Justified?

**Foxx** · 07-18-24, 05:40 PM

Definitely on account of the guy aggressing with a gun in his hand. No gun, probably not justified.

**slewfan** · 07-18-24, 05:42 PM

It's a tough one. First off, your life has to be in imminent danger. Second, anything over 2 shots is considered overkill. If it was me, I would have moved back a little, say I'm sorry (just to diffuse, if possible). Now if I felt 'threatened after that' then I would have to make a snap decision.

I think that's a gun in the idiots hand when he banged on the car.?. I probably would have been ready to shoot. There will be civil suits the shooter will have to deal with for years. His whole life will change. It's one thing to shoot someone when they are clearly about to harm you or your family. But totally different in this situation.

JMO

**getaloadoffatso** · 07-18-24, 06:01 PM

I can't tell if the guy who got shot had a gun in his hand, but it certainly could have been

If that's the case, it's 1000% self defense and how could anybody dispute that???

If it wasn't a gun, then it gets hard to prove

I think it would depend on the whole story and background of who it was and how it got that far

**TheGoldenGoose** · 07-18-24, 07:09 PM

Yes, justified. That’s a gun. 100%

Judges don’t like to see raging idiots. He who keeps his cool usually wins support.

JMHO.

**DwightShrute** · 07-18-24, 07:13 PM

yup if a guy approaches you with that much rage holding a gun like he did, you fire or become victim in all likelihood.

He did switch the gun from his right hand to his left and the raised his right hand but how can you be expected to see it that quick.

Bottom line, he'd be alive if he didn't approach him with a gun.

**Foxx** · 07-18-24, 07:50 PM

I didn't even notice he switched the gun from the the right hand to left hand before he raised the right hand. Changes things a tiny little bit, but not much.

**Optional** · 07-18-24, 08:21 PM

Just glad I dont live in a place where people think they have the right to kill others.

Road rage happens all over the world. Only in America could someone shoot the rager dead and people then have a conversation about if it is justified.

If you think it is never justified to kill another person, guess what? People don't do it.

chicken and egg problem. But in my mind there is almost never a justification for an ordinary person to intentionally kill another.

**getaloadoffatso** · 07-18-24, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Optional

Just glad I dont live in a place where people think they have the right to kill others.

Road rage happens all over the world. Only in America could someone shoot the rager dead and people then have a conversation about if it is justified.

If you think it is never justified to kill another person, guess what? People don't do it.

chicken and egg problem. But in my mind there is almost never a justification for an ordinary person to intentionally kill another.

The guy came at him with a gun
What was he supposed to do????

If he tries to drive away the guy probably shoots him
You make it sound like he killed him intentionally, when it's obvious he was defending himself against an armed aggressor

**Optional** · 07-19-24, 01:05 AM

Originally posted by getaloadoffatso

The guy came at him with a gun
What was he supposed to do????

If he tries to drive away the guy probably shoots him
You make it sound like he killed him intentionally, when it's obvious he was defending himself against an armed aggressor

I thought both people were the problem. Guy 1 who thought he had a right to "protect" himself by carrying a pistol into a road rage fight, and Guy 2 who I am sure thinks it is within his rights to end the life of the other road rager due to feeling threatened.

The root is obviously that ordinary Americans have been taught to think it is justifiable to shoot someone scary looking if they walk on your property and knock on the door. Or if you think someone robbed a house. Or if a person does not obey a police order. Or if someone threatens you in any way.

For a country that wants Christianity and govt mixed so closely, it's weird to see all your exceptions to the 10 commandments when it comes to killing.

And the land of the free so many want to sign over sanctity to your own lifes giving the govt the right to kill you with the death penalty. It's perverse.

Actually the most perverse thing about this subject is how Americans have changed/twisted "Gods words" from "Thou Shalt Not Kill" to "Don't Murder" to kind of help religious types come to terms with the fact they argue people can kill people in many many many circumstances.

**getaloadoffatso** · 07-19-24, 03:01 AM

Originally posted by Optional

I thought both people were the problem. Guy 1 who thought he had a right to "protect" himself by carrying a pistol into a road rage fight, and Guy 2 who I am sure thinks it is within his rights to end the life of the other road rager due to feeling threatened.

The root is obviously that ordinary Americans have been taught to think it is justifiable to shoot someone scary looking if they walk on your property and knock on the door. Or if you think someone robbed a house. Or if a person does not obey a police order. Or if someone threatens you in any way.

For a country that wants Christianity and govt mixed so closely, it's weird to see all your exceptions to the 10 commandments when it comes to killing.

