3 ms·
GP merely said “armed”, not “brandishing”.
by jakelazaroff 2y ago
GP merely said “armed”, not “brandishing”.
- ganoushoreilly 2y agoArmed during a police encounter. I agree we need more information on the stats, primarily what was the catalyst for the interaction? I would suspect though that most of these stats are based on interactions driven by criminal behavior. This isn't counter to BRUEN and current interpretations of 2a rights.
- jakelazaroff 2y ago“Armed during a police encounter” — right, so what? Is there, like, an asterisk on the Second Amendment that says “unless it’s during a police encounter, then they get to summarily execute you, sorry”?
- Rebelgecko 2y agoThat feels like a weird category to use IMO. People who brandish are armed but not all armed people are brandishing. More to the point, if you went to your local PDs website and watched body cam from the last 10 shootings, how many do you think would be involve law abiding gun owners with CCWs using guns in a way consistent with the 2nd Amendment vs people brandishing or using their guns in a criminal and/or dangerous way?
- jakelazaroff 2y agoAgain, I am not the one using that category; I am responding to its use. How many were using their guns in a dangerous and/or criminal way? We may never know, because they were deprived of their right to the trial by jury which would have determined that.