Man threatens to shoot iPhone
All well and good in the rhetorical sense but if you actually brandish the firearm you’re carrying, the cops don’t take too kindly to it. Even if you have a carry permit.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
*facepalm* Dude!
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Depends– Would any reasonable and prudent person determine that the iPhone was presenting a serious threat to him?
October 2nd, 2009 at 9:11 pm
No sympathy for this DB. Go to jail dumbass, you’re making it hard on the rest of us.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Exposing a concealed holstered firearm in a open carry state does not quite rise to the level of brandishing in my opinion. Had he drawn, or threatened the employee then he’d have gone over the line, but although it’s a poor choice to scare the sheep, I don’t quite think this rises to the point of a criminal case. After all, isn’t it the man’s right to dispose of his property in any way he sees fit? Had he been wearing a carpenter’s toolbelt, and theatened to smash the phone with his hammer, turning to the employee to show he had a hammer, would the police have been called? After all, a hammer can be a deadly weapon too.
from opencarry.org-
“Ohio
Summary
Ohio is a traditional open carry state. Recently, the Ohio legislature passed HB-12 over Governor Taft’s veto, thus preempting all local open carry bans even in Ohio’s “home rule” localities. Unfortunately, despite passage of HB-12, a permit to conceal is still required to openly carry a handgun in a vehicle.”
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:18 pm
I breathed a sign of relief to know he was not one of my students, He failed to inform the police, and although open carry is legal in Ohio, it was a dumb move on his part to show he had one, right after saying he was so mad he could put a 9mm through it.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Despite what someone else here wrote. The guy is a dumb-ass alright? Arguments about “a man’s right to dispose of his property” and a reference to scaring the sheep? Gimme a break! What if he “scared a sheepdog” in the same store and was put down right there? No F-ing excuses or rationalization for acting like a tough-guy moron by pulling up his shirt to play “show and tell” with a clerk who gets paid to put up with disgruntled assholes. He knew what he was doing. Try the old “looky here” with me ass-wipe. Don’t show if you ain’t ready to go. Rant off.
October 4th, 2009 at 12:08 am
If said, “Sheepdog” would, “put down” this character for exposing the firearm then, by definition that wouldn’t be a, “Sheepdog”, unless a rabid one. Possesion of and exposure of a handgun is not a circumstance that calls for or allows for the use of deadly force. Now who is being the ranting cowboy? Doesn’t make anything this guy did right but going overboard in responding to his mistakes doesn’t help one bit either and really does reinforce the anti-gunners fears of carry permit holders being an explosion just waiting for an excuse to go off. Can’t we hold back on the fratricide a little, please.
October 4th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
I had a slightly different take on it. Although I agree with those who’ve said he’s a dumbass, I felt the action was much more threatening than most of you seem to be saying. The fact that he specifically identified the phone as the target of his rage, for me doesn’t change the fact that he threatened the sales clerk. But my main point is that he’s not the rare exception you seem to think he is.
October 4th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
“for me doesn’t change the fact that he threatened the sales clerk”
Of course the fact that he didn’t threaten the clerk is totally lost on you.