Destiny Baffled By Self Defense Verdict, Clashes w/ Aba
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2023
- DEBATE: Destiny and Aba get into a debate on self defense ft. Econoboi and Pisco...
Date: 3 October, 2023
▼Follow Destiny▼
►STREAM - www.destiny.gg/bigscreen
►TWITTER - / theomniliberal
►DISCORD - discordapp.com/invite/destiny
►REDDIT - / destiny
►INSTAGRAM - / destiny
►MERCH - shop.destiny.gg/
Check Out My Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/destiny
Buy My Merch: shop.destiny.gg/
#destiny
#politics
#debate
atleast he doesnt fake his pranks
also I'd argue that as a gun owner its your duty to give a warning in such a situation prior to firing and that this man should lose his ability to open carry legally
@@Austinn72 or as a person existing in a place where people can own guns its your duty to STOP when you are knowingly maliciously harassing a person who says STOP multiple times. maybe its just me. Oh but i forgot "pranksters" have no duty or agency in life, they have to chase down people 3v1 and never get shot
@@Healcraft Yeah, you shouldnt harass people, but thats not what the discussion is about. Its about wether the guy that shot his gun used justifiable self defense in fear for his life, or if he made an unnecessary escalation of the situation from being harassed to using deadly force.
@@Austinn72like saying stop or I’ll shoot you?(wont work) Like pulling it out and not using it?(not legal, brandishing) if you pull it you use it. Moral of the story don’t shit with strangers, you never know what’s going to happen.
@@roguis3451 and the jury found that he was in fear of his life and that the state did not prove he wasnt, case closed
These pranksters seem alot more psycho than a drunk guy at a bar that wants your seat. The context matters
Plus they ignore the fact posturing and chest puffing is regular and more expected at places like bars protests and sports games , and even then no one is shocked if the drunk guy gets laid out the second he gets in bro’s face .
Also for the situation to be analogous: imagine you leave your seat and he starts following you out of the bar, even after you tell him to screw off. But at least in that case you know where the conflict came from, the situation with the pranksters seems less predictable.
Angry drunk person is definitely way more threatening
@@finnmarr-heenan2397 exactly
@@michaelmichaelson2014 yeah it really isn't the same thing. These pranksters come off as completely unhinged individuals.
I am sorry Destiny. He made it very clear he didn't want to be apart of whatever was happening. The shove was a warning and he came back to his face
“I don’t want to be part of this” is not a valid reason to shoot someone lmao.
@@pugsley201 "i am in fear of being attacked after i have moved back and said stop to these 2 random guys rushing in my face" is in fact a valid reason
@pugsley201 According to court of law...it is lol. Jokes aside, watching the video he made an honest attempt to evade and separate himself, and he was still pursued.
"rushing in my face" They were clearly showing him a phone, your need to reframe the situation to be as egregious as possible is telling. @@moffat5914
@@pugsley201well according to our legal system it is in fact a valid reason
Destiny is so wrong on this. They were following him while he was retreating, getting in his face, continuing to do so after being told to stop and pushed away, and on top of that, saying nothing while the phone says some non-sensical shit. Any normal person isnt going to be thinking "maybe the random stranger harrassing me and getting in my physical area is a youtube prankster", theyre going to be thinking "theres a psychotic giant following me and i need to end this threat". I have zero sympathy for the prankster, he got the exact prize he rolled for by intimidating and harrassing people. I dont see how you can interpret the pranksters actions in a way that doesnt make him an immediate physical threat if you dont know hes recording a prank, which the victim didnt.
You're ignoring the only significant argument here. Everything you've said is addressed by Destiny saying that he would be endorse the shooter if this happened in isolation from help.
No two or three annoying thugs are going to beat you to death in a mall - and if that was their intent, the only self-defence you would need is to run away and ask for help. There is no world where you die there before you get helped, and more importantly, it's insane to assume that you're in that danger, because 99.9% of the goons you'd run into in this scenario would be - rightly - too scared of the repercussions to escalate the situation like that.
I don't think he is. I think he is right. He could have just flashed the gun. Did not need to shoot him. I think that would have been the normal response. Not trying to shoot someone in broad daylight, in a packed mall with kids.
This isn't the wild west, dude. And second I did not get ANY vibes that this guys was trying to physically harm him. It just looked like he was trying to annoy him. Slapping his phone out of his hand and being met with such a mild response was to me an indicator that he was not trying to hurt him. I feel had the dude been mentally unstable this act would have triggered aggression in someone ACTUALLY trying to harm you, resulting in them swinging at you. Choosing to potentially take someone's life should always be a last resort.
Bro he wasn’t getting cornered in a dark alley😂😂😂😂😂😂 You’re insane and you’re just waiting for a reason to use it too
Everytime something like this happens, Pisco should come in and say "This the future Destiny wants."
Pisco problemly has some form of autism.
True
Philly Democrat activist and journalists JOSH KRUGER has entered the chat.
i mean destiny is of the status quo Biden knows all , fuck the people mindset. Jury exist for a reason to represent the people, if the people hate pranksters, then so be it. Maybe we need to have a vote on whether you can shoot pranksters dead with no provocation at all and set it into law, I would wager more than 50% of people would say yes lol. So it cant be a law?
This but unironically
L take by Destiny there. Not remotely threatened? The "prankster" was already inside range to do serious harm. Not to mention he had an accomplice with him.
Did the aggressor make any violent movements other than walking close? Punches, kicks, violent gestures? No. Did the aggressor verbally say he would harm the shooter? No. Did the aggressor invoke “fighting words” (a real term in law)? No.
So, no, the shooter wasn’t really threatened. He was 3 or 4 out of 10 threatened and responded with 10/10 violence in a public, occupied space
@@garythecyclingnerd6219 The aggressor, was (by his own subsequent admission) creating confusion about his intent by intentionally remaining silent. You already ceded that the aggressor continued to advance when asked 3 times to stop. At the range that he was maintaining, there really would have been no time to react to an attack. The continued advance by itself was met with 3 different attempts by the victim to stop it: Verbal (stop x3) and the 2 Physical attempts to break contact by retreating and push the aggressor away.
He was absolutely threatened, another point you contradict yourself on, and as a result had a right to defend himself. You also conveniently ignore the fact that there were multiple aggressors. It's not unreasonable to assume a serious risk to oneself in that situation requiring self defense.
It’s ok for me to shoot anyone that’s close to me because they have the potential to do harm?
@@bigdadybojangls9219 No, and that's an asinine, reductive question to ask.
It's okay to defend yourself after repeatedly asking someone to stop behaving in a threatening manner, (three times) trying to back away repeatedly, and even trying to push them away.
It's especially easy to see why you might feel like you need to defend yourself if they are behaving in a bizarre manner (the lack of context and silence) and the aggressor has accomplices.
The range involved is just another highly concerning factor when taking everything else into account.
@@garythecyclingnerd6219You don't have to be hit to be assaulted. If I spit in your general direction that can be considered assault. Similarly getting in your "personal space" repeatedly and intentionally is considered assault because the legal definition of assault is:
"Assault is generally defined as an intentional act that puts another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact. No physical injury is required, but the actor must have intended to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the victim and the victim must have thereby been put in immediate apprehension of such a contact."
~Cornell Law School
In other words you don't have to be physically hit before you can respond to an assault. All that is required is a reasonable apprehension of an incoming attack, which was present in this case.
Three people stalked him for 90s before the video started and then they rolled up on him and stayed in his face the entire time. A reasonable person would see this as threatening and a sign of intent to cause greater harm than mere harassment. What level of harm was intended is a complete mystery to the victim because they weren't saying anything and refused to respond to his requests that they stop. They were acting unhinged intentionally by their own testimony in court, in order to explicitly elicit this very response from their victim. As such, the shooting was 100% justified as a use of self defense from a credible threat to his health and safety.
Letting the potential aggressors know that you’re armed is also a double edge sword. Because if they’re going to harm you and they’re also armed that is the queue they need to blast you sooner than later.
Owning guns should come with responsibility. It can turn a situation that wasnt overly dangerous into one where someone dies.
@termitreter6545 lol that's hindsight....
That's not how that works at all..... the point of conceal and carry is to ensure that if your attacker has a gun they don't kill you first.
He told them to leave him alone and they didn't he perceived a threat and addressed it
@@termitreter6545it also applies to knives
@@termitreter6545 It shouldn't be the responsibility of the gun owner. Don't attack people, and you don't get shot.
@@attackmaster519 It very much is the responsiblity of the gun owner.
The alternative is the idea that human lives are worth nothing and its fine to kill other people because of your feelings.
Which some american seem to be fine with apparently.
Regardless of what you think, I’d rather live in a society where people DON’T intentionally try and make you feel threatened and physically intimidated as a prank. The dude has been to jail multiple times, and has been shot, yet still admits that he’s going to keep on doing it. It seems the only thing that will stop him is life in jail or death. I’m not saying he deserves either of those, but can you imagine if this became even MORE widespread than it already is?
People will do what they want, just let natural selection take care of him, he'll be gone for good soon
If your prank relies on someone feeling scared or in danger you just have to accept the consequences of what happens
Pranks like this puts people's lives in danger, not just his. So in a way, he does deserve, at the very least, a few years in prison.
I hope this pranking/harassment trend ends soon. It's only making the country worse. People might get PTSD from this.
Yea while I may think it was a bit much to shoot him you'd think the guy would rethink his content
As somebody who's been around a lot of violence. It doesn't take long or much, from an "in your face confrontation" to a full on brawl. Things can escalate so quick. I get talking from strictly a legal perspective. But from a civilian perspective, you never know how someone would react when they get confronted.
Self-Defense is exclusively a legal perspective my guy. Seeing things from a "civilian" perspective, You could justify any kind of lethal action as self-defense.
@@grizz7714 Sure. But when fists start going. 1 punch is enough for someone to get knocked out and maybe hit their head on the ground. As complicated as this scenario/case is. I think there is a reason why he didn't get charged for shooting the dude.
2v1 silent assailants who keep approaching after warning
@@grizz7714bro was talking outside of a legal perspective and you went with "um actually it is a legal case🤓"
How about we dont fuck with strangers? Do we need laws for that?
