YouTube prankster says he had no idea he was scaring man who shot him
A YouTube prankster who was shot by one his targets told jurors Tuesday he had no inkling he had scared or angered the man who fired on him as the prank was recorded.
Tanner Cook, whose “Classified Goons” channel on YouTube has more than 55,000 subscribers, testified nonchalantly about the shooting at start of the trial for 31-year-old Alan Colie, who's charged with aggravated malicious wounding and two firearms counts.
The April 2 shooting at the food court in Dulles Town Center, about 45 minutes west of Washington, D.C., set off a panic as shoppers fled what they feared to be a mass shooting.
Jurors also saw video of the shooting, recorded by Cook's associates. The two interacted for less than 30 seconds. Video shows Cook approaching Colie, a DoorDash driver, as he picked up an order. The 6-foot-5 (1.95-meter-tall) Cook looms over Colie while holding a cellphone about 6 inches (15 centimeters) from Colie's face. The phone broadcasts the phrase “Hey dips—-, quit thinking about my twinkle” multiple times through a Google Translate app.
On the video, Colie says “stop” three different times and tries to back away from Cook, who continues to advance. Colie tries to knock the phone away from his face before pulling out a gun and shooting Cook in the lower left chest.
Cook, 21, testified Tuesday that he tries to confuse the targets of his pranks for the amusement of his online audience. He said he doesn't seek to elicit fear or anger, but acknowledged his targets often react that way.
Asked why he didn't stop the prank despite Colie's repeated requests, Cook said he “almost did” but not because he sensed fear or anger from Colie. He said Colie simply wasn't exhibiting the type of reaction Cook was looking for.
“There was no reaction,” Cook said.
In opening statements, prosecutors urged jurors to set aside the off-putting nature of Cook's pranks.
“It was stupid. It was silly. And you may even think it was offensive,” prosecutor Pamela Jones said. “But that's all it was — a cellphone in the ear that got Tanner shot.”
Defense attorney Tabatha Blake said her client didn't have the benefit of knowing he was a prank victim when he was confronted with Cook's confusing behavior.
She said the prosecution's account of the incident “diminishes how unsettling they were to Mr. Alan Colie at the time they occurred.”
In the video, before the encounter with Colie, Cook and his friends can be heard workshopping the phrase they want to play on the phone. One of the friends urges that it be “short, weird and awkward.”
Cook's “Classified Goons” channel is replete with repellent stunts, like pretending to vomit on Uber drivers and following unsuspecting customers through department stores. At a preliminary hearing, sheriff's deputies testified that they were well aware of Cook and have received calls about previous stunts. Cook acknowledged during cross-examination Tuesday that mall security had tossed him out the day prior to the shooting as he tried to record pranks and that he was trying to avoid security the day he targeted Colie.
Jury selection took an entire day Monday, largely because of publicity the case received in the area. At least one juror said during the selection process that she herself had been a victim of one of Cook's videos.
Cook said he continues to make the videos and earns $2,000 or $3,000 a month. His subscriber base increased from 39,000 before the shooting to 55,000 after.
People only see this with the context that this is a youtuber doing a prank.
This man is 6 fucking 5. Imagine a random giant gets in your face, you think you're about to be robbed or beaten. He advances. You retreat. He advances. You retreat, he advanced. Again, you retreat, he advances, all the while shoving something in your face. How many times do you need to tell someone to disengage and retreat before its okay to consider it a threat?
Just because this guy happened to be a youtuber doing a prank is irrelevant, imo.
Tbf imo while I carry a gun, I also carry mace for shit like this. From the above description it seems normal force was certainly justified but deadly force is questionable, however I withhold personal judgement as I'm not following the case and the details reported could be (often are) wildly innacurate from the facts.
This assumes a level of focus, presence of mind, and training to reliably discriminate between injurious and non-injurious active threats and measure your response with non-lethal force on a gamble that your attacker is non going to be physically violent towards you.
Cops fail at this all the time, it's not reasonable to treat non-injurious threats as acceptable behavior and demand non-police with zero legal protections handle it better.
