In Arizona, like a number of states, it doesn’t need to be a deadly threat for him to be justified in displaying his firearm. He only needs to reasonably believe physical force is necessary to prevent the unlawful use of physical force. A.R.S. s. 13-421. I think whether his display of his firearm was justified under Arizona law depends on a number of things we can’t see in the video.
“He only needs to reasonably believe physical force is necessary to prevent the unlawful use of physical force. A.R.S. s. 13-421. I think whether his display of his firearm was justified under Arizona law depends on a number of things we can’t see in the video.”
Did you bother to read the law you cited?
How about this section where “defensive display” is defined:
D. For the purposes of this section, “defensive display of a firearm” includes:
1. Verbally informing another person that the person possesses or has available a firearm.
2. Exposing or displaying a firearm in a manner that a reasonable person would understand was meant to protect the person against another’s use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
3. Placing the person’s hand on a firearm while the firearm is contained in a pocket, purse or other means of containment or transport.
Pointing a gun at someone is a lethal threat. It requires the same legal justification as actually shooting someone.
I drew a gun about a year ago because a person was jumping a fence onto my property late at night during a time when many people were evacuating the area for flooding. Turns out he was retrieving his child’s toy (unless it was intentionally put there as a pretext). What he did was foolish. I’m very glad I did not shoot him.
If I had shot him, would it have been a clean shooting? Probably, but you never know how cops and the DA might interpret things. And I would not want to live with killing an innocent man just because he made a foolish choice. And I did not point my gun at him because I would only do that if I expecting to actually shoot.
In this case, you are defending an abortionist who did not merely brandish his gun. He pointed it at a protestor. Could the abortionist have used the defense that he thought he was in imminent danger?
Perhaps, but there are a lot of questions the cops should be asking.
If he thought he was in danger, why did he not fire his gun?
Why did he not call the police immediately after the incident?
Why did he lie to the police, claiming he not only did not do this but never brings a gun to work?
Lying to a police officer who is investigating a complaint is illegal.
But these cops did not want to pursue this for whatever reason. One cop even claimed he could not positively identify that what the abortionist had in his hand was a gun. That’s pathetic.
We can tell that he was pointing his gun at a sign-holder AND also endangering anyone behind him, such as the person videoing the incident and possibly other sidewalk protestors. If you are safely inside your car, to justify pointing a gun at someone who is several feet away, that person had better be displaying a gun or similar weapon capable of becoming a lethal threat to the person in the car.
Beyond the issue of lawfulness, this is a matter of gun safety. If you are under the impression that it is reasonable to draw and point a gun at someone because you are startled or some similar reason, you may need to avail yourself of some gun training so as to avoid hurting someone or getting yourself in legal trouble.