When I read this article, I too thought it seemed to be reversed. Obviously we don't know the entire situation, but its sounds more like a guy had a case of "road rage," approached a car and the guy in the car displayed a gun likely in an attempt to defend himself. Given the few "facts" we have at this point, it appears to me that the "victim" described in the article was actually the aggressor. However, the person that displayed the gun should have immediately called police and reported the situation. By not calling the police, either more happened than what we know, the guy didn't have the gun legally or have a CCW, or all of the above.
I agree with Carl (Bailey Guns), likely enough stupidity on both sides.





Reply With Quote



