Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

BoredEngineer

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Aug 20, 2010
129
1
39
CA, San Jose
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rm6ZKJ15d8E&feature=youtu.be"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rm6ZKJ15d8E&feature=youtu.be" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

<span style="font-style: italic">Good thing I live in California where we have the most restrictive gun laws so nothing like this can happen here.... oh wait this is IN California... </span> <span style="font-weight: bold">/sarcasm off</span>

Looks to me like suicide by cop.
 

SAATG

Private
Minuteman
Nov 30, 2011
67
0
52
New Orleans, LA
Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

best kind of justice for idiots like that..save the cost of trial and incarceration
 

THUNDERBOLT68

Sergeant
Commercial Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 14, 2009
909
0
53
TEXAS
Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca.
 

BoredEngineer

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Aug 20, 2010
129
1
39
CA, San Jose
Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THUNDERBOLT68</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca. </div></div>

My thoughts exactly. But then again everything here is so F'ed up if you rightfully shot someone in self defense you are still looking at a $80k+ legal battle to prove you were within your right. Sad really the justice system favors the unjust and keeps good people from taking action.
 

lessthanfour

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 22, 2011
151
0
28
Canada
Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

i bet if he set up cameras and pretended to be filming a movie it would have gone on a lot longer
 

HPLLC

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 17, 2009
89
3
38
Wales WI
www.griffinarmament.com
Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

Hollywood didn't help at all. I would have figured it was a movie too, unless he hit my car. Then if I didn't get hit bad, I'd turn around and hit him with the car.

In Wisconsin someone would hit him with their car, but in the movie capital of the world, who's going to be able to know what the hell is going on? I guess it's one of the risks of living there.
 

cavscout1983

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 1, 2007
224
0
Tulsa, OK
Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

Is it just me or did the camera man of the incident seem rather contrived in his interview? So specific, so rehearsed.
 

Maggot

Better to die on your feet than live on your knees
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    15,813
    13,243
    Virginia
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Badbowtie03</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That would of been awesome if that guy hanging out the window picked him off! </div></div>

    With his "sniper" rifle.
     

    DeputyDawg

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 30, 2010
    267
    0
    40
    NY
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    Bolt guns are allowed in California and would have stopped this quickly.
     

    Queequeg

    Door Man
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    May 16, 2008
    1,657
    15
    62
    Florida, Hillsborough county
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    Sad that the boob tube is the be all and end all for so many today. Dozens of people just sat and watched this transpire...

    Not a single long gun in any of those buildings that could have been employed by one of the witnesses?

    Funny how the insult so often hurled at Florida, "The Gunshine State", is so often a source of comfort!
     

    threetrees

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 4, 2011
    552
    1
    40
    Tirol
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    not sure about the law ... but what would happen to a person (non-le) that would have actually taken him down?
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoredEngineer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THUNDERBOLT68</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca. </div></div>

    My thoughts exactly. But then again everything here is so F'ed up if you rightfully shot someone in self defense you are still looking at a $80k+ legal battle to prove you were within your right. Sad really the justice system favors the unjust and keeps good people from taking action.

    </div></div>

    do you have an example of this $80k spent in legal defense after a straight forward self defense shooting?

    i didn't see anyone in the video besides the cars being shot and the shooter. the cars being shot at didn't have a chance to react. carrying a firearm is not going to protect you in every situation. with the limited amount of people shown on the video, there would have to be an extremely high percentage of the population carrying for someone to be in that particular place at that particular time.

    don't get me wrong, i am all for ccw but i think it is absurd to say that if this exact intersection was in any other state this situation would have been over any faster.
     

    bassani

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Dec 19, 2011
    1,060
    1
    52
    Mandeville, LA
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    it wouldnt have been very challenging to pick that guy off from the window but sometimes you have to accept things dont have to always be difficult in life
     

    Intrepid4576

    Private
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 12, 2011
    38
    0
    38
    Honesdale, PA, USA
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THUNDERBOLT68</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca. </div></div>

    ^^
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Intrepid4576</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THUNDERBOLT68</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca. </div></div>

    ^^ </div></div>

    so, which citizens did you see in the video had a chance to stop this but didn't because they weren't carrying a firearm? maybe i missed them.
     