If you're going to walk up to a stranger in the street and threaten them, then proceed to advance when they respond with "please stop! Get away from me!", you have forfeited any right to benefit of the doubt on their part.
Cops have "qualified" immunity, as citizens we are forced to take the threat level into account, or else we end up in court with what was it again? Two weapons charges and AWDW?
Not saying this dude should be charged, but he is, and now his life hangs in the balance of 12 "peers." "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6," I know, but still, if you have enough time to back up and say "gtfo" 3x you can look at his hands real fast and see if something looks pointy, shooty, or text-y, and I'd rather mace him and keep rolling, case is easier to beat.
America seems fucking depressing if you feel you have to carry multiple weapons on the regular to be safe.
What's depressing is countries where self defense doesn't exist. Where defending yourself is a crime that gets you locked up.
Self defense is allowed in most countries, the difference being appropriate measures. If someone attacks me and I punch them to get them off, that's justified self defense and unless you're unlucky it's not going to be lethal on the attacking party. As soon as you've pulled out a gun, other brought a lethal tool into the mix.
Single braincelled 'murican posts again
Depends on location, time of day/night, et cetera. America is big, like whole EU big, there are both extremely safe and extremely dangerous places contained within.
It's more than twice the size of the EU.
The EU is 1.6M sq mi. The USA is 3.7M sq mi.
Thanks, I was out and about at the time I saw his question, but realized that while I was unaware of the exact proportions myself he was just as capable as I was of looking it up, so I didn't bother.
Brazil is about as big. Nobody with a normal life carries weapons around.
Weeeelll because they aren't* legally allowed to. Besides, we all know everyone in Brazil is already an off duty cop. We just not gonna talk about the RPG-7s in the Favelas though?
*(or is it now "weren't" as of Ballscenario like last year?)
You're legally allowed to own and carry most weapons, just not firearms. Also, you can own swords but not carry them, for historical reasons.
You have a distorted view of Brazil. Sure, Rio is a shithole, but even there only criminal gangs carry guns.
After bostanaro's defeat, the government properly cracked down on "legally certified" gun ownership.
So that's a "yes."
It's a meme about how every video from Brazil is some criminal with a gun interacting with someone else in brazil who surprise! happens to be a police officer in plain clothes with a gun of their own. This may surprise you, but I'm aware that not "everyone in Brazil" (which would include grandmothers and toddlers and shit) is actually an off duty cop.
So yes. "They don't carry weapons" because "they aren't legally allowed to carry the effective ones."
In fact, https://www.npr.org/2022/08/13/1116989125/brazil-firearm-ownership-booms-gun-laws-loosen-bolsonaro
Legal gun ownership boomed with it "becoming legal." This indicates that the reason those people weren't is because it "wasn't legal." Those people want to carry, they just "follow the laws" unlike all those people who actually do carry guns in Brazil that we're ignoring because they're criminals.
Said "boom" was exclusive to rich, already illegally armed people. Notice the total number of registered gun owners doesn't even reach 1% of the population? Again, you have a distorted view on things.
You've got to understand Brazil has some loaded history, despite being a relatively young nation. Between 1964 and 1990, the country underwent a USA-backed coup which, unsurprisingly, tried to americanize its population in several aspects. As a result, you have pockets of people brainwashed to think 'murica is the best and everything they do should be copied – mostly old rich fuckers and their kids, as poor people could see, or rather were forced to see, the reality of things.
Is that the EU now or with the UK?
The entire UK is the same size as 9 US states. The smallest 9, the smallest of which is just about the size of a small town.
Which doesn’t answer my question at all.
The USA is more than twice the size of the current EU. You can assume losing the UK didn't account for a drop in the bucket.
If you Mace someone you had better take them down. Without distance the mace may be a danger to you as much or more than the attacker.
Take away the gun for a minute. Would this guy be on trial if he instead hit him in the head with a blunt object? I’m not a fan of guns, not approving of firing them in public, so on and so forth, but I think this person may have been justified in defending themselves.
