• Drusas
    link
    fedilink
    2610 months ago

    Just showing a holstered weapon is not inherently “brandishing”.

    • themeatbridge
      link
      1710 months ago

      Right, brandishing implies intent to intimidate or threaten someone. That’s why I said in the second paragraph it doesn’t seem like he’s trying to be intimidating. To be clearer, what I should have said is “the term in question is brandishing” and the answer is “no, he wasn’t brandishing his weapon.”

      • @Katana314
        link
        English
        310 months ago

        I think it could be argued that it’s very hard to define the difference. Ex, a mobster jeering to someone “You know, you shouldn’t say things like that. A lot of people might be angry, and many of them are carrying. See? I’m carrying right now. You see the risk? I’m just giving a friendly warning.”

        Of course, harder to make that argument against a cop.

    • @doingthestuff
      link
      610 months ago

      Yeah if that were the case, police with a pistol on their hip or anyone open carrying would be brandishing. A bunch of states have permitless open carry. I think you have to have the gun in your hand to be guilty of brandishing, although I’m sure laws vary from state to state.

      • @linearchaos
        link
        English
        1810 months ago

        Ehh, He unconcealed it on purpose. It’s still not enough to be brandishing but he was doing it to make a point.

      • FuglyDuck
        link
        English
        9
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Nope.

        In Indiana, this would fall under intimidation. Which is threats to modify or coerce behavior (without justification, I suppose,).

        She said it herself in the video. “I feel unsafe… that makes me feel unsafe.” Clearly the gesture (which was hardly needed,) was viewed as threatening.

        Depending on the state, brandishing may have more specific meanings, but generally, any attempt to call attention to the weapon (like exposing it on your hip,) is a use of force. More commonly, for example, putting your hand on the weapon.

        In ~8 years of reviewing incidents for between 300 and 800 armed security guards; I’ve never seen any sort of “I’m armed!” - including displaying or putting a hand on it (without drawing) ever actually descalate. It was always either going to be drawn, anyhow, or never needed in the first.

        It does, however, give the subject time to escalate themselves. So it always makes things worse.

        The fact this guy never actually acknowledged that he had made his (presumed) constituents - aka highschool kids - feel unsafe, says either he’s too fucking unaware to carry a firearm, too fucking dumb to be a state legislator, or scaring her was exactly what he wanted.

        Probably all three.

        • @jimbo
          link
          2
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • FuglyDuck
            link
            English
            4
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Sorry? I left it out? You replied three times to me tilling me im wrong. You saw the link.

            It seems you’re being just as dishonest here as you are accusing me of.

            Also… you may wish to read something

            Verbally threatening some one is use of force. Threatening with a gesture is use of force. In every state I’m aware of- which is about twenty, specifically- all treat a threat to use a fire arm as the same as using a fire arm

            I have always been trained to never (intentionally) expose a concealed fire arm (unless a cop is asking you to.) precisely because the gesture is easily misunderstood as a threat.

            But, you’re right, this guy could probably pass it off as debate. He shouldn’t be allowed to, though.

            • @jimbo
              link
              -1
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              deleted by creator

              • Cethin
                link
                fedilink
                English
                310 months ago

                Threatening requires…an actual threat. Just showing someone a gun is not a threat. I would challenge you to show me a law that says “showing someone a gun is a threat”. The laws I looked up said that threatening someone with a gun is a threat.

                Would pointing a gun at someone be a threat? (Surely yes.) Why? Because it can intimidate someone (by a statement of intent to use force) into doing something they wouldn’t otherwise do.

                OK, so can the same be said for placing your hand on a gun? What about placing a gun on a table? Surely, again, the answer is yes for both of those. Why? Because purposefully displaying your weapon is displaying your intent (or a warning of possible intent) to use it.

                OK, so what’s the difference between those and displaying (purposefully to a group of people in opposition to you) your holstered gun? What is the possible intent? Was he just trying to show them a piece of his wardrobe or was their another motive? If the intent was to make them feel uncomfortable (and it did) then explain how it’s not a threat?

                Threats don’t have to be words. Threats can be actions, like holding a knife to someone’s throat. If the intent is coercion through an implication of danger, it’s a threat. Arguments can be made that this wasn’t what happened, but you’d be hard pressed to get anyone like me to see this as anything else. What could the other possible intent be?

                • @jimbo
                  link
                  0
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  deleted by creator

                  • Cethin
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    110 months ago

                    I still don’t see a reason for it. What he said should be enough, rather than flashing his gun. Also, since it’s supposedly for defence, what is he doing flashing it at them. That’s somewhat implying ‘I’m going to “defend” myself.’ The most generous interpretation is he flashed his firearm to make a point, which is still wrong.