    Maggot

    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    15,813
    13,243
    Virginia
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Intrepid4576</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THUNDERBOLT68</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca. </div></div>

    ^^ </div></div>

    so, which citizens did you see in the video had a chance to stop this but didn't because they weren't carrying a firearm? maybe i missed them. </div></div>

    If the laws didnt prohibit carrying, then perhaps someone would have been.....what hey.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Intrepid4576</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: THUNDERBOLT68</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where were all the citizens carrying guns.. Oh. you don't have any in Ca. </div></div>

    ^^ </div></div>

    so, which citizens did you see in the video had a chance to stop this but didn't because they weren't carrying a firearm? maybe i missed them. </div></div>

    If the laws didnt prohibit carrying, then perhaps someone would have been.....what hey. </div></div>

    which law would have put someone there at the right place and right time to stop this? which law prevented that? can you tell me at what point in the video showed a person in a position that could have stopped this but didn't because a law kept him from carrying?

    and for the record, california doesn't prohibit ccw's.
     

    KYpatriot

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 31, 2009
    706
    71
    47
    wishing i was in KY
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles


    Dude, CA has a lot going for it. Freedom and common sense gun laws are not one of them. Save your breath for your legislators, not that they will care.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYpatriot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    Dude, CA has a lot going for it. Freedom and common sense gun laws are not one of them. Save your breath for your legislators, not that they will care.

    </div></div>

    while you are correct, i didn't see anyone in the video that could have ended this any faster that it did, even if it happened in a state with no firearm restrictions.
     

    ArcticLight

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 27, 2003
    963
    21
    Silverdale, WA
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    Unless that happened in West Virginia or Texas nobody would do anything about it anyway.

    They don't need gun control, they have prosecutors.
     

    BoredEngineer

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 20, 2010
    129
    1
    39
    CA, San Jose
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">do you have an example of this $80k spent in legal defense after a straight forward self defense shooting?

    i didn't see anyone in the video besides the cars being shot and the shooter. the cars being shot at didn't have a chance to react. carrying a firearm is not going to protect you in every situation. with the limited amount of people shown on the video, there would have to be an extremely high percentage of the population carrying for someone to be in that particular place at that particular time.

    don't get me wrong, i am all for ccw but i think it is absurd to say that if this exact intersection was in any other state this situation would have been over any faster.</div></div>

    I couldn't find the specific legal cost for most cases but the figure of $80K+ was coming from the personal experience of an employee at the gun store I frequent. This person had to shoot someone at their range because a gunman was holding the employees hostage. As the gunman was walking them outside to the back (with the stated intention to kill them) the employee took action and shot the gunman. The gunman survived and sued the employee and range. They eventually had to settle at the advice of their attorney so yeah the gunman got paid. Does this make sense to an ordinary law abiding citizen? Probably not but that's what happened.

    I also found this
    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Will this cover all of my court costs? Each policy has a maximum coverage, with most policies not exceeding $500,000. The cost of a criminal defense or civil defense can vary widely, Mannion says. He points out that even minor charges can cost up to $90,000 to defend.
    http://www.insurancequotes.com/insurance-self-defense-gun/
    </div></div>

    I agree a firearm will not protect you in every situation.

    However, the point I was trying to make was that over here there is no "straight forward self defense" and just the thought of the possible repercussions deters people from taking action . Even if you act well within your right for self defense you can still get slapped with a huge legal fee just trying to prove your innocence in court.
     

    BoredEngineer

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 20, 2010
    129
    1
    39
    CA, San Jose

    Maser

    Friendliest Faggot
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • May 17, 2006
    6,566
    5,520
    32
    /pol/
    www.youtube.com
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    It's not hard getting a CCW permit in CA. It's just that this state is a "may issue" rather than "shall issue" state. I'm getting my CCW permit soon, so that should tell you right away that it's not hard to get here.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoredEngineer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">do you have an example of this $80k spent in legal defense after a straight forward self defense shooting?

    i didn't see anyone in the video besides the cars being shot and the shooter. the cars being shot at didn't have a chance to react. carrying a firearm is not going to protect you in every situation. with the limited amount of people shown on the video, there would have to be an extremely high percentage of the population carrying for someone to be in that particular place at that particular time.

    don't get me wrong, i am all for ccw but i think it is absurd to say that if this exact intersection was in any other state this situation would have been over any faster.</div></div>

    I couldn't find the specific legal cost for most cases but the figure of $80K+ was coming from the personal experience of an employee at the gun store I frequent. This person had to shoot someone at their range because a gunman was holding the employees hostage. As the gunman was walking them outside to the back (with the stated intention to kill them) the employee took action and shot the gunman. The gunman survived and sued the employee and range. They eventually had to settle at the advice of their attorney so yeah the gunman got paid. Does this make sense to an ordinary law abiding citizen? Probably not but that's what happened.

