More conflict in Albuquerque shooting involved

[mindfold]

https://www.npr.org/sections/live-up...oval-of-statue

We all knew something like this was going to happen sooner or later.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FoxtArt]

There's a lot of different groups and influences that are heavily pushing us to kill each other while the opportunity is ripe leading into November. Many different motivations, but I think we're in for a rough four and a half months.

[FoxtArt]

Video shows multiple "protestors" attacking the guy in the blue shirt prior to him pulling a gun FWIW. I don't have a comment on his reaction, only that the majority of the media is neglecting to accurately represent it.

ETA: There's also video of him pulling a protester to the ground prior to the attack. As in most every case, it appears to be one that everybody has shit on their face. I wonder what the DA will do with it. Because his earlier action constitutes a potential chargeable assault, it could potentially revoke his self-defense affirmative defense to the latter act, but NM law is in question so who knows. He (shooter) definitely escalated in the first instance. It also doesn't take a genius to know that pulling a gun amid protesters is very unwise for a ton of reasons, even if they are trying to whack you.

[Bailey Guns]

I read about this earlier. The reporting is so one-sided and biased...even more so than usual...that it boggles the mind. Protesters attempting to destroy property = good. Armed citizens = satan. Even the leftist governor all but praised the protesters and said the non-anarchist types, the armed protesters, were only there to cause trouble with the anarchists.

Fucking ridiculous.

[Gman]

There's a lot of different groups and influences that are heavily pushing us to kill each other while the opportunity is ripe leading into November. Many different motivations, but I think we're in for a rough four and a half months.

Do you promise it will only be that long?

Supposedly the shooter is the son of a sheriff. With a crowd screaming things like "I'll fucking kill you!!!", not sure what his options were. Death, or try and stay alive and deal with this in court?

As to instigating, it could be argued that everybody there was looking for a fight.

[FoxtArt]

Do you promise it will only be that long?

It depends on the incubation period of an unintentional pregnancy resulting from the negligent application of sodomy geese.

-- Monty Python and the Twenty-Twenty.

[hollohas]

He may have done something earlier, but in the video I saw leading up to the shooting, he was hit, retreated a good distance and was then attacked. Not sure about NM law, but in many states, even if someone is an initial attacker, once they retreat, there is no justified defense against them. So the mob attacking him is pure assault by them regardless of any possibility he may have been the initial aggressor.

So, does that mean the shooter is untitled to self-defense since he was very clearly retreating?

[Gman]

It depends on the incubation period of an unintentional pregnancy resulting from the negligent application of sodomy geese.


-- Monty Python and the Twenty-Twenty.

Makes murder hornets seem like a cake walk.

[FoxtArt]

He may have done something earlier, but in the video I saw leading up to the shooting, he was hit, retreated a good distance and was then attacked. Not sure about NM law, but in many states, even if someone is an initial attacker, once they retreat, there is no justified defense against them. So the mob attacking him is pure assault by them regardless of any possibility he may have been the initial aggressor.

So, does that mean the shooter is untitled to self-defense since he was very clearly retreating?

Optics. In the circumstances, it's not likely a court would let him even begin to make the argument, and he's at the mercy of the court (one judge), not actually at the mercy of the law. And as we're all admitting, we don't know if NM has that exemption, we just know CO does. And even then, the way that would apply is mostly irrelevant, all that does is make it so the mob can't argue justification in attacking him, it doesn't actually re-grant his ability to argue self defense (if in CO)

As the initial aggressor (without justification), he would lose his application of lawful use of deadly physical force if that was in CO. 18-1-704(3)(b):
(b) He is the initial aggressor;  except that his use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force;  or

[FoxtArt]

On an unrelated side note, I once knew a guy that spent something like 30 years in prison for what we might perceive to be justifiable self-defense (in the moment)

It started at a bar, and one guy suggested they step outside and he agreed. They fought for a short while, and then the other guy pulled a gun to kill him, there was a contest for it and he ended up getting control of it, and killed the other man with the other man's firearm.

But, because it originated in combat by agreement, he had no application of an affirmative defense for lawful use of deadly physical force and prosecution was successful. 30 years of his life lost.

The original argument started over the old method of calling dibs on playing next at a pool table (using coins). He ended up being in the wrong, because there was a sign in sheet he wasn't aware of.

That's a pretty big derail of course, but the point being, don't place ourselves in situations that can easily escalate out of control, because people can die for the stupidest garbage, or land in the can for decades over a technicality.