Garrelli 5000 said:

---

Like the guy in Japan harassing people on a train and an Aggie verbally put him in his place. That was posted here in the last year or so.

In this case shooter isn't playing with a full deck of cards, but I don't mind professional harassers getting f'd up either.

Edit to add x I couldn't hear what the guy was saying to the shooter so maybe his reaction wasn't "well that escalated quickly" but in silence it was quick.

Still happy to see YouTuber learn a lesson in civility.

---

Multiple people in Japan have beat his ass at this point lol

coconutED said:

---

P.H. Dexippus said:

---

The gunman had other options that did not require the use of deadly force against that annoying punk

---

Like what?

Quote:

---

summon LEO

---

And wait for them to show up? When seconds count and all that...

Quote:

---

use non-deadly force

---

Against a guy at least 6 in/100 lb larger? Good luck with that.

Quote:

---

retreat

---

He was already doing this. The jackass was actively following him.

---

Yes, those are all options in the face of annoying behavior. No physical force was used on him, much less deadly force. So yes, you can call LEO and wait for them to show up. He could have pushed them out of the way. He could have ran away.

We have this debate on this board every time there is a bad shoot. Some armchair legal experts give out piss poor advice justifying the shoot. Yes, this is a FAFO situation that I would have been fine with the shooter not being convicted of. But he and you should be aware that you absolutely do not have the legal right to use deadly force just because someone who outweighs you is in your face, following you with a phone camera to troll for internet clout/clicks.

This is not Kyle Rittenhouse, even if the person shot was deserving.

Slicer97 said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

coconutED said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

That's some Wild West **** right there. Dumb punk harasses a guy, but you can't just shoot someone. I'm a big 2A guy and carry quite often, but never have I been tempted to shoot someone because they were a mouthy *******. So many better ways to resolve this without actually pulling a trigger.

---

So, if some ass clown twice your size gets into your personal space, harasses you and follows you around as you walk away, staying in your face the whole time, you're supposed to do...what, exactly?

---

My opinion was that he went to the trigger way too fast.

The last option should be pulling the trigger.

Present your firearm. Announce with authority that you'll use it. Diffuse the situation.

If that doesn't work and you feel you life remains in jeopardy, then take it up a notch.

---

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

If the situation has escalated to the point that I feel it necessary to pull my weapon, somebody is getting shot. If I am uncertain as to whether or not someone needs to be shot, my weapon stays in it's holster.

If I can, I'm going to diffuse the situation by walking away. If I can't walk away, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

---

This. Further, at such close ranges, having the gun taken from you and turned back on you is a real possibility if you just pull and "show it" to them as a warning.

BlueSmoke said:

---

Slicer97 said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

coconutED said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

That's some Wild West **** right there. Dumb punk harasses a guy, but you can't just shoot someone. I'm a big 2A guy and carry quite often, but never have I been tempted to shoot someone because they were a mouthy *******. So many better ways to resolve this without actually pulling a trigger.

---

So, if some ass clown twice your size gets into your personal space, harasses you and follows you around as you walk away, staying in your face the whole time, you're supposed to do...what, exactly?

---

My opinion was that he went to the trigger way too fast.

The last option should be pulling the trigger.

Present your firearm. Announce with authority that you'll use it. Diffuse the situation.

If that doesn't work and you feel you life remains in jeopardy, then take it up a notch.

---

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

If the situation has escalated to the point that I feel it necessary to pull my weapon, somebody is getting shot. If I am uncertain as to whether or not someone needs to be shot, my weapon stays in it's holster.

If I can, I'm going to diffuse the situation by walking away. If I can't walk away, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

---

This. Further, at such close ranges, having the gun taken from you and turned back on you is a real possibility if you just pull and "show it" to them as a warning.

---

Also, if Calie had brandished his firearms, it might have justified the thugs pulling their firearms, should they have any, and shooting him in "self defense".

Or perhaps some on-looker, seeing a man brandishing a firearm in a store, might shoot him in defense of others.

Here's a guy discussing the shooting and the verdict:



I THINK he raises some good points, but quite frankly I couldn't make it through the whole video. If anyone does, let me know. Somehow he has over 1 million subscribers.

torrid said:

---

Here's a guy discussing the shooting and the verdict:



I THINK he raises some good points, but quite frankly I couldn't make it through the whole video. If anyone does, let me know. Somehow he has over 1 million subscribers.

---

Guy has a boring voice, but I actually listened to it in the background. He agrees the shooter should have been "Not Guilty", and it's very funny listening to the "victim's" father's excuses @ 13'30". His hypocrisy knows no bounds.

torrid said:

---

Here's a guy discussing the shooting and the verdict:



I THINK he raises some good points, but quite frankly I couldn't make it through the whole video. If anyone does, let me know. Somehow he has over 1 million subscribers.

---

Why couldn't you make it through the video.

The guy in the video agreed that the cowardly thug was responsible for what happened, not Colie.

My only issue with the shooter is that he didn't kill this maggot. That sure would throw a pail of cold water on thee jack wagons.

Can you possibly look more "Tanner Cook" than this?

coconutED said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

That's some Wild West **** right there. Dumb punk harasses a guy, but you can't just shoot someone. I'm a big 2A guy and carry quite often, but never have I been tempted to shoot someone because they were a mouthy *******. So many better ways to resolve this without actually pulling a trigger.

---

So, if some ass clown twice your size gets into your personal space, harasses you and follows you around as you walk away, staying in your face the whole time, you're supposed to do...what, exactly?