    I also found this
    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Will this cover all of my court costs? Each policy has a maximum coverage, with most policies not exceeding $500,000. The cost of a criminal defense or civil defense can vary widely, Mannion says. He points out that even minor charges can cost up to $90,000 to defend.
    http://www.insurancequotes.com/insurance-self-defense-gun/
    </div></div>

    I agree a firearm will not protect you in every situation.

    However, the point I was trying to make was that over here there is no "straight forward self defense" and just the thought of the possible repercussions deters people from taking action . Even if you act well within your right for self defense you can still get slapped with a huge legal fee just trying to prove your innocence in court.
    </div></div>

    the gun store you frequent in santa clara? did the hostage situation/shooting happen back in '99? were his legal costs due to the shooting of the hostage taker or because his family sued him for being negligent in renting a gun to a suicidal person? i think you will find that his legal fees had nothing to do with shooting the suicidal hostage taker. businesses get sued all the time for bullshit reasons. i think you will find this is one of those situations and it had NOTHING to do with the self defense shooting and everything to do with renting the gun.
     

    Mavxj

    Private
    Minuteman
    Dec 22, 2011
    7
    0
    42
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    Shoot at me in my car.... I'll shoot back!
     

    EddieNFL

    SMSgt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 11, 2006
    7,162
    7,844
    Florida
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">while you are correct, i didn't see anyone in the video that could have ended this any faster that it did,</div></div>

    Not including those piloting 3500 pound lethal weapons? But, I guess they're typical Kalifornians, so...
     

    mechanicalmehem

    Private
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Dec 8, 2011
    7
    0
    40
    OKC, OK
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    Run the guy over, at the point that he shot at you. Either go at him or away from him..make a decision..
    --Mech
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">while you are correct, i didn't see anyone in the video that could have ended this any faster that it did,</div></div>

    Not including those piloting 3500 pound lethal weapons? But, I guess they're typical Kalifornians, so... </div></div>

    you really think that someone saw a person with a gun shooting at passing traffic and then thought it would be a good idea to proceed right past him? my guess is that it is the same in any city, people are too caught up in their own little world to have a little bit of situational awareness. this is not california exclusive.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mechanicalmehem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Run the guy over, at the point that he shot at you. Either go at him or away from him..make a decision..
    --Mech </div></div>

    again, i doubt any of the drivers had any idea there was a shooter until they were being shot at.
     

    EddieNFL

    SMSgt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 11, 2006
    7,162
    7,844
    Florida
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">while you are correct, i didn't see anyone in the video that could have ended this any faster that it did,</div></div>

    Not including those piloting 3500 pound lethal weapons? But, I guess they're typical Kalifornians, so... </div></div>

    you really think that someone saw a person with a gun shooting at passing traffic and then thought it would be a good idea to proceed right past him? my guess is that it is the same in any city, people are too caught up in their own little world to have a little bit of situational awareness. this is not california exclusive. </div></div>

    I'm really thinking you get defensive whenever someone criticizes Kalifornia.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm really thinking you get defensive whenever someone criticizes Kalifornia. </div></div>

    i don't like california politics at all. there is enough to criticize california about without having to make up things that aren't true. california anti-gun laws had nothing to do with this shooting not being stopped sooner.
     

    Queequeg

    Door Man
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    May 16, 2008
    1,657
    15
    62
    Florida, Hillsborough county
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm really thinking you get defensive whenever someone criticizes Kalifornia. </div></div>

    California anti-gun laws had nothing to do with this shooting not being stopped sooner. </div></div>

    I'd bet real money you are wrong on this.

    Fact: In Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee and other free states, that douche wouldn't have gotten off more than his first couple shots.

    Even giving the benefit of the doubt about the possibility that a movie or TV show was being filmed (Never mind the absence of the legions of very visible and obvious production facilities and logistical considerations such as CAMERAS, boom lifts, police cordons, etc....), the fact that the douchebag was able to plink at passing cars for as long as he did is just as evident of the effective disarmament of Law abiding Californians as is the failure of gun free zones to prevent murderers from killing innocent people with guns.

    I think any logical assessment would conclude that while it was not the anti-gun laws that caused this event, it is those laws, as well as the rampant growth of the lawsuit industry, which prevented it from being stopped more quickly.
     
    G

    Guest

    Guest
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm really thinking you get defensive whenever someone criticizes Kalifornia. </div></div>

    California anti-gun laws had nothing to do with this shooting not being stopped sooner. </div></div>

    I'd bet real money you are wrong on this.

