Alright, guys. Had an incident at my place of work today, tell me if I fucked up.
>be shift manager
>be at register
>hear a ruckus outside
>ohdear.mkv
>there are two guys in the road outside of their cars, screaming at one another
>walk to my car to get phone, figure I'll call the owner of the store and maybe law enforcement should things escalate.
>infuriated citizens decide to take their road rage into store parking lot
>they pull into the lot and one gets out of his vehicle, still yelling obscenities at one another
>they're scaring the customers, dammit
>next to my vehicle at this point
>holler at them to calm down or leave b/c they're interfering with business
>man that was still in car gets out and storms toward me, fists raised and hurling obscenities about my parentage
>open back door and grab rifle from under the seat, tell him to calm down or leave
>he asks if I'm going to shoot him, rather mockingly
>lay rifle down in seat and say that he hasn't given me a reason yet
>he walks up, gets in my face asks me what I'm gonna do
>sternum 2 sternum, faces 2 inches away
>ask him if he wants a kiss
>he storms off, decks another employee (who had come out and phoned the cops) for no apparent reason, jumps in his car and peels out
>other dude was a bro, stayed to help me file report with the PD.
The rest is irrelevant. Hell, most of that was probably irrelevant.
Anyway the question is this: was I within my right to grab my rifle as he was coming at me, even though we were on private property (parking lot)? Texasfag, BTW, so SYG and Castle laws exist.
>>30185508
Yeah. I know in Oklahoma you have the right to use legal force against someone who attempts to remove you from your vehicle. Castle doctrine also applies to any public place where you have a right to be so imagine that would include stores.
>>30185594
My line of thinking was that as the senior employee present, I have some kind of right to protect the establishment. Failing that, I feel like I have the right to defend myself even if I wasn't in my car, only next to it.
I don't think it could be counted as brandishing, because I never put my hand on the trigger and the gun never technically left the vehicle, but there is a good chance that the police will follow through (ran the guys plates and he is a repeat offender for public intoxication and assault) and somehow I feel like I'll get nailed with something .
>>30185508
>he asks if I'm going to shoot him, rather mockingly
Should have just shot him.
>>30185653
Not sure legally but considering you are in based Texas you probably could have shot him and been in the green. However, you clearly did nothing wrong as far as that goes, so unless there is a rule against fire arms AT your work you should be good.
>>30185679
We have a no-open-carry-pistol sign, but it's not a legally binding one and thus carries no weight legally.
>>30185669
>quote from man shot
>>30185508
>sternum 2 sternum, faces 2 inches away
>ask him if he wants a kiss
you've got balls, I'll give you that.
>>30185508
>trying to descalate a heated argument.
what are you a fucking idiot.
depending on the state your probably good, unless a cop decides to give you are hard time for brandishing.
Next time tell him you see him as a threat, and that if he comes any closer to you or others that you will feel as if your life is in danger and you will shoot him.
>>30185839
my bad left off
>trying to deescalate a heated argument with a gun.
>>30185839
>>30185846
Not gonna argue with you there, its just the legal angle im worried about. I already know I was a dumbass. It was not the brightest idea I ever had. In fact, it was a pretty damn bad idea, and several people told me so after. I didn't have the gun in my hands when I hollered for them to calm down, I only grabbed it when he came at me screaming with his fists up because I'd rather not come to blows with a drunk that has retard strength on his side. As soon as he went back to idle posturing I tossed it back in the car.
Definitely going to lay low and just call the cops next time though, no point involving myself in hindsight.
Live and learn.
>>30185508
yeah keep your weapon secure unless someone who is close to you life is in danger. all it takes is one 2nd amendment hating douchbag prosecutor and you will be ruined. lawyers cost a lot and it doesn't sound like you are in a career field that pays a lot
>>30185959
Hence why it stayed in the car til he came at me threatening me with violence and insinuating things about my mother-son relationship. I'll take the jab at my employment in stride, seeing as its a part time job to put me through school, but you're right about me being an impecunious individual.
