A jury has found a delivery driver not guilty in the shooting of a YouTube prankster who was following him around a mall food court earlier this year

  • El Barto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Those are just strawmen. It doesn’t matter if “those are small targets” or if “you can still hit an artery.” What matters in the persons’s intent.

    That’s like saying that “any person delivering a punch to someone else’s face intends to kill them because of the possibility of the punched falling down and cracking their skull open on the floor.”

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, for fights that’s very possible. And in fact that would have been preferable if feasible in this scenario, because it’s still far less likely to be fatal than shooting someone.

      Proper use of a firearm is intending to kill someone. Again, there is no way to use a firearm to be less-lethal. If you shoot someone, you are shooting to kill. Presumably this guy had some CCW training and would know that.

      • El Barto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I disagree with you. Of course there is a way to use a firearm to be less lethal. Regardless, and again, no one was killed in this story, so…

        • jimbo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          By dumb luck nobody died. The guy was shot in the chest, an area of the body known for being home to all kind of vital organs and arteries.