And the land of the free so many want to sign over sanctity to your own lifes giving the govt the right to kill you with the death penalty. It's perverse.

Actually the most perverse thing about this subject is how Americans have changed/twisted "Gods words" from "Thou Shalt Not Kill" to "Don't Murder" to kind of help religious types come to terms with the fact they argue people can kill people in many many many circumstances.

So you think both guys share the same amount of culpability????
That's insane

Next time, he should just let someone who gets out of their vehicle with a gun, and attacks him, just kill him while he sits in his truck

The other stuff you go off on, that is totally unrelated to this incident, would probably be best worked out with the help of a psychiatrist

**Optional** · 07-19-24, 03:15 AM

Originally posted by getaloadoffatso

So you think both guys share the same amount of culpability????
That's insane

Next time, he should just let someone who gets out of their vehicle with a gun, and attacks him, just kill him while he sits in his truck

The other stuff you go off on, that is totally unrelated to this incident, would probably be best worked out with the help of a psychiatrist

not sure how you came to that conclusion.

Hey if dude 1 came at my car with a gun in his hand and I happened to have one as well, I think I'd shoot him too in the heat of that moment.

The thread is asking if this is justified. I just don't think any member of the public should feel justified in killing another person, legally or ethically. And if neither of them had felt it was justified to be killing over a road rage argument, this would not have happened.

People should not be taught it's ever ok to kill someone unless as a 100% unavoidable last resort, even in self defense, is where I coming from. So this is not justifiable behavior imho.

**getaloadoffatso** · 07-19-24, 03:37 AM

Originally posted by Optional

not sure how you came to that conclusion.

Hey if dude 1 came at my car with a gun in his hand and I happened to have one as well, I think I'd shoot him too in the heat of that moment.

The thread is asking if this is justified. I just don't think any member of the public should feel justified in killing another person, legally or ethically. And if neither of them had felt it was justified to be killing over a road rage argument, this would not have happened.

People should not be taught it's ever ok to kill someone unless as a 100% unavoidable last resort, even in self defense, is where I coming from. So this is not justifiable behavior imho.

So you are saying that this wasn't a last resort situation????
It sure looked like it was to me

I'm not sure how self defense is not justifiable

Justifiable doesn't mean it's awesome, great and worthy of celebration

You keep saying the shooter thought it was OK to kill someone over road rage
That is disingenuous

It went from road rage to a guy at his truck door with a gun
That is why he shot, not because of some preconceived notion of road rage

**19th Hole** · 07-19-24, 05:09 AM

Who needs guns?

.

**Foxx** · 07-19-24, 08:17 AM

Originally posted by Optional

The thread is asking if this is justified. I just don't think any member of the public should feel justified in killing another person, legally or ethically. And if neither of them had felt it was justified to be killing over a road rage argument, this would not have happened.

It appears to me that all the comments prior to yours were speaking to as whether he was actually legally justified given existing laws. Just based on the video and not knowing the full set of circumstances, I doubt he would be charged with homicide. If he was charged and it went to trial, no chance he gets convicted.

If you want to change the subject to whether he was morally justified or should he be legally justified as in the laws should be changed, that's a whole different ball of wax.

**ninjagorn** · 07-19-24, 09:12 AM

WTF is wrong in your country? In broad daylight a guy walks to a car with a gun-beceause of a parking dispute??? And the other guy happens to have a gun and shoots him 3 times at point blank range...

**Optional** · 07-19-24, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by getaloadoffatso

So you are saying that this wasn't a last resort situation????
It sure looked like it was to me

I'm not sure how self defense is not justifiable

Justifiable doesn't mean it's awesome, great and worthy of celebration

You keep saying the shooter thought it was OK to kill someone over road rage
That is disingenuous

It went from road rage to a guy at his truck door with a gun
That is why he shot, not because of some preconceived notion of road rage

Not 100% sure me being scared to talk to a guy with a gun is "really" a last resort situation, but as I said I probably would have fired in the same spot if in the USA with your laws.

But I think that this would not happen very often if the population had not been educated to think that killing can be justified.

I know you will hate this, but down here there is not an absolute right to self defense. Self defense is a mitigating factor still of course, but it is illegal to keep a gun, or any weapon, at hand specifically to injure another person as a form of self defense and will undermine any legal defense if you do that and use it. You're just not allowed to kill each other in 99% of situations, so ordinary people like these guys in a traffic dispute would not feel justified in going this far.

I know I am fighting an uphill battle trying to convince anyone killing should almost never be justifiable, but that's basically where I am coming from.

