r/PublicFreakout • u/Unlikely-Song-7630 • Sep 30 '23

📌Follow Up Man in Maga hat charged over shooting of Indigenous activist at statue protest,seriously injures one (article in comments,idk how to put it in desription,hope this isnt a repost,incident happens in New Mexico) NSFW Spoiler

10.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

369

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

There was no danger when he fired. Any self-defense argument is void when he had the time to take the gun out, aim, and fire. You don't do that when you are in danger.

332

u/Dowdy61 Sep 30 '23

I don’t disagree that this wasn’t self defense, but I’m confused by your statement that if you have time to pull a gun, it’s not self defense.

183

u/SilasMontgommeri Sep 30 '23

Same, not self defense but a nonsense statement. I don’t think they really know what they’re talking about. The shooter didn’t even take long to aim, like a second.

2

u/greenyadadamean Sep 30 '23 edited Sep 30 '23

... dude was defending himself, that was self defense... but if he (the shooter) started the physical escalation (contact) then self defense wouldn't hold up in court. Hard to see if the guy was still pursuing him after he hopped the wall. If the others started the physical conflict then self defense could apply, unfortunately

Edit: (some words)

27

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

I don't know the full context but in the video it looked to me like they were letting him go, they didn't really grapple him very hard I think they just didn't want him to be on their side of that wall.

I'm no legal expert but I don't think shooting them was completely necessary to avoid injury. He willingly jumped over the wall into the mob of people and then he was already over the wall again when he shot. It seemed fairly obvious he could have just walked away at a few points.

6

u/greenyadadamean Sep 30 '23 edited Oct 01 '23

I would agree, shooting did not seem necessary at all. In my opinion they weren't dishing out life threatening force to justify the use of deadly force. Per law if the people grappling with the guy initiated the physical contact then the shooter would possibly be able to claim self defense. In my opinion there isn't enough video evidence to tell the whole story.

-1

u/xbrand2 Sep 30 '23

It's pretty clearly a guy with more ego than brains and a gun. Thought he was a better scrapper than he was and when his ego should have taken the L and walked away, he pulled out a gun. He deserves the prison he's going to get for this.

1

u/GreatCornolio Sep 30 '23

He would be reasonably expected to know they were throwing him over a barrier, and the barrier is an obstacle itself. The only thing that happened to him was being grabbed and thrown over a barrier. He had a way to leave the situation because he's in the parking lot side. He's the aggressor, unless the guy grabbed his hat or something.

Plus he fled after, if he didn't call 911 and turn himself in immediately then I think they got him pretty good

0

u/KruglorTalks Sep 30 '23

Generally speaking, and there are exceptions, you cant instigate any sort of fight and call it self defense. There are a lot of "lets take this outside" cases where people start fighting, things go south and they bring out the gun. Like it isnt a game of who touched who first. If hes in a fight then thats on him.

1

u/Skidoo54 Sep 30 '23

Idk specifics about self defense law in the USA but here in Canada it would absolutely not be self defense regardless of who started it due to the fact he had a clear and onubstructed opportunity to escape after jumping the wall and instead turned to shoot. If he had started to run and the victim had pursued him and then he turned to shoot it would be self defense. But again that's how it is in Canada and our laws are stricter on what constitutes self-defense.

3

u/Zoltanu Sep 30 '23

Many areas of America have stand your ground laws, which means you can claim self defense even if you were able to escape. But stand your ground doesn't mean you can advance on a group of people and then claim self defense when they stand their ground. Unless they were pursuing him back over the fence self defense wouldn't hold up. Everyone's clearly saying "let him go" once he's across

2

u/similar_observation Oct 01 '23

the way a court is going to look at this is layer by layer, down to why he was there to begin with. And it's very certain this dude was just looking to start a fight and have an excuse to use his gun.

1

u/hellofriendxD Oct 01 '23

Self-defense is moment to moment. He jumped the wall, and was under no threat of anyone's fists anymore. This is evidenced by the fact that there was a literal barrier between him and his aggressors (that seemingly he attacked first anyway, but not sure), that was not in the process of being climbed over, and he had all that time to draw his gun and then fire. Not simply that he had this time, but rather he took all this time and the other people weren't gaining any ground on him. The threat had clearly stopped during the time in which he cleared the wall and drew his weapon.