@@grizz7714 No. Anyone with survival instincts understands the "perspective" of self defence and the courts can be wrong.
A big point they missed is that the LACK of context can be more threatening. These pranksters weren’t saying anything while moving towards him in a threatening manner. The delivery guy had no clue why they were aggressing on him. In every counter example they gave, the aggressors were at the very least providing the context of their actions (i.e. angry parent, protester, drunk guy at the bar)
"Moving towards him in a threatening manner"
They were walking around normally as you do. There was nothing aggressive about them.
@@WoodEe-zq6qv theyre following him within 2 feet shoving a phone in his face. if i did this to a woman you would 100% call it "threatening" and everyone knows it
This.
Do this to anyone in Irvington, Harlem, Brooklyn, etc. They will instinctively think you're about to jump them... and it is usually more likely than a shitty youtube prank.
the context is shopping mall afternoon. society would collapse if people would be ready to fight to death in response to "moving towards him in a threatening manner" in this setting.
@@anthonyponafala7973 There is a difference between harassment and threatening. If you were to shove a phone in a woman's face, what would be the lethal or deadly threat to be inferred? It would be harassment no doubt but there is no proportional force that justifies responding to nonlethal harassment with deadly force. There needs to be belief that there was imminent apprehension and the shooter genuinely believed he couldn't take any other course to protect his life but shoot them. If someone shoves a camera in your face, you can most definitely slap the phone, walk away, or physically restrain them if they get physical.
"Look for an adult and tell them someone bigger than you is bullying you"- destiny's self defense advice
Which is far more reasonable than shooting someone for annoying you
the next second you try that, you are already mugged, stabbed or dead. wouldnt take any physical advice from destiny@@420DB
That's specifically for manlets that feel threatened by every person that is bigger than them. He said that in the video that you're quoting.
@420DB last time I watched someone try to ignore someone who was "annoying" him, he ended up getting stabbed infront of his 2 children and bled out while everyone else in the coffee shop watched and recorded. It's starting to be a scary world out there
@@Blondie_xx Apparently Destiny's audience have never seen anything on liveleak. I've seen videos of people being stabbed in broad daylight in a crowded area.
I would rather live in a world where people get shot for fucking with strangers than to live in the current world where you have to wait until you are almost or already dead before defending yourself. People seem to ignore the fact that self defense situations are extremely difficult to process in the short amount of time that they occur in. I think too many people die because they waited too long to defend themselves. You shouldnt jave to wait until you know for sure that youre about to die. If someone already has a knife or gun out by the time you realize theyre about to attack you , you have a very low chance of survival. Even if you have a weapon of your own. Whoever is able to strike first has a massive advantage.
Would love to live in a world where every small confrontation ends with someone being shot. The problem with gun violence is that there isn't enough of it
I'm amazed you guys rather live in world where people are fine killing others for being slightly annoying. True progress😂
@@Slyest4255 And we are amazed at how few rights or liberties you possess. True progressivism!!!
I agree. I’ve been in multiple deadly situations that have changed my outlook.
It’s easy to be assmad about legalities on the internet, but it’s hard to make the right call in 3.6 seconds or less when it’s YOUR life potentially on the line…..
I don’t want more gun violence. I’ve had guns almost kill me enough times, but it’s hard to not side with the guy just going about his day, confused and feeling threatened, compared to the jackasses that tried to intimidate him for “content”.
@@Slyest4255 And if that guy wasn't just being annoying and he was actually a schizo or druggy who was sperging out and assaulted the guy or potentially killed him you would prefer that outcome over him getting shot?
Its crazy how you people down play everything. This might sound crazy to you but I've gone all 26 years of my life not getting shot in the stomach. This guy also could have kept living his life not getting shot in the stomach. All he had to do was not harass someone and keep getting in their face. Its so easy to not get shot the extreme extreme extreme extreme majority of people manage to do it!
Those hypotheticals that Pisco and the other guy gave to Aba were ridiculous and misses the point. Also the idea that clothing shouldn't play into how threatening a situation looks is so absurd. I like when Aba asked "what if they were wearing bullet proof vests and ski masks" and Pisco glossed over it.
He agreed with Aba that clothes have an influence on the perception of threat and said that would have sgnificantly altered the situation, towards self-defense. He disagreed that having dark hoodie's on is enough of a "threat" in terms of clothing.
A hoodie vs a suit and a hoodie vs bulletproof/tactical clothing is a bit of a difference in kind. Both hoodies and suits are expected garb while in public. A bulletproof vest is not. That is signaling to everyone around you that you are about to engage in a fucking gunfight or a robbery or some other crime. A hoodie is just a hoodie
Yeah, either that or he engages in bad faith. Had to stop watching a couple of videos where he joins the call to derail the conversation with his braindead takes.
I’m sorry, is a hoody similar to a bullproof vest and a ski mask?
@@MrRazmut you actually *are* allowed to just walk around in a bulletproof vest though...
Destiny be like, "Did he DDOS him though?"
"Its not like the prankster had an egg" - Destiny
Is it the same one that defended Kyle Rittenhouse for shooting someone that had a plastic shopping bag and was being followed him just like these guys
Ever since that ""prankster"" forced their way into the home of a family in England, I just can't bother considering these psychopaths as people. I'm not sad at all one of these degenerates got shot and I don't even think this incident will deter them.
The not guilty verdict is a symptom of tolerating pranksters harassing innocent people for to long without consequence. In a world of one punch deaths you can't take the risk in situations like this, the responsibility falls on the pranksters for creating this situation in the first place.
Just leave people alone.
If you think you might get punched you can kill them?
I feel like everyone feels the prankster deserved it, but it wasnt self defense. If i were on the jury, id let him slide as well.
If there was a 50% chance of getting punched in the back of the head and dying on the spot (has happened mute times) your really gonna give THEM the benefit of the doubt? Nope i will not allow that possibility to arise
Well said. People are just tired of them, even if this was blatantly an extreme reaction.
@@needfood2992 what? You going to kill someone based on a hypothetical? The standard is "imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm", not "hypothetical threat of death based on the mental gymnastics I just completed".
I think the moral of the story is don't act menacing toward strangers in public and continue acting agressive and menacing while they're telling you to stop.
Damn, there goes my Wednesday..... 😓
But I .... must... prank....... and its a mall where autogun turrets and 100 olympic runner security guards are...
@@timr6492 I look around, realize I'm in a mall. I'm in my element, me and my buddies can harass anyone. Thank god I'm not in an alley at night.
Isn’t the “in public” part important?
It’s easy getting help.
I think destiny is actually wrong about if everyone is allowed to shoot others when they feel threatened, gun violence would shoot up through the roof. At the beginning, maybe. But in the long run, people will stop going up to other people's faces and threaten violence. And thus gun street violence will go down significantly.
I do appreciate these conversations that continue to prove MrGirl wrong that nobody around Destiny will dare disagree with him, or they'll have an army of lunatics unleashed on them.
You don't understand, this is all a ploy to discredit mr girl so the truth doesn't come out (or something like that him and his fan would cope with)
disagreeing over this kind of shit is content, disagreeing about destiny's conduct was the stickler
His entire audience disagrees with him alot of the time. Aba disagrees with him on a lot of stuff.
Why are you still obsessed with the pedo?
@@sirondium Disagreeing about Destiny conduct isn't content? The numbers beg to disagree.
That dude defended himself from the threat of violence, he was justified and stopped a possible assault. Anyone who thought otherwise probably has never been in violent situations that can go from zero to life and death very quickly
Being American is a mental illness
exhibit a@@donovan4222
@@donovan4222Well said. I'm the most pro-gun, pro-self defense person I know and I believe this was NOT self defense. It's funny how all these anti-gun people are suddenly pro-gun because it happens to involve people they hate (pranksters, in this case). The dude wasn't threatened in anyway and simply being in someone's face doesn't give you a right to use lethal force. In a situation like this, as a gun owner myself, I always carry pepper spray and a taser. I'd pull it out to give them a visible warning that they will be attacked if they don't go away. If they still pursue, I'd tase or spray them and run away to get to safety. And if they still try to pursue me, THEN you use lethal force. Lethal force should only be used as a last resort, esp in a public setting where you can be confused as the aggressor if you're seen with a gun. Imagine if security saw this guy with his gun out and thought he was an active shooter.
@@donovan4222definitely a threat of violence after you say STOP and they don't. Ridiculous to say otherwise
@@thelonercoder5816it was self defense if it was a woman no one would say it wasn't. They cornered him and followed after he warned them to stop. Many robberies in the area hence why he was carrying
most debate bros dont know that you can get stabbed in literally 1 second, and die from it. You wouldnt even see it coming. Saying "there was no threat" is just proof that most of this community are just terminally online, and have never been in a fight in their lives.
Also in america a lot of people carry guns concealed. Baggy clothes can hide a lot of weapons
Bro most online leftists have never been pressed in their entire lives. You think destiny has even actually been in a real fight? Lol nah
an argument for murdering anyone that gets close to you even once
yeah im sure most if not all of them, have never been in a fight, ever@@vorbo01
They are anti-gun. When they get word that a gun was involved, they immediately go for the guy with the gun. I wonder how differently they would feel if guy with gun had a heart attack and died. Would they say " dude didn't have enough time to fear for his life, so RUclips guy not guilty of scaring someone to their death"
If three random big dudes surround you and started accusing you of being a pedophile, I think it's reasonable to assume they intend to harm you.
Anyone who defends this is only using the context of it being a prank. He didn't know it was a prank, the moment you remove that context this is some creepy shit and it's like they're trying to mug or shank him.
Destiny has Lefty brain so sometimes his brain worms will wiggle every now and then.
@@MrMistiespretty much this, not hard to imagine people who don't know the context shitting themselves if 3 large dudes just randomly approach you out of nowhere because they're accusing you of being a pdf file.
@@MrMisties Who cares, you don't get to shoot someone just because you're a little scared baby
@MrMisties Nah dude, the prank is obviously retarded, we're talking about whether or not the threat was so huge that this dude nearly kills the other for it. I'm not gonna take Destiny's position 1000%, but you have to admit this situation is too close to becoming another where people are out there shooting each other for equally close reasons.
