If you carry do NOT be this idiot

[MikeInOr]

I think this is just another example of why stepping in to defend other people is a bad idea. They taught that in my CHL class and I still believe it. I am using my 2A rights to defend myself, and other people also have the ability to use that right. They should do that. I think this guy should of taken his fear of that possibly being a real gun walking away from him, and taken that fear over to his kid and GTFO or shelter where his kid was at and called 911. These kids didn't walk up to him and confront him, he put himself in the confrontation.

Well said!

Too many people, some on this thread it appears, think that their CHL has deputized them to be a cop.

Wake up people! I doesn't!

Neither does being a rent-a-cop entitle you to decide to play cop at an establishment where you are not specifically employed to do so.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

His thoughts also entirely left out the other gun and other person. Hes also flat out wrong, the mall cop did not shoot the first guy who complied.

RIF

So me and two friends are walking into the same store, the guy in front of me has the exact same airsoft pistol with the exact same problem in his hand the exact same way. Dudley Dowrong pops up and starts shouting the exact same orders and my friend in front tosses the airsoft pistol down in exactly the same way as the kid did. Our 3rd friend doesn't have a gun, toy or otherwise, but I'm packing so I draw and perform a prefect Mozambique Drill and Dudley is now adjusting to room temperature. Should I be the one to go to prison for murder because I "had a second gun" and it's a totally separate incident once I draw my gun?

Please don't say "that's different" without a detailed explanation of what makes it different

I never said mall cop shot the first guy, I was asking what if I (or the the second guy) shot the mall cop


Classic me Turns out I'm the one that misread the post. Mea culpa

 

[Yarome]

I never said mall cop shot the first guy, I was asking what if I (or the the second guy) shot the mall cop

I got the impression he was talking about something the WGL guy said in his video. Wrong mall cop.

 

[Catfishmoon]

I am just the messenger reporting the opinion of a local attorney who happens to specialize in the subject matter being discussed in this thread and who is certainly more knowledgeable than anyone else in this discussion of local self-defense laws.
I could careless if anyone in this discussion agrees or disagrees with this attorney.
It's kind of like we were all speculating on a medical condition that no one involved has any education in and when a trained medical specialist voices an opinion, it's immediately dismissed by those not in agreement.
I believe @Alexx1401 earlier correctly predicted this would be the reaction of the shooter's supporters if W.G.L. attorney disagreed with them.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I got the impression he was talking about something the WGL guy said in his video. Wrong mall cop.

Reread it and I believe you are correct

 

[HA556]

I could careless if anyone in this discussion agrees or disagrees with this attorney.

And yet it must have annoyed you just enough that you had to post that and let us know!

 

[Koda]

I believe @Alexx1401 earlier correctly predicted this would be the reaction of the shooter's supporters if W.G.L. attorney disagreed with them.

I had to watch it again just to be sure, yeah, he does not tell the story accurate even by yesterdays media reports. How does a lawyer post a video with incorrect information?

 

[Nosferatu]

How does a lawyer post a video with incorrect information?

Hastily.

I wouldn't trust him to clean my finger gun.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I had to watch it again just to be sure, yeah, he does not tell the story accurate even by yesterdays media reports. How does a lawyer post a video with incorrect information?

You should watch the one he did on solvent traps back around Jan 2021

 

[Certaindeaf]

I am just the messenger reporting the opinion of a local attorney who happens to specialize in the subject matter being discussed in this thread and who is certainly more knowledgeable than anyone else in this discussion of local self-defense laws.
I could careless if anyone in this discussion agrees or disagrees with this attorney.
It's kind of like we were all speculating on a medical condition that no one involved has any education in and when a trained medical specialist voices an opinion, it's immediately dismissed by those not in agreement.
I believe @Alexx1401 earlier correctly predicted this would be the reaction of the shooter's supporters if W.G.L. attorney disagreed with them.

Speculation! (lol, had to do it)
Yea, he knows the law. He's a lawyer. We don't have all the facts to apply any sort of law to so academics gonna academic.. except perhaps some particular ones (facts) that matter quite a lot.

 

[Koda]

You should watch the one he did on solvent traps back around Jan 2020

I missed that one but there was recently a couple different ones he did where I had to rewind several time to make sure I wasn't missing something and wasn't. Its almost like hes one of the members in this thread...

Honestly one thing Ive learned about the "experts" is it doesn't mean they are always right. We could have two practicing attorneys have very conflicting opinions about a subject. An appeal to an authority is often also a fallacy. Whats sad in this case is he was presented as evidence in support of a position and failed miserably.

 

[HA556]

Its almost like hes one of the members in this thread...

 

[Yarome]

Early on WGL was a pretty good channel. He was very careful about what he posted and really delved into the legalese. The more recent year or so, he's gone much more down the path of just being a YT personality and catering to what he thinks the audience wants to hear. Pretty superficially chasing the headline national stories for content to grow his channel, but he doesn't seem to take as much care as he used to about being accurate, really doesn't cover WA as much as he used to, and OR... barely even a blip

I image trying to keep up with an active law practice and trying to be a national YT personality takes it's toll. I don't watch him any more and even unsubscribed for awhile.