Update: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/youtube-prankster-shot-tanner-cook_n_65172885e4b0a69113b4c9ce
Yeah I figured this would be the outcome
This story sums up America. Stupidity and guns.
Yeah that was my first thought, too. Both sides of this are peak america really.
The pranks in America are lame. Over in Europe you can literally threaten someone with a giant hammer (as a prank of course) and get away with it.
I think there are maybe two times in my life I've been pro-second amendment, and watching that video just now is one of them.
That guy, threatening multiple people with what anyone with eyes would see as an extremely open murder threat? Often with a fake body to demonstrate their life actually is actively at stake in this moment? You can shoot that guy.
People who are into these intense pranks probably went extinct in America.
That clown-thing is one of the worst 'pranks' I've ever seen in my life. Someone could easily get PTSD from that, or someone else could easily assault the clown with lethal force because of the threat implied.
Good pranks are along the lines of the Just for Laughs / Gags series, not these dumbass American vigilante pranks, or that miserable 'clown' prank above.
I'm not a proponent of violence, but I think these dipshits need to get their asses beaten every time they do that shit. Maybe, if more of them got beaten or shot, then they would stop being ass fucks.
I shouldn't have to be forced to figure out whether someone is a crazy, drug induced murderer, or just some stupid "prankster" every time I go out in public. Rule number 1 in a society is "don't fuck with strangers".
“Live and let live” are words I live by yet I see the vast majority of people don’t, and the worst of us get fame and money out of it. Humanity sucks.
Here's a TikTok prankster trying his "prank" on a professional UFC fighter and his trainer.
This video is a textbook example of someone knowing appropriate force when defending themselves, and knowing when to stop. Unfortunately.
That's bullshit, from the way it's described, the guy was clearly behaving in a not normal and threatening manner.
I would like to move that all evidence of my client doing anything wrong be struck from the record.
Hey that argument worked to keep Trump in office..
No really it did...
Oy gevalt
DoorDash driver 🥲
How much do you think the poor guy makes? And now he has to pay for a lawyer, lose the job, and probably go to jail. Only so this dipshit can get the right "reaction".
And the shooting would've been completely justified for a cop.
Anyone who wasn't 6'5 would have gotten their asses beat the first or second time they pulled this shit.
Exactly.
The only reason he got shot is because he was physically imposing enough to skip the normal defensive responses that might have come his way (and/or he specifically (or intentionally) chose victims he knew would be physically threatened by him).
A doordash driver gets cornered by a large 6 foot 5 man who aggressively shoves a phone in his ear repeatedly calling them a dipshit who thinks about their "twinkle", tries to get away but is followed, explicitly asks the man to leave him alone 3 times but is ignored, and tries to brush the phone away? Yeah that sounds like a situation a reasonable person might fear for their life in, and before anyone goes "well why didn't they use a less lethal self defense method?", the prankster is 6 foot 5 and the victim likely only had his fists or his gun for self defense, one of those two is going to get you out of that situation alive
Just based on the facts from what information we have, I fully agree. The story would have to change significantly in order to show anything other than exemplary display of good self-defence principles:
You should not allow a verbally aggressive person to stay at a distance where they could land a punch or use a concealed knife at any time, especially after you backed off already. Try articulating near a cop's face and see what (rightfully) happens.
Your honor, we the members of the jury request additional information regarding local harassment and assault laws related to the 6'5" self-described "goon" so that we may recommend charges.
Additionally, we recommend the charges against the defendant be reduced to misdemeanor reckless discharge of a firearm.
This kid learned nothing from being shot. He still thinks it is okay to bully random strangers, and is already planning his next prank. If your friends like pranks and you play pranks on each other that is fine.
If you get in someone's face and start demanding they stop thinking of your privates, especially after repeated warnings to back up, then you are inciting violence and sometimes it is going to succeed.
He also fails to recognize how intimidating his height can be to people. I’m not surprised the door dash driver reacted the way he did. This kid is a menace.