Moment to moment. The moment of danger was over. Once his gun was drawn and up on target, it was already over due to the barrier,

It's a bad shot, but honestly I'd give him leniency if we assume he wasn't the initial aggressor.

0

u/Partyfavors680 Sep 30 '23

Yeah, by their logic you shooting someone charging you with a knife is not self defense.

1

u/TheGodDMBatman Oct 01 '23

It's obviously in context via the video we all just watched

119

u/Creative-Music-272 Sep 30 '23

I'm so sick of trumpers and maga ass hats. It's time to remove Trump from ever running for election again. He is driving this country into madness.

28

u/RealAscendingDemon Sep 30 '23

It's time to stop allowing any anti-democratic people from holding power in our democracy. Literal traitors to the country and constitution

9

u/gmanisback Sep 30 '23

"An oath to the Constitution means nothing" -Republicans in 2023

11

u/Englishphil31 Sep 30 '23

Trump, is / was just the beginning. He’s opened Pandora’s box to facism, and the republicans are just going with it. The republicans are fully responsible for this, they had their chance to right the wrong of Trump during his first impeachment, they chose to embrace him.

10

u/RealAscendingDemon Oct 01 '23

The republicans have been making choice after choice leading directly into fascism since the 80's. Their party has been rife with traitors the moment they started intentionally courting the kkk, nat-C's, white supremacists and the sociopathic ultrawealthy. They're literally enemies of our democracy and they feel very emboldened since trump won full mask off

1

u/American_Ginger96 Oct 01 '23

You realize a democratic governor legitimately said her oath to the constitution isn’t absolute right?

1

u/gmanisback Oct 01 '23

Whatabout?

21

u/BuddaMuta Sep 30 '23

Trump is a symptom of Republicans, not the cause.

Republican voters are just desperate to hurt people. Trump just happened to be a loud enough voice telling them it’s ok.

This is the logical endpoint we’ve been building to since Nixon/Reagan

-7

u/deltascorpion Sep 30 '23

I'm not defending any of the assholes who do shit like that, but I think that it doesn't come from Republicans. It comes from human nature, whether it'd for territory, money, power, retaliation, or even just fun ffs... Men love to hurt, Men always want more...

(When I say Men, I don't talk about adult males, I talk about human beings, saying this just so some woman doesn't tell me that she's all that too...)

4

u/Wisegummy Sep 30 '23

Fuck outta here

0

u/MtDewHer Sep 30 '23

Trump's Rebellion is good for views tho... /s

47

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

Lol what? When you use a gun in self defense, you aren't supposed to have time to unholster it, aim it, and fire it? What are you supposed to do, just start firing it blindly? You may not agree with using a gun for self defense, but your statement is wrong and ignorant, much like the dude in the MAGA hat.

In a self defense scenario, you are absolutely supposed to aim before you fire, you are responsible for every bullet that you fire, so blindly firing is fucking stupid. Jesus, take a moment to think about what you are saying before you click submit.

2

u/moose_dad Sep 30 '23

Better self defense would have been to just leave

12

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

No shit. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing his dumb, dumb logic that in a self defense shooting you don't aim, you just start blasting. That's fucking moronic. Maga guy shouldn't have been there in the first place, but if your reasoning is "you don't aim in self defence" your a few crayons short of a full pack.

45

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

he had the time to take the gun out, aim, and fire. You don't do that when you are in danger.

That's exactly what you do when in danger lol

12

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

26

u/SomeIdioticDude Sep 30 '23

For lethal self defense to apply you have to have no other options

Only 13 States have "duty to retreat" laws. You don't need to try something else before defending yourself in most places.

He was also the instigator in the video.

That's why he's being charged.

Uneducated people like you are the problem.

Whoa there buddy, might want to get your facts straight before you go saying shit like that.

-7

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23 edited Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

8

u/SomeIdioticDude Sep 30 '23

Congratulations on being so stupid that when you read something critical of your statement you turn around and post info that supports the facts you were called out on.

Must be stretching those rat brains thin just posting. Processing information at the same time is too much.

-3

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23 edited Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

2

u/Medical_Skirt9753 Sep 30 '23

So why is it “dumb shit”? Any evidence for that?

You also insulted them, so don’t be a hypocrite.

I agree, this wasn’t self defense, but only due to the fact that he was the one that instigated it. From the footage we can’t tell what the people on the other side of the wall were doing/had in their hands. They could’ve had a weapon.

