Not mine, don’t worry. In the news yesterday:
The victim, a painter, was driving a city truck with another employee in the passenger seat at about 8:30 a.m. when he made a turn on the 1800 block of Palou Avenue, angering a nearby driver, said Officer Albie Esparza, a police spokesman.
The motorist began cursing at the painter, who tried to drive away. The assailant pulled out a gun and fired numerous shots, one of which hit the painter in his shoulder, Esparza said.
My sympathy and wishes of full recovery to the wounded city employee.
The gunman was transporting a pistol in his car, not locked in a container – illegal in California.
The pistol was loaded – also illegal.
By any reasonable person standard (as far as one can tell from the article, anyway), the city employee has not presented imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm to the gunman, and did not have ability or opportunity to cause such harm. Which means the use of force by the gunman was unjustified and therefore illegal.
Care to speculate what is more likely:
a) the gunman was an upstanding citizen, on his way to a Bible study group, or
b) he was a criminal?
Care to speculate whether any of the above is going to stop gun control advocates from citing this incident as evidence that we need more gun control laws?
