- Joined
- Mar 31, 2018
- Messages
- 60,757
- Reaction score
- 6,482
- Location
- Norcross, Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
At a law school that taught me to understand that discussing the proper way to use a firearm for self defense is not evidence of premeditation of anything, other than understanding how to properly use a firearm for self defense.
What law school was that ?
Yes, which is why I said he was at fault, and could be charge for reckless driving. Heck, I'll even give you vehicular assault if it makes your feel better.
Then he jumps out of the car and shoots a protester three times ? (and the barrel of the gun was pointing DOWN)
Sorry, sounds like a pre-meditated attack to me
Especially in light of his recent social media posts
That doesn't negate the fact that his car was then surrounded by a large crowd of people for no reason other than to return the intimidation. The weren't doing that in self defense. If they were really worried for their safety, they would have gone away from him, not toward him. What they did INCREASED the danger to them.
A crowd he had just driven into
You drive into a crowd of protesters, what do you think will happen ?
Really, which ones?
I copied and pasted them (along with the source) in post #13
No, that's not what I said. Stop lying.
Lying?
You said:
...but for the shooting to be deemed justified by the fact that he was threatened by a man brandishing a rifle in the middle of an angry mob...
So the St Louis lawyer was brandishing a rifle...are you saying he would have had to be part of a mob to be a target ?
The lawyer's gun was pointed horizontally too...unlike Foster's which was pointed DOWN
That's a matter of opinion. We'll see.
I guess we will
I wouldn't rely on the police though. We'll see if the FBI get involved.