Unfortunately, for far too many people the mode their brains go into runs something like, “I’m a MAN, and NOBODY better get in my face!”
barely … and only if the whole vid culminates with a Philly Sidecar (don’t google that!)
I had family, both my side and my ex-wife, that was all into concealed carry. I did so for a bit and it was a complete pain in the ass. LITERALLY. I also carried backpacking into grizz territory. I’ve now given up on all of that and my pains have disappeared. In all those 35 years, I’ve never needed a gun. I’m pretty happy with my decision to stop carrying. I still have the guns…someday they’ll get melted down.
I have a paddle holster (hangs outside my pants though the paddle goes inside) and a shoulder holster. The paddle isn’t too bad but gets uncomfortable after a while. I could probably wear the shoulder holster all day; it really just hangs where it’s not in the way at all.
My discomfort is completely psychological.
Oh, I get it, that is what that Kentucky Jelly is for.
Worst PB&J I’ve ever eaten.
Yes, but having a big dude hovering over you acting bizarre is rather more concerning than the guy in the next car over flipping you the bird. Shooting the guy is certainly an overreaction, and deserving of legal punishment, but I’m not entirely sure what the right level of reaction is.
Sometimes telling a weird acting guy to go away just gets you a punch in the face.
Ditto.
Push him away? Ok. Taser him? Sure. Maybe show him the weapon? Fine. But shooting him is really 0-50 in my book, as in too fast and too extreme in too short a time.
The timeline is not the problem. If there had been a real threat than a fast response is exactly what you want. Hesitate, and you could be dead.
The problem is that there was no real threat, or even something that would be perceived by a reasonable person to be a threat. Shoving a loud phone in somebody’s face is not a threat of bodily injury, just somebody being a jerk.
How about what this dude did? He comes out of a grocery store carrying two bags and some random dude starts screaming at him, getting all up in his face. Shopper dude takes it for a bit, then throws four quick rights and a coupla kicks, never putting his bags down. Hell, if there were eggs in the bag not one broke.
I tried googling to see if the footage had been posted anywhere. Didn’t find it, but did find a related story:
“While [she] says the shooting isn’t justified, she says his actions are taunting.”
Even this lady who made the news for being “traumatized” doesn’t think the shooting was justified.
I feel little sympathy for Cook, but Colie was wrong to shoot him.
She should sue him. For intentional infliction of emotional distress. Others should as well. He should become a professional defendant.
If he can’t be criminally charged for it, civil suits do seem like a good idea.
It’s not clear from the video that the ‘stalker’ in the Target was part of the prank, but I think it is reasonable to think that he was. If the ‘stalker’ later approached the woman, I think she would be highly concerned, if not terrified. That prank was fucked up, and shows that Cook did rely on his victim’s fear in order to get the effect that he wanted for his pranks. Makes it easier for Colie to say he feared for his safety because Cook’s pranks relied on fear.
Not in court though. What matters to Colie’s culpability is what he knew in the moment. If he didn’t know Cook’s history, it couldn’t affect his judgement about whether he was in danger. And if he did know Cook’s history…than he would have known it was a prank and not actually a threat.
Pretty sure the stalker was the guy who was recording it.
No, but since Cook relied on inspiring fear in his victims, it would be more likely that a victim would actually be in fear of danger. If the ‘joke’ requires the victim be in a state of fear to get the results you want, don’t be surprised when the victim reasonably reacts to that fear.