According to him the serialization deadline for frames and receivers in OR is this coming July. Corrections were sent, but he's pretty much ghosted me and never did post a correction. Our M114 attorney.. he ghosts him too and ignored any attempts he made to contact him. I resubscribed to see if he would post a correction on the deadline or would plug any of the M114 info... including Tony's request to post a link to the M114 donation page, but.... crickets.

If he was reporting that it was the first kid that complied that got shot, anything else he brings up I would also be suspect of.


I DO think I know how he got that impression though. There was one news article that named the victim. Later in the article they were using the victims last name when they were talking about the first kid that complied. But later in the article they talked about the one that was actually shot and used the same name they initially reported as the victim.

I was kinda confused too and wondered if the two were possibly brothers with the same last name. But later learned they were both 17, less likely they were brothers, and chalked it up to just bad reporting.

If WGL guy read that, and didn't bother to read the whole article, or engage his brain, I can see where it could be confused that the victim was the first kid they were reporting on... that complied.

 

[Koda]

I DO think I know how he got that impression though. There was one news article that named the victim. Later in the article they were using the victims last name when they were talking about the first kid that complied. But later in the article they talked about the one that was actually shot and used the same name they initially reported as the victim.

I was kinda confused too and wondered if the two were possibly brothers with the same last name. But later learned they were both 17, less likely they were brothers, and chalked it up to just bad reporting.

If WGL guy read that, and didn't bother to read the whole article, or engage his brain, I can see where it could be confused that the victim was the first kid they were reporting on... that complied.

Imagine hiring an attorney that cant even get a media article right.
I kept waiting for him to state he was referring to the second guy and the second gun but it never came. Around 4:30 mark is where he claims the mall cop shoots the guy who complied. Maybe I missed something if anyone reads it different? Even the article from Friday clearly describes a second gun and person.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Imagine hiring an attorney that cant even get a media article right.
I kept waiting for him to state he was referring to the second guy and the second gun but it never came. Around 4:30 mark is where he claims the mall cop shoots the guy who complied. Maybe I missed something if anyone reads it different? Even the article from Friday clearly describes a second gun and person.

I thank the jesus he is not my peer.

 

[Yarome]

I relocated the referenced article. The progression...

[Near top]
"On Friday, authorities identified the teen as Hazrat Ali Rohani. He died after receiving multiple gunshot wounds."

[Midway through. 1st teen with the gun in his hand]
"At that point, police said Rohani who carried the gun complied with the suspect's orders and threw the gun onto the ground."

[Toward the end]
"Rohani died at the scene. Police said security video showed Rohani only briefly lowering his hand towards his waist and said throughout the interaction. Rohani's hands were empty."

..which would be pretty difficult to be empty throughout if earlier "Rohani" who carried the gun complied... and threw the gun onto the ground.", Hu!

 

[Koda]

I relocated the referenced article. The progression...

[Near top]
"On Friday, authorities identified the teen as Hazrat Ali Rohani. He died after receiving multiple gunshot wounds."

[Midway through. 1st teen with the gun in his hand]
"At that point, police said Rohani who carried the gun complied with the suspect's orders and threw the gun onto the ground."

[Toward the end]
"Rohani died at the scene. Police said security video showed Rohani only briefly lowering his hand towards his waist and said throughout the interaction. Rohani's hands were empty."

..which would be pretty difficult to be empty throughout if earlier "Rohani" who carried the gun complied... and threw the gun onto the ground.", Hu!

That is confusing, I thought this whole time it was a different kid that got shot not the kid that complied.

 

[Yarome]

That is confusing, I thought this whole time it was a different kid that got shot not the kid that complied.

You're not confused. (Or are you being sarcastic?)

It was a different kid. If the only article WGL read was that one, and didn't pay attention to all the other numbers accounts, or bother to stop and realize the inconsistency in that report, I can "understand" how he might have reported them as the same kid.

It cannot be possible that the same kid both had a gun in his hand, complied and discarded it, and was also found not to have had anything in his hands at any time.

Drop "Rohani" from that one line and replace it with "a teen"... it all makes sense.

 

[Yarome]

So here's a twist to this discussion.
The man's intervention plan and execution (no pun intended) was obviously a fuster cluck, and without much doubt is going to land him in the pokey... so....

Assuming that the decision to intervene has been made, what would have been your plan of approach (other than, "walk away and call 911") and what factors would you be considering?




(To note: Yet another round of, "anyone intervening is an idiotic moron, has mental issues playing out a hero fantasy and not fit to own a firearm" is not helpful, informative nor welcome.)

 

[Koda]

So here's a twist to this discussion.
The man's intervention plan and execution (no pun intended) was obviously a fuster cluck, and without much doubt is going to land him in the pokey... so....

For those who would have made the decision to intervene, what would have been your plan of approach (other than, "walk away and call 911") and what factors would you be considering?




(To note: Yet another round of, "anyone intervening is an idiotic moron, has mental issues playing out a hero fantasy and not fit to own a firearm" is not welcome nor in the least informative or helpful.)

I think its that the kid complied and they told him it was airsoft that will sink him on shooting the other kid. Not 100% on that though, after we learned he saw the other gun an argument can be made he saw that as a threat but I think thats a weaker argument.

I wouldn't have intervened but called 911. But if thats not a discussion option he could have he could have "tailed" them covertly, and would have had the element of surprise if he was right.