If there is one thing that I hate in life, it’s when people misrepresent something to push their favored talking point.
And that’s exactly the situation in the story that we’re talking about today.
Now, let me preface the rest of what we’re going to talk about here by saying that I’m going to focus on the firearms, Second Amendment, and stand your ground laws aspects to this story. The other aspects, though controversial for many people, are only tangentially relevant to what we’re going to talk about here.
So, let’s get into it…
A person in Wyoming is claiming that they are being criminally charged even though the way that they used their firearm is, according to them, covered under that state’s stand your ground laws.
And, of course, the (very) little media coverage on this story (such as a story from the New York Times) took an activist viewpoint on this story, conveniently skipping the fact that anyone who did what this person did would have been criminally charged because stand your ground laws don’t apply in these types of situations.
Maybe that’s why neither Reuters nor the Associated Press decided to publish a story on this incident even though the activist viewpoint can be (incorrectly) applied to push a narrative.
But that narrative doesn’t begin to justify what actually happened. You can watch a video (admittedly from a source not sympathetic to the activist narrative) detailing why stand your ground laws didn’t apply in this situation…
… including video of the incident so that it’s clear what actually happened. Watch that video below.
Now, let me start by saying that it was a bad idea to start off the situation with the person who was charged slamming down two shots of liquor.
Alcohol (or drugs) and firearms aren’t a good combination. I don’t care who you are.
But regardless of the possible inebriation of the person in question, they didn’t have to walk over to start a confrontation over words, and they didn’t have to pull their gun and point it at someone as those people were walking away.
There was no actual imminent threat and no physical danger to anyone until the person who was charged closed distance.
Oh, and in case it wasn’t clear, a person who is walking away from you isn’t an imminent threat to you.
Now, let me repeat, I’m not here to discuss other aspects of this story that some people will find controversial. What I will say is that, no matter how much of a victim that a person feels like they are in life, there are stiff definite standards of what actually constitutes a threat to your person, and those standards weren’t met in this case.
What we can learn from this situation:
- Whenever possible, walk away instead of escalating if at all possible.
- If a person is walking away from you, they are not a threat.
- Stand your ground laws can only apply if someone else initiates physical violence against you.
- You need to know the firearms laws in the area that you are in so that you know what applies when and don’t violate them.
Unfortunately, there are very obviously people who don’t know these four very important bits of information. Don’t be one of those ignorant people.