Real life scenario

[linkinpark9812]

Recently came upon this video.

link to article: Man pulls gun in self defense during attack in Walmart | News | Pine Bluff News

link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68x167ISQvg

The article doesn't state much, but from the video, it seems that the man is punching him repeatedly. He then seems to disengage for an unknown reason, the man being attacked pulls his legally carried firearm and re-holsters it after a few seconds.

Now I know it is hard to MNQB this since we don't know what led up to it or what was said between the two, and a lack of a detailed news article, but do you think he should have drawn?

 

[chezuki]

Not enough information. You can't see what the other guy is doing out of frame. He may have picked up something to use as a weapon causing pink shirt guy to draw.

 

[Redhorse]

Well...from a legal perspective, it doesn't matter. If the one guy threw the first punch then there was a legal reason for the other guy to pull his gun due to fear of bodily harm and even death. Yes, I know the death part might sound ridiculous but it'd hold up in court because an unfortunate timed punch can kill someone. Regardless, as long as the guy with the gun didnt throw the first punch, it was legal especially since he holstered it after a few seconds. I think he did the right thing, why carry a gun if you aren't going to defend yourself? Even if I could take the the guy, I would have drew it just to end the altercation.

 

[Burnsy]

Well...from a legal perspective, it doesn't matter. If the one guy threw the first punch then there was a legal reason for the other guy to pull his gun due to fear of bodily harm and even death. Yes, I know the death part might sound ridiculous but it'd hold up in court because an unfortunate timed punch can kill someone. Regardless, as long as the guy with the gun didnt throw the first punch, it was legal especially since he holstered it after a few seconds. I think he did the right thing, why carry a gun if you aren't going to defend yourself? Even if I could take the the guy, I would have drew it just to end the altercation.

This very subjective and is up to the 12. What I have bolded in your response is by no means advice, please see disparity of force. This is what you are suggesting, it is very situational with very little case law ruling history in the context of the evidence provided in the video our state.

He appears to start his draw as the attacker runs away from him when he is fleeing still in the frame of the camera.

I wasn't there, but it's not nearly as cut and dry as your bolded text infers.

 

[dmarsh8]

he would know>>>>Guy Relford

 

[Burnsy]

he would know>>>>Guy Relford

I dunno about you but I don't work for free.

 

[chezuki]

I dunno about you but I don't work for free.

You expect him to pay for someone's opinion of a video?

 

[Burnsy]

You expect him to pay for someone's opinion of a video?

Guy is a lawyer that specializes in firearms cases. Lawyers generally get paid for their opinion. Sorta their thing. I didn't expect or ask for anything .

 

[Double T]

Looks like someone tried to jack a wallet/card as they were paying. From videographic evidence, looked like the best possible outcome. The guy presented the gun, and the bad guy shat his pants.

 

[CitiusFortius]

Not enough information. You can't see what the other guy is doing out of frame. He may have picked up something to use as a weapon causing pink shirt guy to draw.

This this and this. If the guy was just standing out of frame drinking a water then perhaps drawing was over the top. But if he went to the hardware isle and appeared with a pry bar, then its probably justified.

This is interesting as it shows how non black and white self defense cases can be..

 

[CathyInBlue]

Assailant might have begun retreating, because the assailed was going for his gun. To stop the drawing process would have emboldened the attacker to attack again, and required a situational awareness that would likely have been lacking after taking multiple blows to the head.

No foul for finishing the draw and pointing it in the general direction of the assailant to insure against reengagement.

 

[cbseniour]

It's an interesting video but you have to ask what caused the big guy to attack the smaller one. The G/O certainly had the right to defend himself but they has to be more here than the video shows.

 

[Kokomo1]

Googling to read the news articles on the incident, there was an off duty officer shopping who became involved.

 

[Redhorse]

This very subjective and is up to the 12. What I have bolded in your response is by no means advice, please see disparity of force. This is what you are suggesting, it is very situational with very little case law ruling history in the context of the evidence provided in the video our state.

He appears to start his draw as the attacker runs away from him when he is fleeing still in the frame of the camera.

I wasn't there, but it's not nearly as cut and dry as your bolded text infers.

Thanks for pointing this out. I understand it can sound subjective but since it was a quick draw and reholster it seems like this would be legal. Of course I'm not a lawyer.

 

[Whosyer]

Bad guy was taken into custody by off duty officer, and charged with battery. Victim was questioned, and showed his carry license. That's the most detailed account I can find.

 

[NDguido]

Maybe I missed something, but I'm curious why the victim ran out of the camera view at the end. Based on the entirety of the video, though, I don't see a problem with his actions.

 

[Redhorse]

Maybe I missed something, but I'm curious why the victim ran out of the camera view at the end. Based on the entirety of the video, though, I don't see a problem with his actions.

This is just speculation. Self defense laws are confusing and sometimes really scary. Chances are he's never had to unholster his gun before so he could have simply been scared or worried. I don't see why he'd be charged with anything but I could be wrong.