Texas castle law extends to places of employment though, and display of a weapon to cause apprehension isn't considered deadly force (never had a hand on the grip, just one around the receiver) so I don't think that that I did anything out of bounds that could be used against me.
The only part that gets murky is whether or not the guy was legally 'trespassing' once I asked him to either leave or calm down and he did neither. Use of non-deadly force against trespassers is 100% legal in Texas, and display of a firearm is considered non-deadly force, and that's where I get a bit worried.
>>30185508
>ask him if he wants a kiss
OP confirmed for Donut
>shooting someone because they walk at you with their fists up, throwing a hissyfit
you can do that? shoot some unarmed man? I've always assumed equal violence with equal threats, ie someone has a weapon you can shoot, if not you can't
>>30186157
That's retarded. If you can articulate that you feel your life or the life of someone else is in danger it does not matter whether the danger is armed or not. You are legally permitted to use lethal force to protect your life or the life of someone else.
>>30186165
>You are legally permitted to use lethal force to protect your life or the life of someone else.
protect your life from what? A punch? Is america so soft now a person can't defend himself against some unarmed aggressor with his own hands? He needs lethal force to subdue nonlethal attacks?
>>30187881
Cuck alert
>>30187881
>punches are totally safe meme
You realize if you get KTFO and fall in a certain way against pavement you could get seriously injured or die, right? Or once you're unconscious your assailant could literally do anything to you and you would be helpless to stop them.
>>30187989
poor baby, you could also trip and fall down the stairs so maybe you should never walk them?
>>30187969
>cuck meme :^)
>>30188010
How about I come over and knock you out with my cock
>>30188010
>being this stupid
If I fall down the stairs I have control over my body and can protect my head. Not so if you get knocked out. Anyways, have fun fistfighting Tyrone when he tries the knock out game on you, hopefully you don't wake up with his dick in your ass.
>Allowing the assailant to get within arms reach after aggravating him
>Allowing a coworker to take a punch
>Laying down your firearm in a situation where you might have been knocked out and had it taken from you
Yeah OP you fucked up
>>30187881
So you're okay with letting someone punch you? How about rape your wife?
Fuck you man, if someone tries to violate your rights, end them.
>>30188037
This. OP, you never should have displayed the firearm unless he was a legit deadly force threat, which he wasn't yet. You probably shouldn't have let him close to that kind of distance, especially now that he knows there's a gun in play. You're very lucky he didn't try anything.
>>30188062
>>30188037
OP here, thanks for the actual replies. I've definitely realized that I fucked up from a common sense perspective, but I'm fairly sure I'm in the legal clear because brandishing isn't lethal force in TX.
>Allowing coworker to take a punch
Wasnt really much I could do, the guy just kind of body-checked him as he sprinted back to his Nissan Juke. I get what you're saying though. Thankfully nobody was hurt and I'll know how to not be an idiot next time.
>>30186157
Found the britbong
>>30187881
We are talking about a street fight, not a sporting boxing match. There are no rules in a street fight and chances are if someone is willing to run up in someone's face for telling them to take their argument away from their establishment, that person does not know how to control their emotions. Who knows what they might do once there is adrenaline from the fight on top of their anger/aggression. Remember, more people are killed by fists and hands in the US than firearms
>>30187881
Delicious bait
>>30188256
Correction: fists vs so called "assault rifles", not firearms in general.
>>30185508
>was i within my right...
no, and you made yourself look like a giant bitch
you immediately went to lethal force, knew it wasnt the right option, and had to backdown.
learn what escalation of force is
learn how to fight without using a weapon
and learn when to mind your own goddamn business
>>30185508
>he asks if I'm going to shoot him, rather mockingly
>>30185669
>he asks if I'm going to shoot him, rather mockingly
"what...you gonna shot" asks shot man.png
>>30188148
What race were the people involved?