Originally posted by Foxx

It appears to me that all the comments prior to yours were speaking to as whether he was actually legally justified given existing laws. Just based on the video and not knowing the full set of circumstances, I doubt he would be charged with homicide. If he was charged and it went to trial, no chance he gets convicted.

If you want to change the subject to whether he was morally justified or should he be legally justified as in the laws should be changed, that's a whole different ball of wax.

I did not see anything about if Dwight meant legally or ethically. But I think it's a mix of both. Changing laws can be done but changing a community's ethics is probably a lot harder.

**slewfan** · 07-19-24, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Optional

Not 100% sure me being scared to talk to a guy with a gun is "really" a last resort situation, but as I said I probably would have fired in the same spot if in the USA with your laws.

But I think that this would not happen very often if the population had not been educated to think that killing can be justified.

I know you will hate this, but down here there is not an absolute right to self defense. Self defense is a mitigating factor still of course, but it is illegal to keep a gun, or any weapon, at hand specifically to injure another person as a form of self defense and will undermine any legal defense if you do that and use it. You're just not allowed to kill each other in 99% of situations, so ordinary people like these guys in a traffic dispute would not feel justified in going this far.

I know I am fighting an uphill battle trying to convince anyone killing should almost never be justifiable, but that's basically where I am coming from.

I did not see anything about if Dwight meant legally or ethically. But I think it's a mix of both. Changing laws can be done but changing a community's ethics is probably a lot harder.

The family of the guy who was shot will still have a right to a civil suit and if they win, the shooter can lose everything he has. That's the possibility and reality of this situation.

I'm not trying to play devils advocate. If you shoot someone, you darn better make sure you can prove you were in ''immediate'' and ''imminent'' danger.

The guy was stupid for getting out of his car with the gun without being ready to use it. But he did have the gun and the shooter may have been scared. But was there a threat. This is what he may have to pay lawyers to prove in court.

**Optional** · 07-19-24, 01:20 PM

Originally posted by 19th Hole

Who needs guns?

.

And? What is your point here?

Seems like you might agree with me? But chances are you don't even understand what you posted. No one in that news report is even suggesting there could be any justification for recklessly killing that road rager who came up to the car window.

Why don't you make some enlarged and bold text and rattle off a little abusive language that makes no sense like you do to everyone else here all the time? That might be more effective as an argument than this.

BTW, bold and enlarged is a big flashing sign that the author is a complete dumbass. Notice who else does it? Just you and Hareeba.

**captrobey** · 07-19-24, 02:38 PM

If he is holding a gun and that looks like a gun and you see a gun then before he even says a word to you that person has the right to shoot him . It was not concealed you do not know what his intentions are but they cannot be good approaching you with a gun. But for sure if i see the gun and the guy starts smashing on my car i would shoot him if he was holding a gun 100% at that point .

But you know people are penetrating ignorant assholes anymore . If you are civil and you are at fault just admit it. I remember once and only once i cut someone off accidentally. Otherwise my entire life i have never done that. The guy was pissed and followed me to a light. I rolled down my window and before he even screamed at me i said " Sorry 100% my fault i did not see you there " . The guy was confused ended up saying Ok and just drove off. When you act like this idiot and run up to someone holding a gun then things like this are going to happen.

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 07-19-24, 03:22 PM

Given the fact that the guy got out of his car and was banging on the other driver's window with a gun, it is probably justified(not guilty to murder) by law.

**DwightShrute** · 07-19-24, 03:45 PM

ok so what about this incident? While its true, we don't what happened leading up to this point, I am pretty certain if that was me in the car, I would have stepped on the gas and ran him over. A couple times.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">What would you do in this situation? <a href="https://t.co/atGlSWsdw1">pic.twitter.com/atGlSWsdw1</a></p>— Clown World ™ �� (@ClownWorld_) <a href="https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1814249767725137983?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >July 19, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

**captrobey** · 07-19-24, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by DwightShrute

ok so what about this incident? While its true, we don't what happened leading up to this point, I am pretty certain if that was me in the car, I would have stepped on the gas and ran him over. A couple times.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">What would you do in this situation? <a rel="nofollow" href="https://t.co/atGlSWsdw1">pic.twitter.com/atGlSWsdw1</a></p>— Clown World ™ �� (@ClownWorld_) <a rel="nofollow" href="https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1814249767725137983?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >July 19, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Wow this is a good one he is obviously hiding something walking up and i think he initially wanted to shoot the guy if he put the window down. I agree though taking off with him approaching you like that i would have said fine to take off not sure about running him over though unless you see the gun come out. What if you ran him over and it turned out to be one of those rubber chickens ?