"This dude walked too close to me so I domed him out of fear, I said stop two times after 3 seconds." People are already shooting each other over the wrong change being handed to them. I'd rather not excuse this dude for resorting to deadly force, and the prankster shouldn't be off the hook for being the dickhead that led this to happen in the first place.
Andrew Branca had the best breakdown of this shooting. He said that the jury was most likely deadlocked on the question of self defense. Some jurors thought that he still did something wrong so they negotiated with the judge, not guilty of manslaughter but guilty of discharging a fire arm indoors as a compromise. I don't think they knew that if you acted lawfully in self defense with a firearm indoors you cannot also be guilty of discharging a firearm indoors, so the negligent discharge will be struck down.
discharging a fire arm in an occupied structure can get you 10 to 20 years depending on where you are from. he didn't get off scott free like everyone is claiming. his sentencing is yet to come and of course they are going to try to fight it like any good lawyer would. its hard to get cleared of the main crime and still charged with the lesser tacked on one
They were deadlocked after 3 hours. The judge told them to go back.
@@quillclockdid you even read the post you responded to? Everything you just said was wronf
I always giggle at conversations like these because you can ALWAYS tell when people have never experienced violence first hand.
Lol you've experienced violence! On some suffering type shit 😳
@@swiggydswirl330 thank you for proving my point
What do you mean? I usually feel disconnected from all of those scenarios too, but if you’re from the us id love to hear your perspective:)
@@ccchhheeennn2 I used to live in New york all the way Up till I was 17. Normally when complete strangers come up to you in groups it means to run. If you run and they chase you you need to keep running to avoid getting jumped or robbed. If you cannot run fast enough and have a weapon you use it.
@@Techinvestor87 damn. I’m sorry to hear that. I’m from Israel so unfortunately I’m used to war but I find the US interesting. I just can’t imagine having here anything like a serious domestic terrorism (mass incel shootings for example)
Disparity of force, 2 guys can quickly gravely injure you. The defender had no idea it was a prank or what.
If I stand by 2 guys I can kill them? Wow
U have to show they were threatening severe harm.
@@Godzilla010_If two guys are walking towards you aggressively while you ask them to stop, and not clarifying lack of intent to harm, they're threatening serious harm, end of story.
@@Godzilla010_ Maybe you miss the part when they follow him and put his hand right in front of his face.
The issue for me is while we know it’s a prankster, the person in the situation has no idea if this person serious or not.
Exactly he’s fucking 31 so he probably doesn’t exactly know how modern 2023 pranks look.
Even if it wasn't a prank, he clearly wasn't in any danger
@@hollowkid97 how does the defender here know he isn’t about to get attacked when two people are following him and clearly threatening him?
@@Stevezftw Does that necessarily warrant lethal force?
@@Stevezftw you must be scared of your own shadow
If the prankster was black then the shooter would be in prison for life
Has Destiny ever felt fear for his life in an altercation before? Sounds like he hasn’t
Nothing makes me more convinced of moral relativism than seeing people argue for their self defense standards.
Destiny and sycophants are dumb. Someone acting schizophrenic is unpredictable. People at political protests are being predictable with their confrontations. It's not that hard
So everyone?
I know especially how retarded everyone thinks the other side haha I’m actually shocked Destiny is so shocked. I could see it going both ways but I wouldn’t be SHOCKED a jury decided they were posed a reasonable threat.
@@dylankempthorneyup. The law literally shows you & these people got different opinions like the prankster is their family member 😂
That isn't what Moral relativism is
100% with Aba on this one. During a protest a certain level of agitation is to be expected, but you can assume that it will not escalate to deadly violence. A random stranger aggressing on you for no appearant reason is a total wildcard.
You're ignoring the fact these guys were in a crowded Mall, not a dark parking lot
@NotHondo your disregarding the fact that random strangers in the mall does not usually approach while being told to stop
@@Aaron_buh people shoot up schools and malls. Why wouldn’t this guy think these random people would attack him in a mall.
@@TGSvilmeif they still follow you and touch you, if you tell them you have a gun, 1911gobrrrrr. If you just say stop and they keep harassing you you still can’t just pop a cap in them
yes but you use the word agressing, for a guy who just stood their playing a video on his phone. that's not agressing on someone lol.
Love this. "Hey if we completely change the situation would you still feel the same?" Real masters of their craft
its about fine tuning factors until we see where the lines are or where the disagreements lie.
@@into-the-weedsonly works when the other person doesn't feel pressured or attacked by the changing goal posts. Everyone in the discussion has to be aware that is what's going on or it becomes gotcha manipulation
@@assortmentofpillsbutneverb3756 if you are intellectually consistent then that shouldn't be an issue. If you are not, you should be mature enough to appreciated being it being pointed out and adjust your arguments accordingly.
@@isaacrichardson5540 nah, it's not that simple. It opens up the idea to tons of inappropriate examples and obscures actual edge cases. Its just not useful except to deceive unless both parties are engaged in the brain storming
Your thinking is impaired. The purpose is to find the metes and bounds as to what's acceptable
You know what? I thought this guy was just a schizo who overreacted, but hearing Runkle and Aba talk about it, I now in complete seriousness believe it actually was self defense.
Bizarrely, every argument for it not being self-defense, actually just makes it seem more like it was self-defense.
"It was only 15 seconds, he couldn't have thought about it."
Exactly. It was only 15 seconds, so how could he have thought about it, and decided to just shoot the guy? It must have been a reaction based on fear. The timeframe here only makes it seem MORE like it was self-defense.
"It's just because he's an influencer that people think it's self-defense."
This one is really odd, because it's exactly for that reason that people argue that it *wasn't* self-defense. Because *they* know it was just an influencer, but this guy can't have known that. He just had two guys walk up to him with an accusation, that seemed nonsensical and pulled out of their ass.
"It can't be self-defense, because they were just getting in his face, not hitting him."
This one is based on prior knowledge of their intent. The guy shooting couldn't have known that. He just had two people walk up to them, accuse him of something, then pursue him after he tries to walk away. As far as he knows, they might have been intending to beat him to death.
"It can't have been threatening, it was in a mall!"
This one is entirely based on the idea that people would stop, and do an analysis of what's going on, when feeling scared and confronted. All this guy knew is that people accused him of something in public, got in his face with threatening body language, and pursued him after he tried to walk away. The fact that it's in a mall is irrelevant and, in some cases, might even make it seem more threatening. Because if people are willing to just confront you like that in public, in front of everybody, you might be dealing with some mentally ill, unpredictable, people.
Also: The example of the guys in the park confronting the guy over the kid is a poor example. If those guys in that example actually did anything, they would probably get in trouble for vigilantism. And the guy being confronted would still be in the right to defend himself.
tl;dr - I changed my mind, this was 100% self-defense.
Firstly the reason he mention the influence bit is that he is trying to say ppl have a lotta hate for these pranksters and there letting that cloud there judgement when it comes to whether they actually deserved this or not. Secondly trying say that the fact that this was in in a mall doesn't matter or that it even makes it worse is beyond insane..... You really telling me that if he was in a dark ally at night that this situation would have been better?!?!? To think there gunna go from holding a phone in front of you to shooting you in a middle of mall is crazy ass bullshit to think. If you are that jumpy you don't belong in public spaces like that cuz this isn't just bout the prankster its bout all the other ppl he puts at danger by firing gun in a place filled with civilians that could get hurt from the crossfire. Maybe I could understand if that city or particular mall has had a history of violent murders I could then understand that level of paranoia and if so let me know but I doubt he had any good reason to feel that unsafe in an environment like that. The obvious thing to do was call for security or run/both. This is one of the most black and white situation I ever seen to the point where it actually scares me how many ppl like you are trying to defend it.
How about this one, you're standing behind this guy in a line for an amusement park, you have to stand behind him for an hour, would you stay in the line knowing it's him, or would you leave and go home.
It was 100% self defence right? So surely you must feel 100% confidence that you aren't in any danger standing behind him.
I've been sucker punched in a scenario that on the surface looks identical to the one that happened in the video, were they were being aggressive towards me in my face but I didn't know for certain I was gonna be attacked. In hindsight I'm glad I didn't have a firearm on me but man I do not care for Destiny's opinion here or pranksters and fully admit my personal bias.
That doesn't justify a reasonable belief of severe imminent danger, just because it's possible doesn't matter
@@Godzilla010_ that's my point genius, i didn't believe i was in danger but i was in danger, i was sucker punched, kicked and robbed and worse could've happened. For all we know people could be extremely paranoid or cautious due to prior circumstances, if a woman had been assaulted by surprise and since then she carries a firearm on her for protection and a 6 foot 2 man is doing to her what was done in the video would you really be surprised if she took a shot?
@@jcnom6606 legally it must be a reasonable belief, not any belief
@@Godzilla010_ legally it must be reasonable belief for the specific person in the scenario, not us, that's why he was found not guilty, hold an L
instead of sucker punched, you could have been stabbed instead. There is no time to coinflip your life, the dude did the right thing@@jcnom6606
This is a conversation between Aba and 3 people that have never been in a physical altercation so they have no idea how it may feel to be in that moment.
I mean, the guy wasn't even in a physical altercation either, some people followed him around being annoying for 2 minutes then he shot one
@@redeyesb.dragonite8562 I get It your chronically online but you using the word "follow" proves it was a physical altercation because you have to physical move with a person to be following.
@@kennan6176 If someone follows you to your house but doesn't say anything and doesn't approach you, do you have a right to shoot them in self defence because they were physically threatening you by following?
@@ChappieCrosbyto your house maybe, especially if it’s quite some time, but this happened over the course for 2 minutes and the guy was in a public place
I think we all overestimate our capabilities in those situations especially if it hasn't happened to you before. The freeze-up/panic responses can really surprise you.
Im not letting someone invade my personal space and then follow me when I try to get away. As someone who has experienced violence, im not risking it. You're getting capped if you do some dumb shit like this. Especially if there are multiple people involved. Its not like ill know if its a prank or an actual plot.
Coward
Playing a weird/creepy audio while silently approaching someone is a TOTALLY different situation then confronting someone about looking at your child or asking them questions threateningly
why do you say then instead of than?