>>30188148
>nissan juke
goddamn, you let someone driving a nissan juke punk you.
hahahahahahaha
>>30188353
We've already established that I'm a weak little bitchboy, this is purely about the legal angle now. Also, Texas doesn't consider brandishing a weapon to be lethal force. And I have zero shame in admitting I went for the rifle because I know I can't fight for shit. As for minding my own business, they were fighting on store property, so it kind of was my business as soon as they decided my store was an acceptable place to start a brawl.
>>30188384
White as bread.
>>30188256
>Remember, more people are killed by fists and hands in the US than firearms
You going to back up those claims, nigger
>>30188439
he probably means "rifles"
and in homicides, rather than suicides.
>>30188422
>legal angle
well, there is what is legal and what is theoretically legal.
sometimes you can do something and everyone is just like, "yeah, you're right" and nothing ever happens, snd sometimes there is "spend $60k in legal fees over a 2 or 3 year period before a judge or jury says you're right"
you're bordering on that second thing, try not to do that.
>>30188439
I guess I shouldve been more specific, obviously not handguns but if you look at the fbi.gov crime statistics homicide chart, hands and fists are as frequent as rifles, shotguns and "other" firearms combined.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls
>>30188458
You make a valid point and I certainly shall endeavor to be less of an idiot in the future.
>>30185508
I hate to say it but you shouldn't have gotten involved. Unless you work for some local place you might get a pink slip for endangering yourself or whatever reason it is they use to fire people who stop robberies and that sort of thing.
>>30185508
>be shift manager
>be at register
Yeah, I'd say you're no stranger to "fucking up", anon.
>>30185508
Look up brandishing laws for your area.
>>30186006
You're very articulate with your wording, friend
Are you from Houston or El Paso?
You don't sound like an Austinite queer
>>30188061
>So you're okay with letting someone punch you?
uh, no? I'm not a retard, I know how to defend myself. There is a thing called putting your hands up and ducking. Also, you can punch and kick too you fucking idiot.
>bringing in other things like rape to pursue said argument.
you're just changing the conversation from one thing to another, dude.
>>30187881
> get punched in the face
> fall back and spill your brain on the sidewalk/gutter
Id rather be zimzam than die.
>>30188256
who the fuck said anything about a fair sporting match? You kick him in the nuts or throat him...you don't have to go clint because you're too retarded to fight and has to go the lethal route
>>30188474
just remember that you are always in the best position to judge how to best ensure your own safety.
How far you are willing to go and how much in the right you believe you are will be dependent upon your knowledge of the law and your life experience.
how right people believe you to be will be dependent on how well your can articulate the circumstances of the situation and how it influenced your decision to act.
learn your local laws, learn your own limitations, and dont depend on a firearm to always bail you out of a situation your mouth gets you into. Train in other disciplines.
and also, using lethal force to prevent someone from damaging property will almost universally land you in hot water
>>30188629
>doesn't know how to duck or raise arms to block
these are the tards that immediately go to shooting because they are literally pussyboys that can't into being a man
>>30188644
Thanks, will do. I know a couple Krav and mma instructors, might see what they can teach me.
>>30188640
>Kick assailant in throat
>falls to the ground from asphyxiation
>Hits head on concrete
>Permanent brain damage
>Go to jail
>Get out 5-10 years later
>Get sued for every penny you own by crippled assailant in wheelchair
>>30188669
not near you.
but theres this googel? thing that might be of some help
>>30185508
If your life was in danger you should have shot him, otherwise
>brandishing
>>30188689
you're pretty dumb. You'd be in just if not more legal trouble for shooting a man that didn't have a weapon than injuring that person in the specified situation
you're just adding other scenarios to further your intent. Why are you immediately going to the falling down causes permanent body damage? fuck man, just because you're made of fat jelly does not mean everyone else has brittle bones
>>30185669
All of my this.
Am I irresponsible because if anyone ever did that to me I'd just shoot them? Is "they were literally asking for it" an adequate legal defense?
>>30188735
>You'd be in just if not more legal trouble for shooting a man that didn't have a weapon
No, you would not be. Plenty of self defense cases where people are attacked by unarmed assailants and are still within their legal means to do so. If some crack head is charging at me in an alleyway and I'm armed, I'm not going to fist fight him for two reasons:
1.) You do not know their intent, they could be just out for blood and when your life is in danger, you stop the threat in the quickest way possible.
