Recently someone I know from college has been charged with unlawfully presenting a firearm because of a parking lot road rage incident. It was around 10:00 PM at the local Walmart parking lot and he was just sitting inside his car eating his meal he purchased from inside the McDonald in Walmart when some random guy came up aggressively screaming and demanding that he leave the parking lot because he doesn't match the demographic of the area and accused him of being a hoodlum up to no good. My friend initially told the guy to back off and said he wasn't leaving because he got to the parking space first, thinking that was all the man was after. At that point the man became more enraged screaming racial slurs and profanity laced comments and started yanking on the door knob demanding that my friend get out and fight. When the guy started yanking on the door knob and hitting the window my friend un-holstered his Smith & Wesson M&P Shield and screamed to the man several times to get back and that he was in fear for his life. The guy took a step back, but didn't back off and screamed back to my friend that he wasn't afraid of his little gun and to just go ahead and shoot. An off duty police officer witnessed that point of the altercation and made a felony arrest on my friend and listed the other instigator as the victim and now the man is claiming to be traumatized and seeking civil damages for what he instigated.
My question is shouldn't the state's Protection of Persons and Property Act (Stand Your Ground Law) protect him from criminal prosecution when attacked in "another place he has the right to be including, but not limited to his vehicle and place of business"? Was this not a case of stand your ground? This also fit the elements of traditional self-defense save the old "Duty To Retreat". My friend was without fault in bringing on the difficulty, was in fear of death or grave bodily harm, and used what he thought was reasonable force to stop the forced entry into his vehicle and potential assault on his person. The law also says the fear is presumed when the attacker is forcing his way into an occupied vehicle so how exactly is this unlawful presenting of a firearm? Also is the fact that he didn't shoot going to be used against him to argue that he wasn't in fear for his life?
Submitted February 18, 2019 at 09:00PM by citizen50beowulf http://bit.ly/2SICv2S
No comments:
Post a Comment