    Fact: In Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee and other free states, that douche wouldn't have gotten off more than his first couple shots. </div></div>

    +1
    He would have learned rather quickly, in free states,
    (A)You don't start a war with a handgun.
    (B)You don't stand out in the open.
    an
    (C)You shoot at our cuz, you just picked a fight with the whole county. Not very smart, when all LEO's around here, are but second responders.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gunfighter14e2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm really thinking you get defensive whenever someone criticizes Kalifornia. </div></div>

    California anti-gun laws had nothing to do with this shooting not being stopped sooner. </div></div>

    I'd bet real money you are wrong on this.

    Fact: In Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee and other free states, that douche wouldn't have gotten off more than his first couple shots. </div></div>

    +1
    He would have learned rather quickly, in free states,
    (A)You don't start a war with a handgun.
    (B)You don't stand out in the open.
    an
    (C)You shoot at our cuz, you just picked a fight with the whole county. Not very smart, when all LEO's around here, are but second responders.

    </div></div>

    can you point out all the people in the video that could have stopped it if they weren't prohibited from having firearms? i must have missed them or you guys are watching a different video than i am. my observation is basted on what i saw on the video. i'm not trying to read more into it than that.
     

    EddieNFL

    SMSgt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 11, 2006
    7,162
    7,844
    Florida
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there is enough to criticize california about without having to make up things that aren't true.</div></div>

    Could you maybe point out these fabrications?

    You can no more prove it couldn't have been stopped than I could prove otherwise. We're (yourself included) posting opinions. You just keep nibbling at the bait.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there is enough to criticize california about without having to make up things that aren't true.</div></div>

    Could you maybe point out these fabrications?

    You can no more prove it couldn't have been stopped than I could prove otherwise. We're (yourself included) posting opinions. You just keep nibbling at the bait. </div></div>

    fabrications like the $80k to defend your self after a straight forward self defense shooting. i have not been shown any proof of this and i know a couple cases firsthand that show it to be false. i could dig up plenty more. also the fabrication like california prohibits licensed ccws or californians don't or can't own guns.

    how many people in the video applied for a ccw? how many were declined? how many people did you even see in the video that had an honest chance to do something but didn't? you are ninja if you could react to a person already shooting at you while you are driving through the intersection. if you had enough time to react and pull your firearm, you should have had enough sense to not drive next to the shooter in the first place. if you knew there was a shooter, you put yourself at a serious disadvantage by driving right next to him. judging by the video, my guess is no one knew what was going on before he was shooting into their car.

    again, yes, i am guess like the rest. my guess is based off of what is shown in the video. from what is shown in the video, this is not something that could not have happened in another state.
     

    PanaDP

    Private
    Minuteman
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lessthanfour</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i bet if he set up cameras and pretended to be filming a movie it would have gone on a lot longer </div></div>

    Nope, people here know what a movie set looks like and it does not look like one guy and a camera.
     

    EddieNFL

    SMSgt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 11, 2006
    7,162
    7,844
    Florida
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300sniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there is enough to criticize california about without having to make up things that aren't true.</div></div>

    Could you maybe point out these fabrications?

    You can no more prove it couldn't have been stopped than I could prove otherwise. We're (yourself included) posting opinions. You just keep nibbling at the bait. </div></div>

    fabrications like the $80k to defend your self after a straight forward self defense shooting. i have not been shown any proof of this and i know a couple cases firsthand that show it to be false. i could dig up plenty more. also the fabrication like california prohibits licensed ccws or californians don't or can't own guns.

    how many people in the video applied for a ccw? how many were declined? how many people did you even see in the video that had an honest chance to do something but didn't? you are ninja if you could react to a person already shooting at you while you are driving through the intersection. if you had enough time to react and pull your firearm, you should have had enough sense to not drive next to the shooter in the first place. if you knew there was a shooter, you put yourself at a serious disadvantage by driving right next to him. judging by the video, my guess is no one knew what was going on before he was shooting into their car.

    again, yes, i am guess like the rest. my guess is based off of what is shown in the video. from what is shown in the video, this is not something that could not have happened in another state. </div></div>

    Okay, you win. We would be better off if the other 49 followed Kalifornia's lead, random acts of violence cannot be stopped by ordinary citizens and we're all liars.

    Merry Christmas.

    Back to Ralphie.
     

    300sniper

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 17, 2005
    3,438
    17
    Greenwood, Ca
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Okay, you win. We would be better off if the other 49 followed Kalifornia's lead, random acts of violence cannot be stopped by ordinary citizens and we're all liars.

    Merry Christmas.

