that the man correctly identified imminent danger and defended himself.

But he doesn't have to wait or get attacked first.

He definitely was sloppy but like I told @Citi Trends in the wm shoots bm amazon driver and paralyzes him thread,

Distance is everything in an altercation. There's a certain form needed to accurately shoot a pistol or a long gun. If you close the distance there's a higher percentage that they miss completely, or don't get the shot off at all. That doesn't mean it's easier though. Close quarters combat with a pistol is never safe.

 

[Sterling Archer]

He the type of guy to ask "Why you doing this to me?"

when somebodys running his pockets.

Two dudes run up on you and your first though is to talk to them like a female.

People like him is why I'll never go broke. Mark ass nikka. Its always Christmas around some people.

 

[murksiderock]

Pulling out the banger to scare people or warn people it not it's intended purpose. You could use the broad side of a wrench to hammer a nail, that don't make it a hammer now do it?

shyt if he just wanted to scare people away you might as well argue that he could've used blanks or had a bb gun.

If you're willing to argue with that man about how you feel he wasn't scared or his life wasn't in danger therefore he didn't need to shoot, go ahead. That's between you and him.

You should like you'd rather be carried by 6 than judged by 12.

I never said he should pull out to threaten them. You said people don't do that, I just said you're wrong...

You're absolutely right. The threat of bodily harm isn't.

Imminent danger is a reason to shoot.
And grievious bodily harm is a reason to shoot.


These two are national rules. Not individual states rights. But they are for ccw.

This dude likely don't have a ccw, so he will go down for whatever gun charges he gets but he won't be charged because he saved his life. He won't receive the same charges he would if he walked in to the restaurant and started shooting at random or targeted people.

We're coming from two different perspectives. You obviously don't have a criminal record because you have a CCW...

You say he "won't be charged", but will be charged for the gun, so I'm assuming what you mean is he won't be convicted of the shooting charge? Because he's already charged with the shooting (1st degree assault)...

My perspective is coming from the inside, "inside" as in the defendant. Of course he doesn't have the same charges as if he randomly walked into the restaurant firing, because that isn't what he did. But that's not how this works fam, you don't do this and not get charged in it...

People like him is why I'll never go broke. Mark ass nikka. Its always Christmas around some people.

Lmao you'd definitely have a time if you ran down on "people like" me, I'm not sure it would go the way you think it would, though. Lol spare me the details gangster, I'm not impressed...

 

[Dr. Acula]

I think that guy in green got hit. He isn't moving after he goes down.

 

[truth2you]

i think the illegal possession of a firearm is whats gonna get him in court...fukk are you talkin about this is NY where it's damn near impossible to get a permit unless you are rich or connected to some Jews

That's a given, but he isn't gonna do .... fukk it, yeah, you're right

Some of yall have no depth of comprehension so everything has to be explained exactly. I don't feel like doing it. peace.

 

[truth2you]

Thats how you get killed with a pistol in your hand. There is no discussion to have. If a situation occurs that requires you to touch your gun then a situation has just occurred where you should fire it. If you want to deescalate, then you do that BEFORE you reach, not after. He did what he was supposed to do in that situation. You don't let off one shot, you dump. One shot ain't stopping nobody unless it's a headshot. When its self defense, if the first shot is justified, so is the eighth.

nikka said " let's talk"....

You are talking theory, why would you shoot in a restaurant, when all you have to do is let the guy know you are ready for anything?

Yall are talking like this shyt a movie, the average person, especially in NYC where its harder to get guns, is not gonna play bold with you once you show your gun. If they do you let off, but if you keep shooting the courts will use it against you. You can clearly see the guys back up after the first shot.

And in NYC there is no self defense laws, its your duty to retreat.

I can see you, and the other guy I replied to, are people who talk how things should be, and find your ass crying when the courts play you!

 

[Da_Eggman]

You can’t play fantasy football

Can’t go to school

Can’t go to Ariana grande concert

And now can’t even go to IHOP

We live in a constant war zone

 

[Master Teacher]

It wasn't a pea shooter. That was a .40 cal. He either couldn't aim or he was too frail to wield a weapon like that. Dude who got hit should be thankful he wasn't up against a real shooter.

wielding guns isn't hard

also it depends on the weight of the gun, if he shooting 40 caliber rounds and the gun only weighs, 1.26 it will be harder to be accurate than a 40 caliber pistol that weights 2.53 pounds

 

[Professor Emeritus]

That little baby like the same age as my baby.

Got me feeling some sort of way.


You shooting people in crowded places, you're working on the side of the demons, I don't care what excuses you try to tell yourself.

 

[TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?]

All these comments over an 8 seconds clip?