                    If you did watch that video and came away saying it must have been a threat, you’re not have a good faith discussion.

                    The argument is likely not made in good faith to start with. Statistically a firearm doesn’t protect you. Frequently it just gets you killed instead, especially if you’re flashing it and making yourself a target and threat (there’s that word again). It almost certainly was a veiled threat (likely fake, but to make them feel uncomfortable), although it can be more than one thing at once.

                    It’s also likely an appeal to his base, because it’s seen as a virtue to carry, and also likely to confront and threaten those in favor of any form of gun control. It’s an implicit endorsement to his constituents to do the same thing.

              • FuglyDuck
                link
                1
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Threatening requires…an actual threat. Just showing someone a gun is not a threat. I would challenge you to show me a law that says “showing someone a gun is a threat”. The laws I looked up said that threatening someone with a gun is a threat.

                you can communicate a threat to shoot some one without ever having a gun on your possession. (Gran Torino comes to mind, even if that is fiction.) Here’s the relevant text of Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-45-2-1. :

                Sec. 1. (a) A person who communicates a threat with the intent:

                1. that another person engage in conduct against the other person’s will;
                2. that another person be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act;
                3. [trimming this, it’s not really relevant here. Basically saying you can’t yell ‘fire’ in a theater, or similar.]

                commits intimidation, a Class A misdemeanor.

                making threats in general is Class A misdemeanor. there’s conditions that can bump it to a class 6, or 5 felony (like, you’re threatening to commit a felony- aka to shoot some one.)

                it goes on to say:

                c) “Threat” means an expression, by words or action, of an intention to:

                1. unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person, or damage property;

                  6) expose the person threatened to hatred, contempt, disgrace, or ridicule;

                I’ve bolded the important bits, and trimmed out a few that were irrelevant or just too wordy and also irrelevant.

                care to explain how calling attention to being armed, isn’t on some level intended to shock or scare school kids? based on posture and what little context there was, it seems more reasonable to believe he wanted- consciously or otherwise- to scare and pressure these kids. And he used a firearm to do it.

                you can use a device to intimidate without ever actually drawing or firing a weapon. on a geopolitical level, the entire premise of MAD is based on that. Simply opening his jacket was “using” in that sense. “I’m armed right now!! [SEE?]” there was absolutely zero reason, as far as legitimate policy arguments go, that flashing that pistol bolstered… and a reasonable belief, by members of this group, that he was indeed threatening them.

                I am hard pressed to conceive of a scenario where the situation would be improved by such an announcement where simply drawing it would not also be a greater improvement.

                Am I stretching things- a bit- ? probably. Will this guy get off because “i didn’t mean it that way?” Absolutely. because he’s rich(ish), white, and in a conservative stronghold that likes this sort bullshit. Does it mean he’s not guilty? No… Does it mean it’s okay to do? absolutely not.

                • @jimbo
                  link
                  0
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  deleted by creator

                  • FuglyDuck
                    link
                    English
                    110 months ago

                    Yes, ffs, just go watch the video. I shouldn’t even have to explain this. He said something about self-defense, some kid goes “like carrying a gun”? He says “yes, in fact I’m carrying right now” and briefly revealed the gun on his side. A reasonable person would interpret that as him demonstrating that he does the thing that he himself advocates for. Nobody felt threatened by that. This group of kids didn’t gasp at seeing the gun and run away. They didn’t even take a step back. They stood there and kept arguing with him.

                    For fucking hell. By YOUR definition of reasonable, and YOUR interpretation.

                    How many ways do I need to say it? It’s not YOUR definition that matters. It’s not even mine. One of the kids even said it. “nothing about that makes me feel safe.”

                    There is no world in which intentionally flashing a gun does not reasonably convey a threat on some level. Showing that you are carrying, serves no purpose to that argument- the argument he’s loosing (and judging by his subsequent comments… quite salty about it.)

                    Now look at his posture, he’s leaning forward, in an aggressive manner (not physically aggressive, yet, but he’s leaning forward, his other hand is in an raised defensive posture. He’s squared up on them, on his toes,) He’s agitated, his face shows frustration. And he has aggressive body language.

                    You’re acting like a single action will always be one thing and never more than one thing. These situations are a whole lot of gray, and his whole lot of gray said he at the very least meant to scare or shock those students.

        • @AbidanYre
          link
          English
          -110 months ago

          r/dgu already added this to their list and say it prevented a violent crime.