    Back to Ralphie. </div></div>

    way to add a bunch of nonsense to the point i was making. i didn't say that other states should follow california's lead. i sure didn't imply california is better than any other state. i didn't say that random acts of violence can't be stopped by ordinary citizens and i didn't call you a liar.

    random acts like this can happen in any state. it is not a california exclusive and you are completely ignorant if you think it is. i am sure if i got on google i could find shootings in your state that were not stopped by ordinary citizens. you are sure making it sound like every shooter in your state is stopped by a gun wielding citizen though.
     

    Badshot308

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 16, 2008
    993
    60
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    I'm curious to hear from any California LEO on this board as to whether it would have even been legal for anybody to have stopped and engaged the shooter vs fleeing once they realized the nut in the middle of the intersection was shooting at them. In some states you cannot use deadly physical force if you can flee or retreat safetly. These drivers, once they realized they were being shot at, did the most sensible thing, they hit the gas and fled. In some states that don't have some type of castle doctrine, you can't even use deadly physical force in your own home without retreating first. So my question to any California LEO on the board, would it have been legal for one of these motorists to pull over and engage this shooter vs fleeing the scene? Would it have been legal for someone in a building to have engaged the shooter even though the shooter wasn't directing any fire in their direction. While most people would consider an armed citizen a hero for ending the rampage, what would the possible legal ramifications have been for someone had they done so?
     

    dpairborneranger

    Private
    Minuteman
    Jan 9, 2011
    0
    0
    38
    KY
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Badshot308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm curious to hear from any California LEO on this board as to whether it would have even been legal for anybody to have stopped and engaged the shooter vs fleeing once they realized the nut in the middle of the intersection was shooting at them. In some states you cannot use deadly physical force if you can flee or retreat safetly. These drivers, once they realized they were being shot at, did the most sensible thing, they hit the gas and fled. In some states that don't have some type of castle doctrine, you can't even use deadly physical force in your own home without retreating first. So my question to any California LEO on the board, would it have been legal for one of these motorists to pull over and engage this shooter vs fleeing the scene? Would it have been legal for someone in a building to have engaged the shooter even though the shooter wasn't directing any fire in their direction. While most people would consider an armed citizen a hero for ending the rampage, what would the possible legal ramifications have been for someone had they done so? </div></div>

    I can not answer for CA but you would've been justified in KY. Your reasoning would've been to try to save others lives
     

    Badshot308

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 16, 2008
    993
    60
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DonniePD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Badshot308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm curious to hear from any California LEO on this board as to whether it would have even been legal for anybody to have stopped and engaged the shooter vs fleeing once they realized the nut in the middle of the intersection was shooting at them. In some states you cannot use deadly physical force if you can flee or retreat safetly. These drivers, once they realized they were being shot at, did the most sensible thing, they hit the gas and fled. In some states that don't have some type of castle doctrine, you can't even use deadly physical force in your own home without retreating first. So my question to any California LEO on the board, would it have been legal for one of these motorists to pull over and engage this shooter vs fleeing the scene? Would it have been legal for someone in a building to have engaged the shooter even though the shooter wasn't directing any fire in their direction. While most people would consider an armed citizen a hero for ending the rampage, what would the possible legal ramifications have been for someone had they done so? </div></div>

    I can not answer for CA but you would've been justified in KY. Your reasoning would've been to try to save others lives </div></div>

    2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person
    under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
    (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or
    about to use deadly physical force. <span style="font-weight: bold">Even in such case, however, the
    actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with
    complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
    necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no
    duty to retreat if he or she is:</span> (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
    (ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police
    officer or a peace officer at the latter's direction, acting pursuant to
    section 35.30; or
    (b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
    or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal
    sexual act or robbery; or
    (c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
    or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that
    the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of
    section 35.20.


    This is a section of NYS Penal Law Article 35 Defense of Justification. Even here, it could be argued that by retreating, you would not do so with the complete safety of others, as in the shooter was still posing a deadly threat to pedestrians and motorists entering the intersection unaware that the man standing there was opening fire on passing vehicles. I'm interested in California's laws and how they may be interpreted in this situation.
     

    EddieNFL

    SMSgt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 11, 2006
    7,162
    7,844
    Florida
    Re: Lunatic Shooting Passing Vehicles

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">random acts like this can happen in any state. it is not a california exclusive and you are completely ignorant if you think it is.</div></div>

    The point(s) that virtually everyone else is trying to make is:

    - Intervention would be more likely in states with gun-owner friendly laws (most are more friendly the Kali).

    - A person intervening in such a instance will face intense scrutiny and, quite possibly, prosecution and/or a civil suit This would be less likely in more gun friendly states.

    If you can't see that in the previous 40 or so posts, you must be completely ignorant.