@@youtubegavemynameawaycuntbagsIf you’re going to correct someone’s grammar, then just correct their grammar… the proper/improper usages of “then” and “than” are very common grammatical mistakes. Tbh? They’re ones that I’d guess the vast majority of people tend to make, they get used interchangeably all the time… be it someone who may occasionally make said mistake or be it someone who’s always conflating the 2 words. Lol But I digress, as the point I was originally wanting to get at… was that you fully know why he used “then” and not “than”. So idk why you’re doing this weird thing by asking him why, as if he purposely used the wrong one opposed simply making a mistake. Lol We all know you’re in thing to correct him, so just do that from start and forgo all your weird preamble sh*t… that sorta reads as your attempt to demean him. (or something weird like that.)
The entire point of this 'prank' is to make people feel like they are being threatened with physical violence. The shooters reaction is an entirely expected outcome of 3 dudes following a guy around, crowding him, and not saying anything as he tries to warn them to get away from him. "Walking around aggressively hurr durr" is incredibly reductionist and debate-brained to anyone normal watching this video. Anyone sane would think these dudes were about to whoop their ass.
😂
😂😂
How was that the point of the prank? It seems like it was just to be really random and weird
Just saw a prank where 3 guys intimidate another like it's a robbery, but instead give him a jacket, a bag, and a hug.
@@stevena.7022 It's really sweet if it works out.
If they make it look like a robbery, and someone treats it like a robbery....
i don't know about it being self defence but one thing i know for certain is that it was 100% hilarious watching one of these cringe pranksters being shot lmao
Repent to God christ
Your honesty is highly respectable.
The guy that shot the prankster, was trying to leave, told the pranksters to stop, they didn’t, he fired. Sounds like self defense to me.
What was he defending himself from, Annoyance? They weren't physically stopping him.
@@olknoxlocredible threat of grievous bodily harm.
@@olknoxlo what distance do people have to travel while continue harassing you before you can defend yourself? How long do you have to endure? Do you have to wait for them to swing? For them to pull a weapon?
@@thelasso9478I would argue that as soon as you can’t see both of their hands it becomes a dramatically different situation. A person cannot use a knife or gun on you with nothing in their hands.
The difference in what Destiny believes vs. what I believe is that none of this is a prank. Those guys weren't pranking. They were publicly harassing and threatening a man pretending he was a pedophile. When told to stop, they didn't stop and they kept following. And just because it's a mall in broad daylight, I don't feel any better about the situation. I don't think you can rely on others in the mall to assess the situation and save the delivery driver if they actually started beating the shit out of him in a food court. Most people would stand there and call 911 or at most tell them to stop. Nobody wants to go to a mall and break up a fight from strangers that may or may not be armed.
The differences between this case and every example given to Abba were: Two people arguing over something tangible.
**EDIT: Hilarious interpretations that miss the point below!**
Neighbours complaining, two people in a bar arguing over something, protestors clashing over ideas... cops being threatened because they are potentially going to arrest people...even the bike lady. There is something being fought over that allows the option to argue.
And usually when people get aggressive, which thteatens violence... one person backs down and gives up the arguement.
This was different on both fronts. There was nothing to talk about. Nothing to fight over. He gave up ground to aggressor, but he didnt want to win anything, or talk about anything.
Imagine every scenario above, but one person doesnt say anything while being aggressive.
Heck imagine non threatening scenarios where someone doesnt talk. Silence is super intimidating.
Yo this dude was silent to me one time so I emptied a clip into him. This is utterly COOKED.
@@dellabooty Yea, if multiple ppl get in my face and aggressively follow me saying nothing. I'm assuming they are mentally unstable and about to attack.
@@JR-wf5kg so then you alert by-standers of which I could see 7 in this clip, you follow through with your initial threat to call the police and you do, in fact call the police. Just imagine that you're telling a child what to do in this situation (e.g. a 12 year old with one friend) you would tell them to find an adult (so 6/7 by-stander), go to a shop ( they walked straight past a wide open store) and ask a storekeeper for help or to call the police or security
So if the guy had been doing the same thing, but instead engaged the defender in an argument about philosophy, this wouldn't have been self defense? Because the guy could have dropped his philosophical opinions to "give ground" to the attacker.
@@dellabooty Yea, cause by-stranders have a great track record of helping it's not like there is a phenomenon called the bystander effect. There was just a huge story about a woman getting r@ped on a train in Philly full of by-standers who did guess what? Nothing. If a crowd full of people aren't going to help a woman getting raped in front of them, I don't think I should assume anyone is going to help me. These stories are endless and aren't new either.
If your argument constantly requires you to diminish the facts of the scenario, you’re wrong.. “aggressively walking toward you” diminishing the fact that they’re being stared down, a provocative video being played at him, and refusing to acknowledge requests to stop, and following after retreat… The intention was to freak the guy out. the outcome was they harassed the dude, and in his attempts to deescalate they continued to play their freak him out game, and got shot.
I think he completely ignored the part of them pointing at the guy in a threatening manner, and also refusing to acknowledge what he says to them verbally, would make someone potentially feel like they’re dealing with some crazy person that could attack at anytime. You shouldn’t need to wait for the attack to begin or get verbal confirmation you’re under threat. Their body language, and their refusal to acknowledge his request to stop, should be sufficient evidence he could feel a physical attack is imminent.
Just going to look bad now cause it was all a prank lol
people who get threatened by silence, wierdness, phone videos and someone being in their face for 17s to the point they are afraid of their well being cant have guns.
if u have such a power u also need to be able to controll ur emotions and assess and control situations without using said power.
saying 3 times stop is nowhere near what is expected of him.
@@Desdresslook at that, reframing the situation again. tsk tsk
CHALLENGE: try to make the case for shooting the prankster without rewording the scenario into some weird stuff like “aggressively harassed”
If the prankster had only respected dudes boundaries no one would have got shot
I’m sorry Steven, your wrong, fuck your case law.
The argument in this case is the exact argument self defense cases have had for years. People (Destiny) try to impose their own morals or how they THINK theyd react in a specific situation when in reality they have no clue because theyve never been in that situation. Shit happens quickly and almost never like how youd expect. Reality is this dude felt threatened, period. This is a similar argument to, “why not shoot them in the leg” or “cops should wrestle or fight people before shooting them”. You have no clue what someone will do or is capable of and you do not have to wait until you are being assaulted to defend yourself. Also police officers arent average citizens. Thats a non comp
I’m glad you freely admit you have different standards for cops(which is retarded when you’re talking about justified use of lethal force) so that you don’t have to support basically every single police shooting ever.
feeling threatened doesn't mean there's an actual threat, a mentally handicapped individual may be trying to communicate by showing a phone to someone, that doesn't pose enough threat to kill them.
@chadingram6390 lmao your miniscule chance hypothetical doesn't negate reality. You can try to appeal to empathy like every lefty but the harsh reality of the world is without our 1st world privileges handicapped people wouldn't be so prevalent due to lack of medical treatment and technology. Let's talk about day to day chances and not the one in a million chance.
That is reality tho, its not an appeal to empathy its an appeal to rationality. Showing a phone to someone is not a legitimate threat. 1 in a million is the people getting killed in a mall, not the innocent yet annoying people that "seem" threatening. Your numbers are backwards @@WethamanClanVideos
@@chadingram6390 lmao first it's phone then a fist. I kmoe how quickly shit escalates my dude. Never had shoot anyone but definitely had to quickly defend myself, but if I had a gun I would've shot them. There is no room for chances.
Deatiny thinking 3 guys couldn't beat down someone because they are in a mall is unbelievable
The guy is in a mall where he could run and scream and get help if he needed. Shooting and potentialy killing someone because you got scaired isn't an excuse. If someone punches you that isn't a reason to shoot them. He could have backed off and brandished the firearm to get the guy to back off
Nebraska mall maybe 😂
Next your going to tell me that Vaush thinks this shooting was justified
@@DeNick33 I watched a video of a group of teenagers jump-kicking a downed teenager in the head inside of a mall while a group of onlookers shout "STAHP!". Heck, I've watched school resource officers struggle to break up fights with kids half their size.
Also, the line between when you can brandish or shoot is typically non-existent. If you brandish a firearm when you aren't in danger you're gonna have real bad time.
LOL, he could also shoot the person thats harassing him. and also most people probably wouldnt help him.@@DeNick33
Whoever's talking to a abba had him in bad faith. Abba was implying that when someone gets in your face in a Riot it's expected violence. In this instance, it is unprovoked unexpected potential violence that's why hes saying it's more of a justification to assume you're in more Danger from an unprovoked attack or rather than and expected attacker.
Aba talking like a man who lives in the real world.
I disagree entirely with destiny’s take on this. Especially about it being 15 secs is to short of a time to react with a gun. It was only 15 secs because he decided to shoot him then. You never know what someone is intending to do to you at any given moment. So yes if someone is suspiciously in your personal space and you try to remove yourself and let them know to stop and they don’t, it’s fair game at that point. That’s why I just don’t bother people unnecessarily.
Everyone seems to miss a very important aspect of this case. The prankster was not agressive enough to justify lethal force, true, but he was also highly weird from the perspective of the delivery guy. We know it was a prank but he didn't. All he knew was a bunch of guys came up to him out of the blue and started acting weird and agressive for no apparent reason. The big guy was shoving a phone in his face playing some weird sexual accusation while not saying anything and refusing to back down. What is he supposed to think? Who does that? Why? When you have a altercation with someone and you know his motives you kind of know how far he's willing to go. But when someone acts agressive without a discernable motive you don't know how far he's willing to go and you tend to assume the worst.
Plus in most cases there is either an immediate attack ,or some back and forth posturing to gauge the situation . Rarely is the mind left time to soak in the fear of unknown combined with adrenaline.
Doesn't justify the use of lethal force. The pranksters were absolute assholes, but at no point they posed or seemed to have posed a major physical threat to the shooter. They were harassing him iphones in daylight and public. If it was dark alone at night and those two were stalking him closing the distance making threats i would get it. This one i don't gety but i am am also not American 😂
The shooter had multiple escalatory steps he could have taken before killing one of them. He could have shoved, called othet people to help or pull out the gun and warning them before shooting.
What he did is imo manslaughter and in any nation BUT America this case would have been evaluated like that.