2.) Suppose you do fight them and then get knocked out or beaten to a pulp. Presumably, they will mug you or check you for valuables. So now not only are you laying in the dirt, possibly dying from internal bleeding, your assailant now has a deadly weapon at their disposal to either finish you off with or use it in a crime against other individuals.
>>30188714
there isnt such a thing as "brandishing". in fact there was a thread about that the other day.
though some states might try to get you for "terroristic threat" or some type of assault.
>>30188789
fucking retarded tripfags, at it again.
It depends on the state.
See California Penal Code Section 417, you stupid cocksleeve.
>>30188812
OP here. I'm in Texas, so I don't think that California laws are particularly relevant. Texas has no "brandishing" laws to speak of.
>>30188784
>No, you would not be.
depends on where it happens and under what circumstances.
in OPs example, he went outside of his business and inserted himself into a situation he wasnt involved in.
honestly he would have been in some serious legal shit unless the guy actually threatened or began assaulting him, unless there was another mitigating factor such as a disparity of force
>>30188735
>Why are you immediately going to the falling down causes permanent body damage?
It happens all the time you dense motherfucker. How many thousands of people get concussions just from falling off bikes every year?
>>30188821
>Texas has no "brandishing laws"
TX Penal Code Title 5 chapter 22.01.(2)
>>30188812
read the whole thread, faggot
>>30188864
That one is about deadly conduct, and since the gun wasn't loaded or ever pointed at anyone, I feel like it doesn't fall into that category.
>>30188876
Suck the whole dick, faggot.
>>30185508
By inserting a rifle into a situation where no force was used against you, you escalated the situation. You are the aggressor, you are the initiator, and if he at that moment had beaten you senseless would have been within his right because you had shown intent to cause him imminent serious injury or death.
It doesn't matter what state you're in, what the laws are. Your response to a situation must be proportional to the threat at hand. If you fear for your life and can back it up reasonably, then you may use deadly force to repel assault. A reasonable person does not equate an imminent fear of death with a douche bag yelling at you.
Here's another example; someone throws a water bottle at you, and you draw on them and shoot them. That's second degree murder, even if you suffer minor injuries or may be battered, your response was not justifiable nor proportionate.
>>30188622
>you're just changing the conversation from one thing to another, dude.
So then where do you draw the line? A strong enough person could beat someone to death or strangle them; should a potential victim just assume that they're not going to? Should we have different laws for people who have had self defense training? What about women or the elderly, who are more likely to need a weapon to defend themselves; if someone approaches them with their fists raised and proclaiming violent intent, should they not be allowed to use a weapon to deter or stop them because "lol just use your fists, why do you need a gun pussy"?
>>30188887
"threatened with imminent bodily injury"
Pointing a gun at someone is exactly such a threat. They don't know if the gun is loaded.
Class C misdemeanor.
>>30188931
>or ever pointed at anyone
>>30188649
go fuck yourself deranged antman.
>>30188663
I'll fight somebody with my fists if there's a misunderstanding and we are both being belligerent and it's an appropriate setting.
I'm not gonna let somebody I've never seen before come up to me and put their hands on me, I'm gonna stop the threat. I don't know their intention. Maybe they wanna kill me, knock me out and rape me, steal all my shit.
You're about as bad as the "real men use their fists" hipster faggots.
>>30188812
>>30188864
these arent "brandishing"
the cali example is a "disturbance of the peace" and the texas example is "assault"
>inb4 fagoot anon defends his retarded examples as "meaning the same thing".
they dont mean the same thing, criminal law is the most specific interpretation of our language, just because your dumbass can't understand that things have a specific meaning doesnt mean your definition is correct.
tl;dr
fuck off and read a book
>>30188953
you're confusing people making a moral judgement about how they "feel" you should handle something and people telling you that if you shoot someone who is unarmed, (unless specific circumstances legally exempt you) that you're going to get raped legally.
