“Showing a gun without justification to use it is a CRIME. It is called “brandishing”. Only recently have some jurisdictions begun to consider allowing the showing of a firearm as a means to ward off an attack.”
You’re an excellent example of someone who’s committed to a theory, and will double down endlessly despite being clearly wrong. You remind me of many global warming supporters...
As a CCW holder, there is no problem with “brandishing” your weapon if you have just cause to draw it and potentially shoot someone. For instance, if you see a man beating a woman on the sidewalk, it is perfectly permissible to draw your weapon and warn the man to stop or he’ll be shot. If he stops, it’s fine to hold him at gunpoint until the police arrive. You will not be in any trouble. and there is CERTAINLY no requirement to shoot him rather than warning him first. You should look into the myriad of accounts where simply exhibiting a weapon defused the situation...
I really, really hope you are not a CCW holder given your general cluelessness in this area.
That is good to know and should probably be shouted from the housetops so that a whole lot of people here and elsewhere who are carrying can get the message as they clearly did not pay attention in their CCW classes.
Fine. That means that if the ex-cop was not justified in firing then he was not justified in brandishing.
Hypothetically, (and I use the word explicitly so that people don't misunderstand and think that I claim that is what happened), if the ex-cop, for whatever reason, pulled out his gun after the popcorn throwing and put it in his lap, what would the popcorn thrower do?
Assume, again hypothetically, that the popcorn thrower was armed. Would the popcorn thrower be justified in drawing his own weapon and shooting the ex-cop dead? Does it make a difference if the ex-cop's hand is still on the firearm?
For that matter, and once again hypothetically, if the off-duty copy in the audience had been armed, would he have been justified in shooting the ex-cop dead having seen the display of the ex-cop's firearm? Would the off-duty cop then be facing second degree murder charges?
Let me turn your statement around and see how it sounds:
As a CCW holder, there is no problem with shooting someone with your weapon if you have just cause to draw it and brandish it.
Isn't that the same thing?
If the justification for "brandishing" is the same as the justification for shooting, then there is no justification for brandishing if there is no justification for shooting.
Is it perfectly permissible to shoot?