To state they pose physical threat is just bs, it’s a classic set up to approach with multiple people , one distracts with a phone or map or conversation and the others attack, look at most attacks at atms, or when a gang set upon someone on the dance floor of a club . Bro might have been robbed or stabbed with soiled body language . Your right most people would take an extra step but we don’t know what life this guys had or what he felt at the time, except that he told them to stop snd tried to leave .
They pose * NO* physical threat
@@finnmarr-heenan2397ah yes, two young dumb tall teens have never done harm to anyone else. I'm also pretty anti shoot here but saying that those 2 pranksters couldn't have possibly posed a threat is laughably wrong considering the prime demographic of a criminal about to victimize you is some young dude getting up in your face over some BS
The threatening part of the behavior is the lack of verbal communication. That has a powerful psychological effect on people brains when they see a person who is nonverbal. When there is a clear set of hostile actions being done without verbal communication, people just get a heightened sense of danger because they are given no reason for the increase in hostility. They also are given no verbal way to engage with the threat because the other person is non responsive that type of engagement.
And everyone processes fear differently. He told the guy several times to stop, and he continued to advance well into his personal space.
Every single scenario given to Aba was one where there was a verbal acknowledgment of the issue between the two parties which could be easily defused. Two drivers getting road rage and getting aggressive with eachother can be resolved by simply driving away, which is wayyy different than someone being aggressively harassed by two people after asking them to stop. The two situations are not comparable in the slightest.
@@Odinson69so here is another thing we have to ask though that is super interesting. Was the defendant trying to defend himself or retaliate? Yes I completely agree he felt afraid, but I don’t agree he was being defensive. I think he was retaliating in this instance, so I would call him guilty after considering it carefully.
@@AngelicIsight what if he has PTSD, maybe he's been the victim of a violent crime before, we have to respect people's personal space, and there request to stop because we don't know what mental state someone is in. He very well could have feared for his personal safety, and I don't think we should have to wait until we are actively being victimized to defend ourselves.
@@AngelicIsight personally I would have stated I was armed before escalating things, but that's just me..
This whole debate is easily explained by people who have been jumped vs people who haven’t been jumped.
If I put myself in that guys shoes I would be terrified too and you're not always going to think rationally in that kind of situation. I am really tiny and probably wouldn't be able to defend myself against someone a lot bigger like that. He tried to remove himself from the situation, nobody was coming to help him, he didn't know that it was a prank and he was scared, and anything could've changed in a moment (which it did). If someone is being extremely threatening to you like that do you wait until they start physically hurting you before you defend yourself? I don't have a gun and could never shoot someone, but just put yourself into his shoes
Agreed.
1. They accused the guy of being a ped0
2. They followed and stalking him super close
3. They approached him in a threatening manner
4. They refused to talk and stared the guy down menacingly when the guy pleaded for them to stop
They acted like they were gonna murder the guy because they thought he was a ped0
Being scared isn’t an excuse for murdering people. For it to be self defense, his life needed to be in danger. It is unreasonable to think it was. You can piss your pants when a homeless guy you walk past yells at you, but you’re not entitled to execute them.
@RaptorMerlin By your logic, a man can go out and r*pe as many women as they want, beat up as many men as they wish, as long as he isn't killing them. No one can shoot the man and claim self defence.
Great place for women and racial minorities to get harrassed and attacked.
@@RaptorMerlinyelling at someone isnt the same as getting right in someones face and pursuing them as they try to get away I cant believe you're actually trying to equate these things
@@RaptorMerlindude had his hand less than 1 foot from the shooters face and disregarded the shooters verbal commands while PURSUING him as he tried to flee. if thats not an immediate physical threat then what is
At first I did think this Self Defense wasn't justified but I did change my mind once I heard Nick Rekeita talk about it on his recent live streams with another lawyer. They said you have a right to use deadly force if the other party is treating you with death or serious bodily harm. The lawyers said the Perpetrator kept getting into close proximity of the Victim's face, after several attempts from the Victim to leave/back up/ and tell the Perp to leave them alone. They also pointed out that having control of someone's head can be very debilitating and gives the Perp control over you. The Perp kept bringing their hands to the Victim's face and trying to get closer and closer after the Victim resisted their approaches. Words alone isn't enough to justify the use of force but in this case there was more than just words. The Perp kept approaching and getting too close. You can't read the Perp's mind so you have no idea what they are going to do to you. I think this is enough to have the jury say deadly force is justified and it was enough for me.
Another thought that goes through my mind is if the Victim was a Woman in this case. There would be zero doubt in my mind that this would be a justified self defense if that was the case.
This is the name of the video. 👇
(My Final (Hopefully) Statement on Rippa Drama, Pranks and Vigilantees, Trump Civil Trial, and MORE!) 👈
With,
Nick Rekieta Of (Rekieta Law) &
Andrew F. Branca of (Law of Self Defense)
Nah, it just was unnecessary to fire your gun.
Seems like a fringe case of self defense that could go either way. For Destiny to call people unhinged for believing it was self defense is actually unhinged.
Especially when his own stance is essentially that it would have been self defense if it happened 30 feet away in the parking lot..
@@ASquadWiperYT It is ok to shoot people because they are trying to rob you.
It is not okay to shoot people because you think they might try to rob you.
Nah you're just a bloodthirsty psycho. The fact that you think he was justified shooting in a crowded mall in broad daylight after a 15 second interaction is unhinged.
@@falseprophet1024 Tbh is it really that hard to see the difference in what Destiny is talking about?
He talking about the likelyhood of you being in actual danger. And some jackasses in a public place are generally less likely to harm you than people ambushing you in a parking garage.
Like, one is to make it public, the other is to keep whatever happens from the public. Obviously the latter one implies much more insidious intent.
@@termitreter6545
I get his argument. But its actually idiotic and irrelevant.
The question is whether the actions of the "prankster" but him in reasonable fear of great bodily harm.. the actions that destiny agrees would reasonably put someone in fear. That doesnt magically change because you are in a mall, no matter how wild destiny thinks it is that you could reasonably fear for your safety while at the mall...
To be fair regarding the suit thing - someone's appearance is ABSOLUTELY an indicator of whether you could reasonably feel threatened by them or not. If the person looks like they care about and take care of themselves, wearing nice clothes (they probably also have a general positive demeanor about themselves as a result) that person is going to be perceived by most to not immediately be a threat. Compared to some random average every day looking guy carrying himself like a bully. It obviously doesn't help that he's much taller as well.
Would trayvon still be alive
@@narutofan4545
Trayvon got in that mess b/c 2 other people who were pieces of shit broke into a woman's and childs home in the middle of the night in that neighborhood. Those 2 ppl were black teenagers so they were on high alert and Trayvon got dragged into bullshit annd paid for their crimes. Those 2 pieces of shit are racism factories and make us look bad
Being in the middle of the mall means absolutely nothing. He was approached by 2 dudes and were messing with him. He told them to stop and leave him alone and yet no one came to his defense. If he was situationally aware and realized that, he probably realized he was on his own. There's several factors for how he won. Isn't something I'd expect a youtuber to ever know what it's like in real world situations. Sheltered life styles do that for people. Waiting can turn you into a statistic
Edit: You don't need to threaten someone and you don't need to touch someone for them to be allowed to defend themselves. All you need to do is APPEAR as a threat
How do you prove that in court?
prove what
@@yaboi-km2qn
@yaboi-km2qn It's easy. If you can't figure it out, that's a you and your lack of intelligence problem. 1. There were 2 guys in his face. 2 . The dude was much bigger. 3. The dude appeared mentally unstable with the phone in his face. 4. Prankster didn't make his intentions known, and all food boy saw was a big dummy in his face and nothing else to go off of. 5. Dude kept following him regardless of being told to stop. 6. Big dude was given a warning when food boy said he'd call the cops. 7. He ignored the warning and kept advancing within arms reach, and so he lost all privileges of his own safety. I gave you 7, and there is even more reasons for how they were able to prove the guy acted in self defense. I seriously can't stand perpetual online people who don't know what being in some garbage situations is like
Destiny consistently accusing people of being hypocrites on their positions because its a prank youtuber has gigantic "you know who the truly persecuted people in society are? RUclipsrs like me" energy.
404 sympathy for obnoxious pranksters not found
I'd say just don't have empathy for anyone, like seriously who gets sad when a 4 year old gets run over I don't.
Dude I’m New York just got unalived when buddy got in his face, had a knife.
Also, they guy walks up on him, plays some cryptic audio repeatedly that he can’t understand., won’t stop when asked to stop, is following the man, etc. It’s reasonable to assume that its an eminent threat by someone with mental health issues.
He should have brandished his weapon, if he felt he could brandish without being attacked, and then if he continues to aggress, then he can discharge.
Either way, it’s still self defense. After he pew pew’d, he still kept retreating.
Disagree on brandishing, as soon as you pull it out the situation could change DRAMATICALLY (ie if they lunge or pull their own). If you're gonna pull you gotta shoot
@@Gemerlbro this is just not how gun use works. pls never get a gun, or at least get training before u ever do because holy shit. if someone starts running when u pull a gun, YOU will be fucked legally
Right If ur from a big city just minding your business and someone pulls up like that not explaining anything it’s a clear signal, they kept saying what about a bar or a protest, most people are fare more lenient and aware of posturing and chest puffing in these type of situations, if dudes pressing u for your groceries it’s a very slim chance it’s a bluff.
This is the correct interpretation, agree 100%
@@DavidJones-ot8quYou get training you dork. I been taught by numerous dudes in the military. You have no idea what you're talking about. However, if I wanna rob someone, I know you're an easy target
While going to a protest means you are putting yourself in a place to expect those kinds of encounters, sometimes the protest comes to you instead.
Of course the right to protest does not include an entitlement to force others to participate in your efforts.
It's crazy how quickly Pisco can talk his way into me wanting to disagree with him
21:41 bruh a punch that knocks you down can kill you. I’m not taking any chances either in that situation.
especially with a dude that is almost 1ft bigger than you lol Destiny is wild
Absolutely especially if it's some gym bro who's built, there's always gonna be different standards that justify self defense with a firearm
Bro why do you take any chances at all?? Just blast every single person you think might beat you in a fight
Learn to fight plz, even if just a little. Or run, running better
@@dellabootybased
What’s driving me NUTS is part of the reason it’s threatening is these people aren’t saying WHAT THEY ARE DOING! They are silent and that’s really strange in uncommon. Not every situation will be like that because in most you have enough context to actually know things won’t become life or death. Holy shit.