>>30189041
Not in my state.
>>30188904
In your example that's for the courts to decide not some guy on the internet. If the assaulted man felt his life could have been threatened in some way lethal force is acceptable assuming your not in a cuck state. Many places have laws in place that expressly say you have the right to defend yourself in places you are legally allowed to be and you don't have to stand there like a lemon when someone chooses to assault you. I'm not saying I would shoot the first guy who threw a water bottle at me nor am I saying it's a good idea. I'm saying if you can argue it in court you might be in the clear and your only guilty after a jury says so even that can be appealed.
>>30188848
He inserted himself into a dispute at his place of business which is the correct thing to do as the manager. We can all seem to argue op fucked up and even he agrees the main issue is with what and when. With op as the manager what should he have done? Stayed inside? And what if the agrressive guy starts assaulting the other? If he cause him to hit his head on concrete? Well the situation didn't involve op so he should let it go according to what you said.
>>30185508
You pleb.
Carry a handgun. Pull it out and shoot when your life is in danger.
Anything else is fucking stupid.
>>30189562
>With op as the manager what should he have done? Stayed inside?
yes, and secured himself and customers inside if needed
>what if aggressive guy starts assaulting the other
well in most places you'd be within your legal right to step in and do something. but you'd still have to use equivalent force.
the question is SHOULD he step in.
I realize that a lot of posters here are idealistic, gung ho, young men. Im cut from the same stock. But I've been around the block enough times to know that doing the right thing isn't always doing the right thing.
getting yourself in dire legal straits in your 20's because you're young stupid and angry is going to hurt you well into your 30's
personally i like having freedom and money more than i like getting involved in other peoples retarded bullshit
>>30189693
I'll agree to that maybe I'm idealistic part of me would also try to step just not how op decided to the other part of me says you decided to get into this altercation for whatever dumb reason you sort it out. They both had to pull into the parking lot for it to continue so it's not a one sided affair.
>>30188783
That's pretty dumb. People can't give you verbal consent to end their life. Have fun being in jail for 20 years because you were afraid of looking like a bitch boy.
>>30189041
No state says you can only use a gun if they have a gun you tripnigger cuck. In some you may have to make a reasonable attempt to escape a violent altercation (not Texas) before using lethal force to defend yourself, but OP could have shot him for advancing with the intent to cause bodily harm and/or death.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Getting killed for being a roadraging faggot trying to beat people up in a gas station parking lot is the prise you win for being a shitkicker.
>he walks up, gets in my face asks me what I'm gonna do
This is precisely where I would have pointed the gun at him and told him to back off, and then shot him if he got to within ten feet.
Once a firearm enters the situation, I'm going to maintain positive control of it, even if that means dealing with the legal hassle of installing a new sunroof in somebodies skull.
>>30188859
>a fall on a moving object and in most cases being hit by another heavier object (a car) is the same as being jawknocked and falling down
bruh
you dumb fuds are fucking it up for the rest of us normals
>>30188927
the line is if the person attacking you has a weapon you have the right to blow his fucking head or balls off. If the person is physically assaulting you unarmed the rules of engagement are very grey and vary state to state. Blowing a person away because he fronted on you is retarded and is thug behavior
If a nigga is choking you knee him in the nuts, simple
>>30188176
As a britbong I must say I disagree with him.
>>30191138
no state requires you to engage in fisticuffs with an assailant because he isn't armed. Mutual fighting is highly illegal, responding to the threat of great bodily harm or death with lethal force is not.
>>30185669
>>30187881
I took a concealed carry class with a women who had a kidney disorder where she only had one kidney that functioned and was somewhat damaged. One punch to the stomach or lower back would be fatal to her; "life threatening" is extraordinarily subjective.
>>30188311
>implying the name "assault rifle" makes it more deadly
go home hilllary
Yeah you did fuck up, OP, you put your fucking gun down and let him get close to you
Idiot
>>30188422
> someone asks about the assailant's race
> white
> nobody brings it up again
Fuckin white people.