Yeah I'm around his height and have light footsteps, I startle people at work accidentally all the time. People don't like being loomed over out of the blue, if you're 6'5 you should already know this.
He does know it. He uses it on purpose and then feigns ignorance.
Yup. I'd love to see an analysis of his victims. How many 6'5" grown adult men of reasonable physical build does he try this shit on? Maybe a nice histogram of height vs. prank count. I wonder where the data points will end; hmmm?
I'm sure he recognizes it and enjoys the control.
Assume that if you threaten someone, they will in turn assume you are a threat.
Damn, he missed.
He eliminated the threat. That I can agree with. Training says shot center of mass until the threat is gone.
Unlike you and all your upvoters, I'm glad the shit bag is still alive.
I'm glad the real victim didn't so something stupid (but maybe understandable in a high-enough threat posture) of shooting again; that would have made his defense much more difficult.
One shot was all that was needed. Heck even if he had missed, that would likely have been all that was needed since I assume (a risk I know) fuck bag prankster has at least enough self-preservation brain cells to un-ass from the scene once the loud bangs start to happen.
I'm glad Cook didn't die for Colie's sake. Killing somebody is majorly traumatizing even in self defense.
It's sad that this article reads like advertising for a shit head to attract other shit heads (how many times did they call out his show?). He'll come out of this better off financially.
This channel needs to be de monetized
Very much so. YT should demonetize all "prank" channels. It's just bullying/terrorizing.
https://www.youtube.com/@classifiedgoons/about
For the lazy if people want to report his videos. He literally has shit like "Taking people's groceries", "Aggressively X", "Accusing people of stealing pets", etc. in the titles,
Almost all of them are against Youtube ToS.
https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms
and thats everything thats wrong with society right here.
Him getting shot is just giving him more fame, more money and more excuses to continue doing this shit.
That could be short term. Oftentimes I hear about these people getting more followers, but then I don't hear about them ever again. There are exceptions to that obviously, but I'm not entirely certain on how many retain that fame.
Subscribers is a big number for YouTubers, but if I'm not mistaken, views for videos is still more important. And I wonder how easy it will be to continue making this kind of content a) after suffering an injury like this which will put him out of commission for a while and likely prevent him from doing particular stunts, and b) with the general hesitancy to approach people that this altercation will hopefully instill. So he could be looking at paying actors (would go poorly) or making his pranks more tame (would go poorly).
Articles shouldn't be blowing up his channel when covering this case, he makes a living harassing random strangers
I'm not really addressing that facet of the topic, I was addressing whether those subs would be enough to keep his career afloat. But for the record, I'm not going to be subscribing as I also do not appreciate his behavior.
I think it's about not missing his final prank. 2 month later: idiot got shot again. Darwin wins
Except around here you get two in the chest and one in the head.
There wasn't reacting with fear? I guess backing up and saying "stop", while you continued to shove yourself in his face, was a happy reaction?
He gets off on harassing people just trying to do their jobs or get through the day.
One of the most common ways to become a prank artist is to have some impediment to your empathy. So it's understandable that he couldn't tell what the victims reaction was if it wasn't big enough or obvious enough to bypass his impediment in reading people's reactions.
It's an unfortunate skill to lack, but it's also surprisingly common. Anyone that values money more than what they have to put people through to get that money, usually suffers from the same thing. And I'm sure you can think of alot of people that sound like that.
Past a certain age, it's unlikely that empathy will develop. I have seen it develop as late as age 15 though, so you'd be surprised who is not beyond hope yet. We can only hope for his sake it's still possible to develop after 21 too.
I don't agree that shooting him was the right way to solve that problem, but I do agree there was a problem that needed a solution.
Could just be a psychopath.
That is indeed one of the ways to have an impediment to empathy, generally the strongest one. But even a milder impediment would be enough to lead to the possibility of behaviour like this. In fact a milder impediment combined with being hyposensory and an extrovert could actually make him crave more of a response than he normally gets from social interaction. Having no empathy would likely lead to not caring what response he got, and it does seem he cares, he just wants it to be more.