Exactly, if someone is in your face aggressive, instantly we are accessing the threat, is it posturing and ego protection, or do they have real intent. Looking at body language, how many friends, how many witnesses, but most non autists can read the steps of escalation, if you come up on me glassy eyed , mumbling incorrectly about space lizards , or dressed as a clown that’s a completely different fear responses. The fear of unknown crazy can be far greater in some people.
Ya. This discourse was so brain dead. I’m probably checking out of DGG content for a while
As someone who lives in a college town, nonsense like this happens all the time I can only imagine the body count if every incident resulted in someone getting shot lol
things dont generally become life or death. This is NOT Fortnite
@@allan6468muggings don't usually end in death. Should you just submit yourself to the mugging?
Considering the consequence of a Guilty verdict also helps here. Imagine this guy getting put away for 10+ years for this. Wouldn't sit right at all. It's the instigators' fault.
The guys not touching you yet is a rediculous argument, you have to be conscious to defend yourself, waiting to get knocked out ain't gonna work.
I’ve watched too many fight videos on Twitter to feel bad for the prankster, all it takes one punch or a body slam to leave someone dead or having a seizure with could lead to life long complications. I don’t blame anyone for taking the initiative to protect themselves.
THERE WAS NO FUCKING THREAT!
@headrush8535 until there is and it's to late to react. If you really think that's the case then you need a dose of reality.
@@headrush8535if you are disengenuine and ignore all body language then sure
@@blazerdude89I think you guys saying this sound just as delusional as the redpill guys that are constantly talking about how they need to be on high alert for people that are trying break into their houses to murder their girlfriend. Real life is not some MMORPG where every time you leave your house, hoards of enemies are approaching you to attack you. You can’t just fucking shoot people because you just assume they’re going to attack you. There needs to be some reasonable suspicion that you’re going to suffer bodily injury or death. You can’t just QuickDraw on a motherfucker because they’re being annoying. I don’t think this guy getting shot is some tragedy, but the precedent you guys are arguing for is legit insane
@@badart3204 What body language, you lying little freak? Provide actual evidence.
I like how Destiny describes a scenario that sounds even more like self defense 😂 if two dads start accusing you of doing something horrible like that to their kid, you probably think these guys are about to murder you. Especially if they haven’t called the cops.
Yea that was a bad example there lol. This scenario, the suspect doesn't even know what is going on but I don't think it should have escalated to him instantly shooting the individual cause if that's really the case, then almost every unjustified police shooting is justified lol. He could have brandish his weapon which is what most people do.
Funnily enough it's just like the Kenosha thing. A mob thinks you're a murderer so they keep chasing and attacking you. Are you justified in shooting them or do you have to just let them beat you up and potentially kill you. If you believe you did nothing wrong initially you should be able to keep defending yourself regardless of what the mob thinks.
No you guys are just unhinged lunatics.
@@Eric-mg6yr The necessary standard for brandishing your weapon should just be way lower. Like basically allow it in any situation where you're trying to deescalate further violence. Same with warning shots if necessary. But those are like 5 years in prison types of crimes if you do it.
I was thinking like 5 minutes earlier "damn destiny you're intelligent but youre way too willing to die on hills not worth fighting for" and as soon as he pulled out that argument i knew he was too far gone on this one lmao
44:12 Best part of this video. "Petty" Aba and Destiny has been the funniest parts of these videos. Good things exists because bad things exists. If you call a bluff that isn't a bluff and you "know" what is going to happen, you should bear the consequences. Proportional response is harder to negotiate when time is not given to the aggressed threat maker.
The two on one situation (hell it was actually 3 on 1 with the other guy filming) is probably where the jury saw the reasonable force was used with the gun. Also with Distractions the pranksters phone you could have a 3rd member of your group sucker punch the Delivery driver from behind, so there's that too.
With all that in mind I feel proper force was used.
Repent to God
I agree. The driver has most likely been robbed before, and that often involves the robber getting close in his face.
Amazing that considerations for "lived experiences" only apply to American minorities
@@user-wr2mx9vf5l he wont need to so long as he doesn't fuck around
@@theimmortal4718 If they had actually tried to take his belongings: that would warrant lethal retaliation.
This did not happen in the video.
@@wisemage0
A knife can come out at that distance in a flash.
Don't get that close to people with aggression
You will deserve anything you get. There will be a trial, but you won't be there. You'll be in the ground.
Not saying it’s right or wrong, but the delivery guy looked terrified
@@rogerbrownreacts8528 fair
I don't think have ever seen anyone actually look terrified. He looked annoyed.
Broooo no he looked confused and weirded out. I do not see terror when i watch that clip
@@rogerbrownreacts8528u don't like the simpsons?
If he was being accused of being a p%d0 by two aggressive males, that's usually a precursor to violence, whether their implication is true or not.
Self defense is whether the defendant reasonably believed he was facing an imminent threat of death or severe bodily harm. It's not whether the members of the jury would have done the same thing under the circumstances, it is whether they think the defendant reasonably believed he was in trouble.
the line of questioning happening around 28:00 is INSANE, the answer is very simple, CONTEXT! Having or not having context is EVERYTHING when it comes down to a question of "How threatened do I feel?" In the Project Veritas scenario yes the guy is running up on you aggressively but he is shouting context at you: "What do you have to say about XYZ?" "Is it true that you did XYZ?" its very clear whats happening, within 2 seconds its clear what the aggressor wants and its NOT to commit bodily harm to you. The prankster scenario is so scary because its 2 guys running up on you, shoving a phone in your face, playing a weird cryptic message, the dudes are saying NOTHING, they are remaining stonefaced and following after you, its much more reasonable to panic and assume to worst because literally the only context you have is "2 scary looking dudes are getting up in my face and chasing me"
If two dads are mistaken and start coming after a person who they mistakenly perceive as harming their children, the responsibility falls on the two dads for being incorrect and going after the person who they wrongly thought was harming their child. Just because you incorrectly think something is happening doesn’t give you the right to assault or intimidate someone.
Absolutely, at that point you call the police and they deal with it
Almost like skatebaord kid who thought rittenhouse did something wrong and attacked him. Destiny supported rittenhouse there fyi.
This also commonly happens when people interject with what they perceive as domestic abuse between partners. There is tons of cases to go through that are considered self defense
@@cancelculturevulture5453he actually physically assaulted rittenhouse, and rittenhouse was chased by a mob of people while he was brandishing a weapon, little bit different than someone getting in someone’s face. Americans are so cowardly
That's an insane take , people get angry over so many things if we start shooting everyone who angrily approaches us , shouting etc then we would have millions of deaths every year.
I don’t like how much Destiny relies on this “They’re in a mall” point. Does that really make a difference? Malls can be empty as hell since covid, mall security isn’t gonna be able to get to him in time to stop anything, and starting a fight in the middle of the mall while one dude is armed is way more dangerous. What do people think would’ve happened if they started to fight? The dude would probably draw his gun in a panic during the middle of the fight and emptied the mag, that puts himself and the people around him in way more danger. CCW training will tell you that when you only draw when you are ready to fire and end the threat as quickly as possible. This situation could’ve been way worse if that was the outcome.
I also don’t like how they bring up the threat aspect. They say there was no physical threat and that it was an overreaction. If I put myself in the delivery guys shoes, the first thing I’m thinking when a dude comes up with his buddies and puts a phone to my ear is “Are these guys trying to rob me? Why are they acting so sketchy? Did they kidnap someone I know and are trying to ransom them to me? Do they have dirt on me and are trying to blackmail me?” Like in no situation aside from this stupid prank bullshit would I think that this situation is non threatening. This situation would immediately make me think someone’s life is at stake, most likely my own. I don’t know if those dudes are armed and gonna pull gun on me if I don’t comply or go along with whatever they are doing. So I would’ve done the exact same thing in that guys shoes, tell them to back off and start backing away and they persist then I’d probably shoot them.
Homie forgot the schizo pills this morning
@@Hoodiewitdaboogie If you disagree then feel free the explain why. Otherwise your comments are just meaningless. People don’t care about the opinions of someone who can’t even defend them.
It does make a bit of a difference when talking about the "average person".
Some random joe shmo walking around in a mall probably wouldn't immediately jump to "my life is in danger" in that situation. It would take a minute or two to get there. A delivery guy, on the other hand, has probably heard a few horror stories about muggings and would get there a lot faster. The average person would jump to "my life is in danger" instantly if this happened in a dark parking lot.
Remember, the state of mind and the ability to not shoot are two major factors in self defense. The state of mind of the delivery guy is probably gonna be wildly different than an average person. Destiny is just harping really hard on the "ability to not shoot" here, completely ignoring the state of mind when he does.
@@donovan4222 Ok, I wanna try and keep this civil, this doesn’t need to be some fight. My point was the mall itself doesn’t make a difference, if you wanna say the people surrounding them are what make the difference, then that’s another story. You can point to hindsight and say you know nothing was gonna happen, but the average person in that situation doesn’t. Those guys were acting super sketchy, following the dude around, then get in his face and put a phone to his ear. That not sketchy has hell to you? Especially when you tell these guys to go away and stop multiple times? That isn’t threatening behaviour? You telling me that if a big guy gets in your face and won’t back away you don’t think things are about to go down? Let’s be real here, he had every right to feel threatened, even Destiny admits that much.
Let’s be honest here, getting up in someone’s face without a word is pretty universal movement to start a fight.
Destiny’s issue is the level of escalation, but my argument is that there isn’t any other level of escalation without making the situation much more dangerous for everyone involved including bystanders. I think I have a very good argument to say that this dude was at least aggressed upon and had a right to feel threatened. If a fight breaks out then that makes the situation way more dangerous for bystanders, cause now he has to draw a gun during a brawl and will probably blindly fire in the general direction of the prankster guy, having a decent chance of hitting bystanders. He can’t brandish the weapon cause that’s illegal and also creates more danger. CCW classes will teach you never to draw unless you intend to shoot. So what exactly should this guy have done?
