Video Footage (https://ysterhout.net/upload/19DEC2022-03.mp4)
There was an argument between two people. One was unarmed, the other drew and fired a shot. In a public place.
The police came, and escorted he unarmed person off the premises. Fat boy in red shirt was not arrested, and not charged for anything.
Is any further information available?
Quote from: Ds J on Dec 23, 2022, 09:26 AMIs any further information available?
No. That's it. Since the incident, the unarmed party was identified as an off duty security guard for those premises. His boss has since opened a case, not sure of the details.
What was Red Shirt doing in the office ie - did he enter it to draw his pistol from the start?
In the context of discharging a firearm into the air in a city center because of anger issues, does it matter what he was doing in the office ?
Quote from: 414gates on Dec 26, 2022, 03:01 PMIn the context of discharging a firearm into the air in a city center because of anger issues, does it matter what he was doing in the office ?
Yes and no. It depends on his interpretation of the FCA. He might claim that it was his warning shot. The FCA doesn't say a single word about warning shots, but it counts among the generally believed folklore regarding firearms, just like the story that we may not use HP's in self defense.
His actions are illegal, but he probably does not think so.
The OP question is about broken laws.
The first question is whether the firearm is licensed to him, and also whether the license is up to date.
Secondly, he may not fire in a built-in area.
Thirdly, one could ask whether he was under the influence.
Fourthly, could one open a case of attempted murder, or rather negligence?
We have a member of parliament who was filmed a few years ago firing what looks suspiciously like the same sort of SLR that his hired security monkey has licensed to himself/his business over the heads of a crowd. Nothing meaningful has come from that so I wouldn't hold my breath about that being different here.