This is NOT why we carry.

[Doubledown]

I have found that going out in full tactical gear with an AR on my back and camo face paint pretty much gets me any gas pump I want and the people at Wal-Mart are always so nice, they let me skip right to the front of the lines. This was especially helpful when Christmas shopping on black Friday.

Seriously what has the world come to when being first to use a gas pump involves a fist fight much less gun play.

Maybe the self defense claim comes because he lost the fight he started. I can hear the testimony now...Yeah ah it is like this. I wanted the pump but he tried to get it first. I figured I could kick his butt so I punched him a couple times. All of a sudden he started punching me back...and it hurt. He hits alot harder than my wife and pretty much beat me like a drum. I was in fear for my life so I shot his car.

Jury now raises their hands and say Judge we don't need to deliberate he is guilty lets all go home early.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[OhioCatter]

What a nut job, someone needs to .

[aaronu]

The article I read said the shooter confronted the victim and the victim moved his car to another pump. Thst should have been the end of it. After paying, the victim got into a confrontation with the shooter, even though it seems like he played nice. After that, the shooter retrieved his gun and shot the victim's car.

Based on that, it seems like the shooter was a jerk, got his comeuppance and couldn't deal with it. I hope they throw the book at him.

Aaron

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk

[sgb]

[archer51]

Before everyone jumps to judgment here... there are two potential sides. I think that the consensus is probably right, but let me play devils advocate here since all we have is one newspaper article here, not a court transcript.

1) He shot me because he didn't get his gas pump
2) I shot him because he assaulted me and I was defending myself from grave bodily harm at the hands of someone more capable than me.

The obvious mistake here is that he shot the car... not the assailant, which indicates to those of us that know better that he wasn't in as much danger as he thought or claims.

However if you read the article again. He was the aggressor in the incident. Video tapes show him following the other person into the store. Hard to claim self defense in those circumstances.

[SpencerB]

What a donkey

[dukalmighty]

Before everyone jumps to judgment here... there are two potential sides. I think that the consensus is probably right, but let me play devils advocate here since all we have is one newspaper article here, not a court transcript.

1) He shot me because he didn't get his gas pump
2) I shot him because he assaulted me and I was defending myself from grave bodily harm at the hands of someone more capable than me.

The obvious mistake here is that he shot the car... not the assailant, which indicates to those of us that know better that he wasn't in as much danger as he thought or claims.

If he felt so threatened and justified,why didn't he call 911 and report the attack,and why did he hide the gun he used.Just somethings I would be asking myself and other members if I was on the Jury

[livewire]

However if you read the article again. He was the aggressor in the incident. Video tapes show him following the other person into the store. Hard to claim self defense in those circumstances.

If he felt so threatened and justified,why didn't he call 911 and report the attack,and why did he hide the gun he used.Just somethings I would be asking myself and other members if I was on the Jury

I had trouble keeping the names straight when I read the article.

I'm not defending anyone specific so much as trying to make a point here that we shouldn't necessarily judge based on articles. Journalism isn't exactly a jury of one's peers, and a lot of reporters have an agenda. Maybe the reporter doesn't like guns. Maybe this happened in a small town and the reporter is dating the 'shootee', or just got dumped by the shooter, or maybe the reporter is related to one of the parties in the case.

It's easy to jump to conclusions on the Internet, but we are very likely to not have all the facts.

[Colonel78]

that guy is a donkey butt and obviously has no formal handgun training or the right to do what he did he will most likely go to jail and never be able to legally own a weapon other than a plastic butter knife

[TN_Mike]

The guy in the linked article is obviously not mature enough to be carrying a firearm. What a sad example.

[Hiram25]

We'll read about this guy again!

[retsupt99]

One doesn't shoot at a tire because you fear for your life. If threatened, and you fear for your life, you END the threat.
This guy became involved in a personal dispute...now he's in Deep Kim Chee.

[msgt/ret]

Two poster children for the brady bunch.

[Gene83]

There's another story linked to the first one with an update and a jury verdict if anyone is interested...


Dmytro Solomatin, 26, of Reston, was found guilty of first-degree assault, using a handgun during a felony and illegally carrying a gun in Maryland. He was acquitted on a charge of attempted second-degree murder.


Gazette.Net: Jury: Reston man who fired shot in gas pump standoff guilty of assault

[noway2]

From the article:

"He had no right to pull that gun out," Nee said. "Call the police before you pull the gun out. You can't be the judge, jury and executioner."

Nee being the prosecutor. His words are a fine example of why MD is on the list of unfriendly, anti, states.

Dmytro Solomatin is still facing a possibility of 30 years, which is more than many get for a full blown murder conviction. All this over getting the closest gas pump.