Video Shows Man Shooting At Crowd During Charlottesville Rally, With No Police Response

[edpc]

A man attending the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, earlier this month fired his gun in the direction of a black counterprotester who was holding a torch, and police in their vicinity did not seem to respond.

Those events appear in a video filmed two weeks ago by a volunteer with the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia and published by the civil rights group on Saturday.

As seen in the footage below, a man in a blue sleeveless shirt, a green vest and a bandana on his head pulls out a gun and aims it at a counterprotester, who is off camera and appears to be holding a makeshift lit torch. The first man appears to yell a racial slur at the black man, then fires the gun toward the ground in the direction of the counterprotesters.

The shooter then leaves the scene by joining a line of white supremacist protesters and walking past law enforcement officers, who were standing behind metal barricades about 10 feet away.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-shows-man-shooting-crowd-033820125.html

[edpc]

Video at source.  The man fired a shot at the individual we've previously seen using the aeresol can as a flamethrower.  It's a wonder things weren't worse at this rally, given the absolute ineptitude of law enforcement.





If they're going to charge the shooter, they should charge this individual as well.  They make it sound like he was unprovoked.  The flame is visible from the right when the weapon is fired.  Probably not the best decision to shoot, since there are people behind the bushes in the background and he wasn't the person directly threatened.

Language warning.

[mountaineer]

Both using deadly force, in other words?

[edpc]

Both using deadly force, in other words?

The man with the gun, so far, has only been charged with discharging a weapon near a school.  That's pretty weak, especially when it occurred on a Saturday during summer break.

[Wingnut]

The man with the gun, so far, has only been charged with discharging a weapon near a school.  That's pretty weak, especially when it occurred on a Saturday during summer break.

Pretty lame.

[mountaineer]

If someone shoots at you with what amounts to a flamethrower, it's arguable that it should be legally permissible to defend yourself with deadly force that happens to be a pistol. 

[Cripplecreek]

Was he firing blanks?

[GtHawk]

If someone shoots at you with what amounts to a flamethrower, it's arguable that it should be legally permissible to defend yourself with deadly force that happens to be a pistol. 

An arerosol can is not a flame thrower, is not caple of burning someone alive, killing or doing an grievous bodily harm at the distance employed, there was nothing to keep the otherr party from moving away, the guy who fired the gn is an idiot that put everyone in line with his shot in actual danger of grevious physical harm, but the guy with the flaming hairspray is the dangerous one? Well I jost don't see it, the guy with the over reacted and I am far more worried about people like him on the streets with a loaded gun then a guy with a loaded can of hairspray.

[Cripplecreek]

An arerosol can is not a flame thrower, is not caple of burning someone alive, killing or doing an grievous bodily harm at the distance employed, there was nothing to keep the otherr party from moving away, the guy who fired the gn is an idiot that put everyone in line with his shot in actual danger of grevious physical harm, but the guy with the flaming hairspray is the dangerous one? Well I jost don't see it, the guy with the over reacted and I am far more worried about people like him on the streets with a loaded gun then a guy with a loaded can of hairspray.

He's a danger to the 2nd amendment.

[edpc]

An arerosol can is not a flame thrower, is not caple of burning someone alive, killing or doing an grievous bodily harm at the distance employed, there was nothing to keep the otherr party from moving away, the guy who fired the gn is an idiot that put everyone in line with his shot in actual danger of grevious physical harm, but the guy with the flaming hairspray is the dangerous one? Well I jost don't see it, the guy with the over reacted and I am far more worried about people like him on the streets with a loaded gun then a guy with a loaded can of hairspray.

To be fair, you could be seriously burned/injured by that improvised device.  I doubt he would have pulled the weapon without the provocation.  However, he'd have a tough time arguing he was acting in his own defense. 

[Cripplecreek]

To be fair, you could be seriously burned/injured by that improvised device.  I doubt he would have pulled the weapon without the provocation.  However, he'd have a tough time arguing he was acting in his own defense.

Even if he felt threatened, any man who fires a warning round or shoots to wound should be found guilty. Shooting the center of visible mass is the only legitimate defensive shooting.

[edpc]

Even if he felt threatened, any man who fires a warning round or shoots to wound should be found guilty. Shooting the center of visible mass is the only legitimate defensive shooting.

I agree. He only had a small slope and shrubs behind him as a backstop. Pretty reckless decision on his part, IMO.

My biggest problem of the story is the fact they make it sound like he drew the weapon for no reason and the description of the 'torch,' like the man was standing over there like the Statue of Liberty or something.

[Smokin Joe]

An arerosol can is not a flame thrower, is not caple of burning someone alive, killing or doing an grievous bodily harm at the distance employed, there was nothing to keep the otherr party from moving away, the guy who fired the gn is an idiot that put everyone in line with his shot in actual danger of grevious physical harm, but the guy with the flaming hairspray is the dangerous one? Well I jost don't see it, the guy with the over reacted and I am far more worried about people like him on the streets with a loaded gun then a guy with a loaded can of hairspray.

I agree. Cooler heads should prevail. The only serious risk, despite the flashiness of the flames, would have been if the shooter had punctured the can. The ensuing aerosol cloud would likely have burned someone fairly badly, because it would have dispersed the liquid contents of the can, which would have ignited on someone.

[Smokin Joe]

To be fair, you could be seriously burned/injured by that improvised device.  I doubt he would have pulled the weapon without the provocation.  However, he'd have a tough time arguing he was acting in his own defense.

Many states have use of force laws which empower a person to use lethal force on behalf of a third party who cannot defend themselves and cannot retreat. Retreat was blocked, and it is difficult to defend against flames. However, the flames in this case did not reach to the target close enough to cause burns, and it is not as if flaming liquids were being emitted (as in a real flamethrower).
Leftist accounts say the flame trick was done in response to gunfire, apparently that is not the case unless there was another shooter.

[GtHawk]

Many states have use of force laws which empower a person to use lethal force on behalf of a third party who cannot defend themselves and cannot retreat. Retreat was blocked, and it is difficult to defend against flames. However, the flames in this case did not reach to the target close enough to cause burns, and it is not as if flaming liquids were being emitted (as in a real flamethrower).
Leftist accounts say the flame trick was done in response to gunfire, apparently that is not the case unless there was another shooter.

The more I look at that the more it appears to me that the guy with the aerosol can was using it to impede the forward progress on the stairs, one side or the other would have had to move several feet before there was a real chance of injury, I still see no imminent danger that justifies anyone pulling and using a gun. The guy with the can is in a set posture slightly leaning back while the guy with the flag pole is leaning in towrads him.

[Smokin Joe]

The more I look at that the more it appears to me that the guy with the aerosol can was using it to impede the forward progress on the stairs, one side or the other would have had to move several feet before there was a real chance of injury, I still see no imminent danger that justifies anyone pulling and using a gun. The guy with the can is in a set posture slightly leaning back while the guy with the flag pole is leaning in towrads him.

The guy on the steps looks off balance to me, and the guy with the spray can looks relaxed, maintaining his own distance from the flame. Be that as it may, I don't see a justified lethal force situation there, despite hype that the aerosol can was a "flamethrower". Perhaps the shooter was trying to hit the spray can.

[txradioguy]

Who brings a flame thrower to a gunfight anyway? 

[Smokin Joe]

Who brings a flame thrower to a gunfight anyway? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdNvNy5WIco
The USMC, among others...