What a fucking piece of shit. YouTube prank fucks are wasting good air the rest of us need to breathe.
"It's just a prank" needs to end.
It totally amazes me how stupid this kid is. Scaring people in a country that is known for gun owners shooting people for low-level reasons is not a good survival trait.
Well he got more subscribers after being shot, and is still doing it. He probably thinks it was worth it.
That's okay. Second time's the charm.
Well I sure fucking hope so. It'd make the world a little bit better.
If at first you don't succeed...
This. We live in a crazy timeline right now. People are stressed, angry, afraid, and it just seems to be getting worse. Couple that with a culture that promotes gun ownership so heavily, and it's a recipe for what we see in this case. "It was just a prank, bro" is no defense, especially when someone has asked you to stop and is backing away from you. He's engaging in risky behavior by acting like a creep. He wants to make people uncomfortable to illicit a reaction? Well, bub, you got a reaction.
Speaking of survival, that made me remember a Brazilian prankster who liked to scare people in the middle of the night. In one such prank, where he was dressed like a killer clown and basically jump scared people in a dimly lit alley, the 4th victim stepped back and immediately drew a gun, forcing the prankster to get on his knees, receive some slaps to the head and hear all sort of cussin'.
This guy should consider himself lucky. He could easily have ended dead in a ditch...
Nothing would have been lost in he died. Fuckin trash yt streamers.
I’m reminded of a prank channel I used to watch. He was briefly in jail for a bomb prank and later attacked and beat a woman, seemingly for fun, just a few years ago. These prank channels are nearly universally run by terrible people and there does not seem to be a single thing that will dissuade them from “advancing” their “art.”
Wait, has it been illegal to shoot YouTubers this entire time?
Always has been.
(I wouldn't mind kicking them in the nuts if they threaten me and don't leave me alone.)
🌎👨🚀🔫👨🚀
This was completely inevitable, I've seen one or two videos of 'pranks' and felt its only a matter of time before someone gets assaulted or shot, now the little shit has more viewers
I mean, people are legit insane these days, and basically everyone has a gun. Like, forget pranks for a sec, I was telling my wife that the cart narc guy is probably lucky to be alive and he's playing Russian roulette and loading another every time...
Cart narcs fights the good fight though.
He almost stopped, but didn't because he wasn't getting an entertaining enough reaction.
the fucking lack of empathy is appalling. as if people going about their lives exist to give him the reaction he's looking for.
Exactly. The content wasn't good enough.
Prosecutor: "we urge you to ignore the behavior of Cook so we can throw another person into prison, and bump up our conviction rate, helping our careers. We're unconcerned with justice, only convictions matter."
TlDR: no judge, only convict!
I certainly don't condone what the YouTuber was doing, but I'm curious what alternative action/approach you'd prefer to see from the prosecutor in this context? What would it look like?
They shouldn't ask jurors to ignore the circumstances that created the situation that led to the shooting. All of those details are relevant to the shooter's reaction. They're asking the jurors to ignore relevant and vital information, because that information hurts their chances of getting a conviction.
Right, that's a legal argument. Part of presenting a case is to argue what is the legal issue/crime at hand and what circumstances/information is relevant. It's the defense council's job to make the argument you just made, not the prosecutor's and it's the judge's job to make judgements about what information the jury should consider in making their decision. It's the prosecutor's literal job to make arguments that benefit their side, within their code of conduct and court rules. I don't know if it's a very good or convincing approach by the prosecution, I'm not a lawyer.
Right, which is what I take issue with. What justice can a justice system serve if their primary goal is to convict? If their career advancement and peer standing is based on their ability to get convictions regardless of circumstance? I understand their job, and I understand the need for it, I don't agree with the career culture built upon convictions.
"It's just a prank bro" taken way too far, huh?
Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
All the times I've seen people say "Try that and you'll get shot someday" finally came true.
