I am skeptical about CJ's judgment in this case, but I wasn't there. I support his right to be armed and I expect that he will think quite a bit about whether or not he could have made better choices.
Nonetheless, it is so very easy for us to criticize after the fact when we were not at the scene.
I think CJ has learned a valuable lesson about modern communications and discretion.
I think it was a felony, even under CJ's own narrative. I'm assuming as true his own story.
"I find it amazing that so many people who weren't there are so willing to assume so many things about the facts and character of people that they don't know."
There's a great book called BLINK, about how most snap judgements are actually very...right. CJ told us more about himself than he ever would have guessed, in his post. The majority of responders are with me, which is not to say that we are right, per se, but that we came away with an impression different than yours, apparently.
Excuse me, but CJ started this thread. He posted the story, and the critical comments are based on the facts presented by CJ himself. If the facts are as he has stated, he showed very poor judgement.
I am not sure what your complaint is, this is after all a discussion forum. CJ posted a topic for discussion.