And to be clear I’m genuinely trying to have this conversation with you.
@@GraysPeakBand I think the “average person” would likely go to thinking they are about to get into some sort of altercation extremely quickly. If some big guy gets in your face without a word and keeps pressing you, your immediate thought is “this guy wants to fight” and considering this dude was armed, I don’t blame him for not the situation to get to go there. Trying to shoot someone by drawing a gun in the middle of a brawl is just asking to get a bystander shot. It was safer for those around the situation if the deliver driver only fires once point blank to the stomach rather then drawing in a panic during a fight and blindly spraying the direction of the prankster guy.
So I think it’s really easy to see why this guy felt threatened. The guy had been followed by these guys prior to the video and they approached him without a word and got his face, that’s pretty clearly a sketchy as hell situation just screaming “Fight”. So given that’s the case I’m curious what people think he should’ve done. Some say he should’ve brandish the gun but that’s illegal, goes against CCW training, and really dangerous for everyone in the area. Others say he should’ve threatened the guy with the gun without drawing it, but then the aggressor could just tackle him before he has time to draw and then wrestle over the gun, plus given the dudes size he’d probably win. So I’m not sure what people expect to have happened instead. I’m convinced that anyone saying “Threaten” or “Brandish” doesn’t know much about guns, how to use them properly, and their relevant laws.
3 guys menacing a smaller guy who told them to get away over and over and over. It came out in court the entire confrontation was upwards of 90 seconds unedited. That is an eternity when you are in fear for your life. This is exactly the kind of menacing a predator does to sum up an intended victim they are planning to rob and/or assault or worse. You don't have to wait for the actual attack to commence before you defend yourself.
🤡
Are you claiming he saw and interacted with them before the short confrontation and still shot him?
Because where do you fit the rest of those ~60 seconds? After the shooting?
"That is an eternity when you are in fear for your life" are you randomly stating he has a life flash before him? What has this to do with anything. Is that some sort of evidence? ;D
"This is exactly the kind of menacing a predator does to sum up an intended victim they are planning to rob and/or assault or worse."
Yes, every robber or person who wants to assault someone, gets the victims attention and starts playing sounds over his phone while saying nothing, for over 8 seconds ;D
Bro, if you wanna bet, I will pay for your mensa IQ test or any other supervised one, if you score more than 100 you win. You can choose the sum.
if you are so easily scared for your life, you shouldn't be able to open carry. Being a coward (easily scared) doesn't give you a green light to shoot everyone.
Where is that video?
@@adisproject Being fearful when menaced by 3 psychotics while doing a job where you are at high risk of robbery and violent assaults does not make you a coward. Most people would be in fear for their life in this scenario, as you can tell from the vast majority siding with him wherever this is discussed. It is a good thing we have a "reasonable person" standard when it comes self-defense. Unreasonable keyboard warriors who would actually pee their pants in a similar situation don't qualify.
@@adisprojectI hear what you’re saying but logic dictates that fearful people are the type of people that open carry right?
i wish the rewatched the video so they could see how actually ridiculous it was for that man to get shot
The timing on that gun shot was comedy gold
I don’t understand how people can’t view things from a different perspective than their own. WE know it’s a prank, and WE know it’s someone who wasn’t going to be violent but HE wouldn’t necessarily know that. All he sees are two strangers following him and putting their hand inches from his face without explaining themselves. Do you really think it’s that much of a stretch for him to think he might be attacked if he didn’t know it was a prank.
Maybe it’s just a privileged view point or something but people can attack people, kill people with punches, rob people, or stab them in public and if you’re aggressing on someone saying stop you look like someone willing to do those things. What the fuck else is there to say?
You can't just slippery slope your way into shooting someone. This argument could justify almost any shooting. There are a lot of people that COULD harm me if they wanted to, that doesnt mean I can shoot them if they yell at me or something. You can't argue "some people who yell also attack people and some people who attack people kill people, therefore anyone who yells at me is a threat against my life".
@@donovan4222I think the mens rea is an important part here.
and? this doesn't give you the right to shoot someone lmao. Imagine if everyone thought like you and everyone felt it was their right to shoot someone over any inconvenience. A Mormon knocks on your door? A salesman approaches you? A man approaching a woman at night trying to get her number? By your logic, it's all justifiable since these are all strangers you feel are bothering you. Also lol at your "privilege" argument. I grew up in the hood in chicago around gangbangers and still don't think it's right for him to go around trigger happy.
@@donovan4222yes, unironically. Why are we justifying petty outbursts & confrontation? These are adults, show them some respect. They made the decision to antagonize, they aggressed beyond repeated requests to stop while retreating. This is in the grey area for sure, but id feel safe saying it leans lawful self defense when you take out the hindsight of it being a prank.
@@MrMetra101 justifying outbursts? Disagreeing with shooting someone for an action is the same as justifying that action?
Destiny would also feel threatened in this scenario. Three 5’3” guys come tower over him acting cryptic and weird while not leaving him alone or letting him disengage.
He always talks about shooting if he feels threatened. Dude is a big pussy. I guarantee if it was him in that situation he would cry
He never said they weren't threatening...
You clearly didnt pay attention at all to the discussion.
@@donaldothomosonyou misspelled 3*
@@donaldothomosonhope he sees this bro
Anyone who shoots a prankster should get qualified immunity
You dont have to verbally threaten someone to be a threat. What these two duds did was physically threatening.
The guy was retreating and from what i heard he was being followed a good 60 seconds before the video, he told them to stop twice, he pushed them away as a signal to stop. That guy gave them all the signs and they didnt stop. Seems destiny wants you to fist fight them and hope they dont pull out a weapon first.
Or give them some sort of warning, I like that you use "retreating" because he is just kind of walking away from the guy, normally if you want to escape something more than a brisk pace is ideal. 60 seconds is only a minute, so the guy was being annoyed for a minute, didn't run, yell, scream, or threaten him, he just pulled out the gun and shot with no warning.
yeah maybe aim the gun at them first instead of commuting manslaughter
@@salter429that gives them a reason to attack you. They could now say you were attacking them
@@redeyesb.dragonite8562walking away from is the definition of retreating. Usually yelling could cause the criminal to kill you. In some situations, people don't wait for you to aim a gun at them and some that doesn't stop them. I shouldn't have to go through a laundry list of things to do before defending myself. You know the ONE thing people should do? Stop when someone says stop. No if ands or buts
@@austinhale5699 No, walking away isn't the entire definition of retreating, if that were the case running away would not fall under retreating. But choosing to use it in the place of walking away leaves it more open.
For one, they weren't criminals, for two, no yelling does not usually "make criminals kill you" I have no idea where you pulled that from. There isn't a warm up period for a gun, just take a step away, pull it out, then if they approach pull the trigger, if you pull the gun out correctly its already aimed at them.
And finally the last line we get to it, basically what destiny said, you think it's okay basically because you don't like these guys. Yeah it'd probably be good to back off when people say to, but being annoying probably should be a surprise death sentence.
This a situation where you CAN pull a gun out, but most people just dont.
He should have pulled it out and left it that. Most people see a gun and run, but no he QuickDraws and blasts a dude like he was a RDR2 character.
@@sumbigdumkunt Yeah it's crazy. It's not the wild west anymore :/
If you pull a gun you better keep it in low ready, because this shooting is not justified by letter or spirit of law. This is effectively jury nullification.
@sumbigdumkunt most places just doing that is a criminal charge. Like my area you are legally allowed to open carry. But you can't just pull it out and point it and say "stop". You'll end up getting yourself arrested. It's as dumb as the people who think you can just fire warning shots.
@@sumbigdumkunt Pulling it out is still assault maybe just imply that it was there.
I think generally speaking as long as you stick to the main pathways, which should be and usually are fairly obvious, you should be fine when "trespassing" even around farms and such.
I love America, no other countries are dumb enough for this to even be a conversation lmao, “this dude looked at me funny I’m allowed to cause him to cease to exist!”
I feel like accusing someone of being a pdf file in public is inciting violence against them, if you don’t know it’s a prank you would feel like these guys are about to jump you, or that they are trying to get you jumped by bystanders.
Even if you knew it was a prank, other people in the vicinity might not, and it could severely damage your reputation. Some things are just going too far in my book.
I think this is a big factor. We all know how a lot of people feel about pdf files and the violence they'd happily do to them so if you see a bunch of dudes towering over and approaching you while accusing you of being one, it's not unreasonable to think you're about to get jumped and potentially killed.
who tf outside of this canadian "lawyer" actually hears "quit looking at my dinkle" and thinks "yup, they're accusing me of being a pdf." lol. you clearly just bought into someone elses subjective interpretation of the situation instead of forming an independent analysis yourself. for shame
I'd like to see more evidence that the "pranksters" made such an accusation.
If true, then whereas there were three of them it would appear to have been a conspiracy to deprive a person of rights - which can carry the death penalty in the United States. It may even qualify as conspiracy to commit genocide, which carries the death penalty under international law.
Apart from the general insanity around this issue, there have been numerous cases of people being murdered by individuals and/or crowds after being mistakenly identified as such, in such places as the United States and the United Kingdom. Again, if this claim is true then Mr Colie would have been justified in defending himself against all those involved in this conspiracy against him.
I recall a case in North Carolina where a young woman decided to "prank" her ex-boyfriend by leaving a burning sack of poop on his porch and ringing the doorbell - but he was either asleep or not home and the fire spread and burned down the apartment building killing five college students who resided there. She got something like an 80 year sentence for what was almost an accident. These "pranksters" acted far more maliciously and with far greater likelihood of causing permanent harm to a stranger who was minding his own business, so I feel no sympathy for them.
None of those things represents an imminent threat.
Inciting violence might represent a threat but any arguable threat would not be imminent, so the standard for using deadly force for self defense would not apply.
If you thought these guys were about to jump you, you'd have to be able to articulate why you thought that. These guys didn't verbally threaten the driver. They didn't commit any hostile physical act. So you can feel whatever you want but that only standard that matters is would a reasonable person perceive an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm in that situation.