I keep seeing YouTube shorts of dudes like this doing not just stupid shit, but DANGEROUS shit. I saw this one of this dude flashing gang signs in gang territory in LA. You DO NOT do that shit. Any time someone would get aggressive with him he’s go “it’s a prank there’s a camera!” One of these days he’s going to say that and it’s going to piss the dude he flashed signs at off even more and he is going to get shot.
Here's hoping
According to Darwin, this is evolution - and not everyone makes it.
He only has 55K subs? He's not even good at being a YouTuber lol
55k subs is no small feat.
I'm always surprised this doesn't happen much more often - especially on shows like 'just for laughs - gags'
Like. Impersonating a police officer. How the fuck aren't these assholes in jail ?
The professional shows are staged. The contestants might not know the exact prank that will be played on them but they usually are aware that something will happen. They sometimes give a rough time frame of "in the next few days" or even an exact time.
Source?
I've heard it discussed in a few interviews as well. The thought process is that the larger networks are not willing to deal with the legal liability of being sued for someones distress by taping.
You can really tell if you pay attention because none of those pranks ever end violently or harshly. Contrast that with MTV's punkd for example.
Lol Zach from scrubs almost beat up some kid who was a punkd crew member before they did the reveal.
"Asker: When you got punk'd, did you punch that kid for painting on your car? Because I'm pretty good friends with him and when he tells the story he said you were (very reasonably) pissed.
Zach Braff: I punched him in the stomach (as I recall). Who amongst you wouldn't have? They edited it out though. You're not allowed to punch little kids on MTV. Lame."
Always heard Zach Braff was a bit of a prick but i agree with him. You can't relentlessly bother someone to their face, invade their personal space, offer no apology, and be surprised when they feel like they are backed into a corner then lash out like an animal.
I may have reacted differently, but he was probably in the right.
Yeah I heard he's a bit of a prick anyways but I was torn when I first heard that cause I'm like justified anger but at the same time if my kid was one the punched id have beat the shit out of Zach. Detain them, fine, call the police to report it, okay. Arbitrarily lash out at a kid with physical violence over a non life threatening event? Ehhhhhh.........
Yeah, JFL gags has had a few segments where they make it look like a blind person or child fell into a sewer full of water. Somewhat predictably, some reactions were to jump into the water to save them. That situation has legal liability for drowning stamped all over it unless it, like the pranks themselves, aren't what they seem.
Dude deserved to be punched in the face, not shot. I hate people who do stuff like this and wish they'd stop getting attention. But I can't imagine how you could justify shooting someone over it.
Except he's 6'5 and Collie probably isn't that.
Yeah. It's complex.
It's more or less assault by Cook. I mean ok in hindsight there wasn't that much of a threat to Colie, but if I were queueing somewhere minding my own business and out of nowhere this big guy was getting in my face about his twinkie it would be... "very intense".
By Cook's own admission he was trying to illicit confusion. IDK if that's really an emotion in and of itself, rather a conflict between multiple emotions. In this case those emotions would be fear, anger, embarrassment, whatever.
If Cook were to say "I was behaving in an intimidating way in order to illicit fear, anger, embarrassment, and a conflict between all of those emotions on the part of Colie" it sounds much more like assault.
Yet the fact remains that Colie's reaction of shooting the guy isn't really proportionate to the threat. Certainly in most places which are not America Colie has broken the law and Cook has not... despite that feeling somewhat unjust.
Rather than changing the law to allow people to shoot youtubers on sight (as appealing as that sounds) - I think it might be better for force platforms like youtube et al to have some social responsibility and at least exclude this type of content at least at a policy level.
I know my views on this are probably abnormal in some way but it just seems way inappropriate to me to use the public even as extras in your social media content. Like if I'm at a cafe or something and someone starts making a video even if I'm merely providing some infinitessimal portion of ambiance I just find that grossly inappropriate. I guess I just have to suck it up as part of being "in public" in 2023.
YouTube has too much money to be expected to be socially responsible. This is America.
I don't know why this hasn't occurred to me and why I haven't seen anyone suggest it before now. This sounds like a great solution to the problem.
I don't imagine the person who shot him ever wanted to shoot anyone. I feel bad for them.
