Wave gun at car, get shot

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
Holding a gun to show it to the other car, to scare them, to make them feel threatened. That is pretty much the textbook definition of a threat.... Even if it's not pointed directly at the other person's face (assuming he's holding in by the handle as if he's ready to use it... )

If they have time to aim and point it at you, it's too late, you're already a goner.

If you are going to defend yourself, you need to do it BEFORE it gets to that point.

I know you do, which is why people shouldn't have the right to lethally defend themselves in ambiguous situations.

There was no law that prevented them from having a gun, from what was stated.

Deadly threat met with appropriate force. End of story.

Based on the information in the OP, I don't know enough to know if it was a deadly threat. It seems like it's not based on the wording.

The two SUVs, friends of each other, decide to get off of the Intersate and get gas. Police say the driver of the minivan, 53-year-old Su Hong Springer, also from Tennessee, followed them and showed a gun at the gas station.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
neckbeard, what law prevents criminals from owning guns in your country or any country?
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
neckbeard, guns will never not exist. your entire argument is shit, so shut up. guns exist and they will always exist. if they disappeared tomorrow we would invent another way to kill people. that's what we're good at, killing shit. we're the best at it. so instead of being a dumbass blaming the law abiding citizens for owning guns. why don't you talk about what we can do to stop criminals from attacking non-criminal citizens. I mean if that stopped completely, we wouldn't need guns right? So why don't you attack thta issue instead of your stupid emotional bullshit responses to guns.

You hypocritical piece of shit, I hope you choke on your boyfriend cock.

I don't have a boyfriend.

There is no emotion in my responses, that's the point, just logic.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Where are you guys getting these details?



It says showed a gun, not aimed a gun.

If it had been holstered charges would be filed.

According to Willoughby, Kentucky law states if someone presents a handgun, you have the right to defend yourself.

Presenting a handgun means drawing at best and probably pointing.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
There are assorted laws in the UK banning private gun ownership.

And you think that criminals give two shits about your laws. Lol.

You're on a small island. That's the only reason your laws are even partially effective.
 

Numenorean

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2008
4,442
1
0
Where are you guys getting these details?



It says showed a gun, not aimed a gun.

It's called brandishing, and it's illegal and it can reasonably be considered a threat and therefore there was no issue with the guy shooting him.

It's not like he came up and said "Good day old chap, here won't you have a look at this fine handgun that I have in my possession? Isn't it quite fine?"
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
If it had been holstered charges would be filed.



Presenting a handgun means drawing at best and probably pointing.

I think I'm going to have to bow out of this debate, as there is not enough information for me to continue arguing. For me showing a gun would mean this.

0.jpg


not this

Aiming-a-Gun.jpg


With us disagreeing on this I don't really know how to continue.
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
And you think that criminals give two shits about your laws. Lol.

You're on a small island. That's the only reason your laws are even partially effective.

OK.

It's called brandishing, and it's illegal and it can reasonably be considered a threat and therefore there was no issue with the guy shooting him.

It's not like he came up and said "Good day old chap, here won't you have a look at this fine handgun that I have in my possession? Isn't it quite fine?"

Read my above post.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
:confused: Wait, I thought guns were supposed to make us a more polite society?

This kind of bullshit reminds me of the wild west...

Yeah, the stupid Wild West comparison. How long until the gun grabbers realize that shit doesn't work?

And no, JM, I'm not calling you a gun grabber, I know you're an owner.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Really? He killed someone (or seriously injured at least) someone because he saw a gun even though it posed no threat to him. Sounds like if he didn't have a gun no one would have been shot.

How does a gun waved at you pose no threat? What possible rationale can you explain that idea away with?
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
so either 1. you think you're smarter than everyone and only you're capable of owning a gun 2. you're a fucking moron or 3. you're a hypocrite

i think it's 4. all of the above.

In case one, Dianne Feinstein would like you to move to her district.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,165
1,637
126
Of course, it is impossible to un-invent guns, it is however possible to minimise them.

Well, in Chicago, as well as Washington DC, handguns were "banned" for many years. Chicago and Washington DC are two of the most dangerous cities in the USA. This "ban" hasn't helped the situation at all. In Illinois, it's illegal to carry, there is no "permit" for concealed carry, yet there are people getting shot all the time.

If people with no criminal history who have training in gun safety and usage who practice regularly and keep their gun(s) in good working order want to carry a weapon with them "just in case", then I think it should be their right to do so.
 

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
That's not what I asked. I asked what laws prevent criminals from owning guns in your country or any country around the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom#1997_Firearms_Act

How does a gun waved at you pose no threat? What possible rationale can you explain that idea away with?

"Waved at you" that's not what I got from the OP, check my images from a couple of posts up.

It doesn't make any difference to what I said.

I think it does. Based on the info in the OP this is the conclusion I have reached, and without more info I can't argue about it much further. Or without redefining "showing".
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
I think I'm going to have to bow out of this debate, as there is not enough information for me to continue arguing. For me showing a gun would mean this.

0.jpg


not this

Aiming-a-Gun.jpg


With us disagreeing on this I don't really know how to continue.

There is a marked difference to anyone with a few functional brain cells between a gun held in any manner for a picture taken on a computer in one's own home and a gun held in any manner while on public roads in a vehicle.
 

hdfxst

Senior member
May 13, 2009
851
3
81
It says showed a gun, not aimed a gun.[/QUOTE]


In the state i live in it's the same thing as long as i'm being threatened.And i have the legal right to kill you.And it doesn't matter if you agree with it or not,thats the way it is.
 
Last edited:

HAL9000

Lifer
Oct 17, 2010
22,021
3
76
Well, in Chicago, as well as Washington DC, handguns were "banned" for many years. Chicago and Washington DC are two of the most dangerous cities in the USA. This "ban" hasn't helped the situation at all. In Illinois, it's illegal to carry, there is no "permit" for concealed carry, yet there are people getting shot all the time.

If people with no criminal history who have training in gun safety and usage who practice regularly and keep their gun(s) in good working order want to carry a weapon with them "just in case", then I think it should be their right to do so.

Yeah I did read some of that, I'm not arguing about the practical application of ethics on a national scale when applied to America, I'm more arguing about how things should be. In the abstract sense, the practical application and execution of gun control laws I will leave to people a) Smarter than be and b) more interested in legality / sociology than I am.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
neckbeard, way to fail. it's a trick question, criminals don't follow the law you fucking dumbshit. so no amount of laws will ever prevent criminals from committing gun crime. EVER. so knowing full well that criminals, who live outside the law, will still poses guns, you want to take them away from everyone else who is NOT a criminal.... so criminals get more rights than non-criminals?

neckbeard must be a raping, squatting, murdering piece of shit. he doesn't want us law abiding citizens arming ourselves against his kind.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Let's say you draw a gun, and hold it aligned with the holster, in a threat to a person for whatever reason. How long will it take to point the gun to target and fire? It's going to be close to the reaction time of your target.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Well, in Chicago, as well as Washington DC, handguns were "banned" for many years. Chicago and Washington DC are two of the most dangerous cities in the USA. This "ban" hasn't helped the situation at all. In Illinois, it's illegal to carry, there is no "permit" for concealed carry, yet there are people getting shot all the time.

If people with no criminal history who have training in gun safety and usage who practice regularly and keep their gun(s) in good working order want to carry a weapon with them "just in case", then I think it should be their right to do so.

Don't forget NYC, highly restrictive, and still violent.