I feel like the biggest difference between the situation and Pisco’s is that there was no clear communication between the Harasser and Rambo. He asked “What does that mean”, got no real response then switched to “Stop”. He doesn’t understand what is going on, what they’re trying to say, nor what’s about to happen. He wasn’t taking any chances and decided to shoot his shot. Even so, I’m sitting on the fence on this one.
The only real argument is he should’ve warned of having a gun or shooting, though I don’t think that would change much judging from how meek he was
There is no fence to sit on, that is obviously wrong to shoot. Who the hell shoots in a public place like that? He was never attacked
@@amazin7006 "obviously wrong" well a jury didn’t think so, and the judge didn’t correct them, so pound sand and cry harder
@@ciege7486 Yes an a jury also murdered Emmett Till. Worthless point
@@amazin7006 holy strawman argument Batman!
This was the best Destiny video in a long time, laughed my ass off 🤣
I’m just excited to see the next wave of ‘prank vids’ where there all clearly wearing body arm out of fear 😂
The youtube channel Law of Self Defense does a good job breaking down why the verdict was reached in the way that it was. This is one of the times I really wish Destiny had more than surface level knowledge of the incident since it's one he's taking such a hard stance on without really knowing the facts of the case.
Law of Self Defense sounds pretty fucking biased given its name, right? rofl. what do you expect them to say. you can get lawyers on any side defend any side every single time. so dumb you call destiny shallow here.
Yeah. He's wrong on this take. The shooter is probably unhinged (he could have called the cops or mall security) but he did try to de-escalate the situation three times before he shot him. I haven't even watched the video yet but did he even mention the fact that the prankster is physically taller than him and he was with a group of guys. The jury shouldn't have split the difference though. Either it was self-defense or it wasn't. (On the lesser charge)
@@Darkwarlord1533Would it not have deescalated by brandishing? I'm almost certainly confident this incident would have been over immediately had he brandished instead of shot.
@@RickGenis At that range? Might as well just offer it up to the people trying to harm you
@@timr6492 The last measure is firing it, actually.
Destiny’s point that “not every threat is severe bodily harm” is just moot because there’s really no way of gaging the threat level posed by somebody in any given situation by the average person. All I know as Joe Schmo is somebody is aggressively following me, ignoring my pleas for them to leave me alone. If they’re that unhinged to do this, how far can they go?
Just hand him the Bodily Harm Form you carry, if he wants to just lightly rough you up it's fair game, but if he wants to put big ouchie-wowchies onto you then you can start blasting. It's about communication.
If there’s no way to gauge the threat level of someone then how could you justify shooting them? The fact is there are ways to gauge threat level and in this situation the man greatly overestimated how much danger he was in.
@@javeydones5163a threat is shot, don't want to be shot, don't be a threat
@javeydones5163 When people are stalking you super close while being silent. That is a very dangerous situation and a very high level of threat.
Most confrontations, whether it's road rage or getting robbed. There's usually an opportunity for communication and a way out. If you are getting robbed and the robbery says, "Give me all your money." They are communicating, and there's a way out by giving up your waller.
In this scenario, you are being stalked super close by three men who do not say a single word the entire time, getting stared down while pleading for them to go away. That's a very scary situation.
@@javeydones5163they surrounded him and called him a edp while getting closer to him, prior to that they kept eyeing him and pointing. On your magical threat level what scale does it fall into? A sturdy 4/10?
The problem here is the difference between what's right and what's legal. The fact is that the shooter KNOWS he has his own weapon and instead of using it as a last resort he used at almost immediately in the middle of a mall during the day
Bro you act like niggas can't get jumped in broad daylight and in front of huge crowds. Like, yall literally forget worldstar was whole ass trend
There isn't an across the board rule that is going to simplify this kind of situation. I'm comfortable with the idea that when one citizen shoots another there is some sort of investigation and possibly a trial if the district attorney suspects the claim to self defense is dubious. Also, Destiny talking about making the decision in 15 seconds...homie, as someone who has been in a situation where I had to defend myself against someone who was presenting as if he was pulling a gun on me, 15 seconds is LONG TIME. It's short when watching a video but is very different when you're in that situation.
This is the kind of situation where we should all agree to put the law aside, and celebrate RUclips Pranksters getting a dose of Karma.
Indeed. Pranksters of his ilk need to be drawn and quartered. That or have "It's just a prank, bro" Tattooed on their foreheads so we can all identify them easily and revisit terrible things upon them at every turn to achieve karmic justice.
He is still a human being with people that care about him. Just because you don’t like the job he has doesn’t mean he deserves to be shot. There is no putting laws aside when there’s crimes committed.
Yeah I think the shooter was unhinged, but anyone who remembers the 2015ish 'its just a prank bro" era should revel a bit in the ego check delivered.
@@peepeepoopoo2749lmfao playing joke on someone=shoot on site
Repent to God christ
Based on everything so far, I feel like it was a bit of an overreaction BUT I think it's grey enough for a not guilty verdict
Agreed. If you ask me. This was self defense in my mind. But anyone who says its unambiguous self defense is lying.
@@donovan4222this wasn't some "lol so random" prank though, two dudes mean mugging you, getting in your space to jam their phone in your face silently following you after you've told them to stop gives off far different vibes than your typical prank.
@@donovan4222Its not just annoying him, they aggressively get in his personal space AND do not engage in any conversation AND never announce their intention. Any reasonable person may deem it as threat and percieve that he might get injured in this kind of situation.
True attempting to murder the dude was a slight overreaction.
I would 99.99% justify the shooting if recent gang violence incidents or other assaults happened in the city. Without, I would justify the use of less-than-lethal weapons even if it ended up in death, but not outright gunning someone down. The standard for deadly force in self defense cannot be this low.
This wasn’t a typical aggressive confrontation. If someone’s talking shit at least they’re talking, & you can engage verbally. If you aggressively invade my space, say nothing & ignore my warnings while I retreat then my only thought is you’re crazy & I have to put a stop to it
Steven keeps saying that all they were doing is getting in his face and acting aggressively toward him. But what does he think getting in a persons face and acting aggressively toward someone is a precursor for?
What comes next is either violence or backing down because the attacker was bluffing. Why is it on the innocent, nonaggressive victim in this situation to gamble their wellbeing, or (potentially) life on whether the aggressor is bluffing or not?
As for how quickly he went to his gun. Of course. Was he supposed to issue 3 warnings and slowly reach for his gun while they were close enough to touch his face? Does Steven know how quickly a punch can be thrown? How quickly someone can grab another? How quickly you can lose everything because your head bounces off of the floor in a particular way? How quickly you can be on the ground, with boots knocking your head around like a soccer ball?
Quite frankly "They haven't touched you yet" is an ridiculous thing to say when it comes to defending yourself in the real world. To accuse others of being "video game brained" and say something like that is just silly. I think he just doesn't have an idea of how real world violence happens.
The men were clearly acting in a way to heavilly suggest they wished to cause him harm. This man had no reason to believe that they were pretending and every reason to believe that they were a genuine threat.
As for being more understanding of the shooting if there were less people around, as he is in a big open mall setting. When someone is getting beaten and jumped, no one runs over to help. People look on, film and mind their own business. In the real world, no one wants to risk themselves for some stranger, especially when, if I'm recalling correctly, these two men were also saying that he was a peadophile as part of their prank. Even if this were the case, why should this man have to eat X amount of punches while he waits for someone to play saviour or a mall security guard to waddle over and protect him?
Also, height isn't the trump card a lot of people seem to think it is. I'm 6'3 and fairly large. If two 5'9 men decide to attack me, I'm most likely not winning that. Outnumbering is a FAR more dangerous advantage than being tall.
All in all, the prankster decided to put someone in what could have been a highly dangerous situation against his will. It's not on the victim to risk harm to spare the attacker. The attacker accepted the risk when he aggressed on an innocent person.
I grew up and spent my whole life in a lower income are in the UK. I've seen how quickly people get bottled, beat up, knocked out, slashed at, robbed and jumped. Things go from 1 to 10 on the violence scale in a heart beat. There's not a slow incline in agression. It's instantaneous. You either act in kind or you'll be at a 2 with your hands in your pockets while they've just jumped to a 10.
Pretend to be a physical threat, get treated like a physical threat.
break it down into 5 elements of self defense and its pretty clear that everything is met except reasonableness which is what trial is for, the state has to PROVE unreasonableness, you do not have to prove your innocence in a criminal trial
Destiny and a lot of these commenters have just never been in a real fight or been jumped
@@Mike_RochExactly, and that's why they need to stop giving their input. They're wrong, clearly wrong as the court deemed it self defense, and they need to accept it and talk about something else. Anyone semi intelligent would know that they only talk about this for views/money
i dont even need to read your entire comment to know i disagree. the situation we are talking about clearly was taken too far too fast. anyone should be able to see that.
like destiny said, in a different setting, i would be more on the side of the shooter, but in the scenario the shooting actually happened, he should not have fired his weapon that quickly.
he has to prove via a preponderance of evidence but the ultimate beyond a reasonable doubt burden is still on the state
Blows my mind how many people are against Destiny on this one. Y’all shouldn’t own guns
Do not physically intimidate random innocent people. Ever. Especially after multiple warnings, and the victim is trying to get away. LITERALLY asking for it. If you think being in a public place like a daytime mall is safer or more protective in this kind of situation, you're a fking idiot.
F around and find out.
counter arguement, "y'all" shouldnt 3v1 harass and "prank" random people, is that really that hard to do?
@@AnDr3w066 Bud, thinks he's The Joker.
I immediately thought that wasn’t self defense, also negligent discharge in a crowded area, zero thought jumping straight to homicide to settle things isn’t civilized behavior.
this is such a culture clash between white guys who grew up in suburban white schools and a black guy who actually understands what violence and conflict looks like in the ghetto.
In Destiny’s world, a person must endure infinite harassment, but can’t endure infinite blades of grass being stolen.
This made me lol
It's his disconnect between emotion and rationality. He's holding other people to an unrealistic standard emotional stability under duress
what r u talking about. He said rittenhouse was justified. Destiny is just saying he didn't have to shoot him.
shoot him in 17 seconds. he didn't touch him
@@treveanhall3877where does this 17 seconds come from? I heard the dude was following him for at least 60 seconds before the video even started.