This dude, though, he FAFO'd.
I think it's a classic "Fuck around and find out". I don't like how every idiot can own a gun in the US, but i think it's reasonable for a delivery guy to fear a strange guy putting his smartphone in your face. What if it's a stupid way to mug you? Distract you with the phone and while your attention is on the phone, stab you with the hand you don't see?
The average person is going to be overwhelmed by his size and even likely his energy, they're not going to be able to punch him and do anything other than injure themselves and/or aggravate him.
Easy for me to think that he could have just brandished the gun to get the guy to back off. But I'm not in his shoes, I'm just some guy on his phone, I don't envy him having to deal with that scenario and could totally see anyone making the wrong decision there
Hard disagree, he deserved worse. If you assault someone then expect to find out.
this is so American even the bullet was wearing a star spangled bandana and riding an eagle 🦅
Our freedumbs.
What you gonna do? Shoot me?
Said man who was shot.
Both parties should be prosecuted. One for reckless discharge of a firearm and the other for harassment.
what do you mean reckless
I'm sure the victim would love to be charged with a misdemeanor reckless discharge of a firearm instead of the three felonies he is currently being charged with.
there you go. im not a lawyer just glad he's getting charged
Does anybody know what is the legal option we have when having to put up with an asshole like this one?
Not a US resident, but I'm not sure that the jury has a very difficult decision. The US has a strong pro gun culture and you could predict that victims of pranks would be scared and that the prankster would be shot eventually.
The guy might have felt threatened, but he was not in any sort of actual or perceived danger. Pulling the gun as a deterrent would have been more than sufficient, but he shot without hesitation, in the middle of a mall during rush hour.
They might have a case of self defense here, but need to convince the jury that he absolutely, genuinely felt threatened, and that's not as straightforward given the setting than in an abandoned parking lot at midnight or some back alley.
I think you're right, but it was only a matter of time before someone got shot. Human responses and thresholds are widely variable.
I've never heard of a single credible reason for a person to own a handgunI've only ever heard of one single reason to own a handgun
If anything, "Hey Dipshit, quit thinking about my twinkle" should get a punch to the face, not a bullet to the gut. People these days....
I going with "hyperbole".
Pepper spray is better in this situation anyway. Far less likely to accidentally seriously hurt or kill someone, but still incredibly painful enough to drive the point home. And if you do end up having to fight them you have an advantage.
Hey guys, can we quit with the calls for the deaths of assholes? Lemmy.world's server rules include this:
I've seen that interpreted as including comments that call for someone's death, and I don't want to see this shit get out of hand and draw admin attention.
This particular piece of shit, Tanner Cook, deserves to have his channels shut down, deserves some prison time, and deserves some kind of court order preventing him from pulling stupid "pranks" on anyone ever again. Maybe then he can do something productive with his life, instead of... whatever the fuck it is he's doing right now.
But he can't do that if he's dead.
Being an asshole isn't a capital offense, worthy of summary execution. And the judge in this case apparently agrees.
So just tone it down a little, OK?
Can't antagonize people going about their lives, either.
That's understandable but now a poor man is going to be left financially ruined and will serve jail time for defending himself.
Agreed, it sucks all around.
This case is very local to me so I have been following a lot of the discussion about it.
Way too many people are too quick to call for this guy's death or saying that he deserved to get shot. And I just can't disagree more. But I do also get why people are sympathetic to the shooter though, cause he very much is also a victim in all this as well.
This guy though absolutely deserves consequences for these stupid "pranks" and he absolutely should not be earning any kind of money from this. Seriously fuck that guy.
100% agreement. Fuck that guy.
Seems like he did suffer some consequences for his stupid pranks
Go to his channel and report his prank videos
Click on the gear icon > report > harmful or dangerous act
"What're you gonna do, huh? Shoot me?!?"
Welp... life is just awesome isn't it? Full of mystery and adventure. I mean... this is no crime, it's merely the process of life.
He almost died for the lols
I'm sure we can trust what this young man says... :P