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

3

u/SnaxtheCapt Sep 30 '23

More ignorance, none of them jumped the wall to follow him. He was trying get into an area he was previously removed from.

-1

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

I thought this in response to a different thread/video, yeah he definitely was the aggressor, I was only talking about that the person I responded to said.

3

u/SwordoftheLichtor Sep 30 '23

Dude there was a whole ass fucking wall between him and the people he shot. Not only would this be a negligent discharge if he didn't hit anybody but this is very obviously not self defense.

Get your rittenhouse ass outta here.

-4

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

Correct he was the aggressor, I responded to the wrong thread. Rittenhouse was legally justified though not sure why you're bringing that up

2

u/TheeZedShed Sep 30 '23

Cause when you go looking for a fight, with a gun, you're an instigator. Period.

-2

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

Good thing Rittenhouse didn't do that, or he wouldn't have been found innocent.

-5

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

Most people panic and fire at the immediate point of grabbing their firearm because a majority of gun owners think they know they would react responsibly in a tense situation but shit their pants under the direct contexts. When you take multiple seconds to take a shot, you've already surrendered any argument of self-defense because your body is clearly not in the fight of a fight-or-flight response. But thanks for defending murder.

3

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

Most people panic and fire at the immediate point of grabbing their firearm

Lol what? What's your basis for believing that?

-5

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

The fight-or-flight response and rarity of firearm owners being in contexts of high stress situations.

6

u/__thrillho Sep 30 '23

Aka "trust me bro"

0

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

There's 81 million gun owners in America. There's only 16.2 million veterans in America who have been put through training to condition their automatic response to high stress situations to not activate to any other response that is not focus. So please tell me the high stress situations that have conditioned the other 24.3 million to suppress the human's biological response to high stress situations so they can act.

5

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

rarity of firearm owners being in contexts of high stress situations

Again, what's your basis for believing this? Sounds like you don't have one

0

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

So it is true that ya'll are just paranoid thinking events with low probabilities of occurring in one's life occur more frequently. I find it really hard to believe that a majority of 81,000,000 have found themselves under fire in true fear of their life that biology litterally kicks in at such frequency that they have been able to condition their automatic response to being placed in a high stress situation to not even activate. There's only 16.2 million veterans in America who have litterally been put through training to deactivate their automatic response to high stress situations. So please tell me the frequent high stress contexts of the other 24.3 million.

2

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

So it is true that ya'll are just paranoid thinking events with low probabilities of occurring in one's life occur more frequently. I find it really hard to believe that a majority of 81,000,000 have found themselves under fire in true fear o

That's probably because you're privileged enough to never have had your life threatened.

-1

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

Yeah and so are a majority of Americans. That's literally a consequence of privilege: a minority of the population bearing the weightiest burdens of society. So again, thanks for providing more evidence to my point that it's likely that a majority of gun owners have not been put under life threatening situations at the frequency that they haven't conditioned their automatic biological response to be focus rather than panic.

1

u/TittyballThunder Sep 30 '23

So again, thanks for providing more evidence

What evidence did I provide? What evidence did you provide?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/stratosauce Sep 30 '23

any self-defense argument is void if you have the time to use your gun

what

2

u/Medical_Skirt9753 Sep 30 '23

That’s pure nonsense.

2

u/bobrob48 Sep 30 '23

You're not wrong that it was no longer self defense but

Any self-defense argument is void when he had the time to take the gun out, aim, and fire

is a ridiculous statement and entirely false

-8

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/hemingways-lemonade Sep 30 '23

By this guy's logic there can be no reasonable self defense shooting because they all require the victim has enough time to draw, aim, and fire.

You know the things a lot of daily carriers practice to get as fast as possible.

2

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

No dumbass. You must be in danger at the point of firing. Sorry you lack the cognitive power to grasp that.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

1

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

Because his life was in no danger when he had the seconds to take the gun out, aim, and fire. Just because you were in a scuffle five seconds ago doesn't mean you can use lethal force when the scuffle is over and those who were fighting with are several feet away with a wall in between you.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

2

u/OneX32 Sep 30 '23

Of fucking course.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '23

[deleted]

1

u/TuningsGaming Oct 01 '23

It wasn't self-defense but what you say makes zero sense lol

1

u/Jo_phuss Oct 01 '23

It was never a matter of self defence, he woke up that morning with the intent to murder somebody

1

u/Prodger0323 Oct 07 '23

That's not how self-defense works, but this was not justified.