---

Just keep walking and keep letting him stay in your face, scaring you for as long as he wants. Maybe he knocks you out for funsies and youtube clout and you fall to the ground hitting your head, suffering permanent brain damage, or even worse, as we have seen from time to time. But you have to let them just keep bothering you even if you fear that you are in danger. /sarcasm

I am not saying I would have responded in this manner. I am a bigger stronger guy than this delivery dude, but if someone was doing this to me, I either confront them or just get the F away because I would be thinking there is a chance they want to do me physical harm.

Haha…LOL. I'm ok with the shooting….and acquittal.

Pardon my oldness, but what's a YouTube prankster?

Lake08 said:

---

Pardon my oldness, but what's a YouTube prankster?

---

It's basically the modern day version of "Candid Camera meets Americas Funniest Home Videos" except the jokes and pranks are more outlandish and sometimes offensive and dangerous. In other words, no one is ever laughing when they find out they've been pranked. Folks do it for the YouTube likes.

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Lake08 said:

---

Pardon my oldness, but what's a YouTube prankster?

---

It's basically the modern day version of "Candid Camera meets Americas Funniest Home Videos" except the jokes and pranks are more outlandish and sometimes offensive and dangerous. In other words, no one is ever laughing when they find out they've been pranked. Folks do it for the YouTube likes.

---

I remember one Candid Camera when a guy was sitting at a lunch counter eating and a Candid Camera guy sat down next to him and started picking food from the guy's plate and eating it.

After a minute or so of the guy with the food looking at him in disbelief, he got up and started taking off his jacket while mumbling something like "Sometimes you just have to ..." The Candid Camera people immediately recognized the seriousness of the situation and nervously rushed in very quickly to calm the guy down and explain the prank.

In this case, they cowardly bully kept up the bullying until Colie, after trying what he could do to get out of the situation, finally had to pull his handgun and shoot in his own defense.

If you are going to be "in your face" like that, then you shouldn't be surprised if some people refuse to put up with your anti-social antics.

I'm cool with it. The shooter did everything reasonably possible to de-escalate. He retreated, he clearly asked him to stop, etc….FAFO.

Lake08 said:

---

Pardon my oldness, but what's a YouTube prankster?

---

Lucky you....you show off

He'll be sentenced on December 21st and is facing up to five years in prison or up to one year in county jail, but he's also eligible for up to five years probation. The judge ruled that he'll stay in jail until his sentencing.

He'll be sentenced on Thursday.

captkirk said:

---

More "youtubers" should be shot

---

Not going to hold my breath waiting for YouTube to deplatform these type of channels.

Say something against the woke agenda, your channel is gone, channel all about harassing people, celebrated.

Notice the you tuber didn't do this to a guy that would clearly beat his ass. Maybe he would have only got knocked out instead of shot.

Dimebag Darrell said:

---

Can you possibly look more "Tanner Cook" than this?

---

Hmmm, why shoot when the face is THAT punchable.

If he goes to prison, he's eligible for parole after one-fourth of his sentence (possibly less with good behavior). The court records say the shooter got probation for assaulting a family member in 2012.

https://www.loudounnow.com/news/dulles-mall-shooter-released-with-time-served/article_c57fbad2-a024-11ee-ac72-47313ec775ec.html

He was sentenced to time served (no probation, just time served), but he'll never be allowed to own a gun again

Gonna have to borrow a handgun for his daily carry now.

sanangelo said:

---

The shooter was convicted of a 6th class felony: "Guilty of discharging a firearm within a building (Class 6 felony): not guilty of aggravated malicious wounding (Class 2 felony); and not guilty of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony (unclassified felony)."

The entire press release from the Virginia state court:

Quote:

---

Jury Convicts Alan Colie of Discharging a Firearm Within an Occupied Building

On September 25, 2023, a jury trial began in the Commonwealth v. Alan Colie. After four days of testimony and jury deliberations, a Loudoun County jury returned its verdicts in the Commonwealth v. Alan Colie trial. The jury announced the following verdicts: Guilty of discharging a firearm within a building (Class 6 felony): not guilty of aggravated malicious wounding (Class 2 felony); and not guilty of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony (unclassified felony). The case is scheduled for post-trial motions to be heard on October 19, 2023.

The Honorable Judge Matthew P. Snow presided over the trial. The judge will hear motions filed by the defense and determine if the jury's verdict will be upheld. If the verdict is upheld, Judge Snow will impose a sentence within the law, one to five years in prison, or up to 12 months in jail and/or a $2500.00 fine.

On April 2, 2023, the victim, a self-professed YouTube prankster, went to the Dulles Town Center mall to record interactions for his online prank videos. The victim approached Alan Colie, and shortly thereafter was shot in the stomach. Colie had a license to carry a concealed weapon. At trial, Colie asserted the shooting was done in self-defense.

Loudoun County Commonwealth's Attorney Buta Biberaj stated, "The investigation by the Loudoun County Sheriff's Office indicated that the shooting was force that exceeded the threat to Colie. It is unfortunate that the interaction between the victim and Colie resulted in a tragic shooting. We are thankful that the victim did not die. We appreciate the time, dedication, and service of our jurors. They are the voices of our community, and their service is the most powerful way for them to participate in the judicial process. We are always grateful of the hard work of our law enforcement partners, the Loudoun County Sheriff's Office and the Loudoun County Fire and Rescue, as well as the members of the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney for their diligence."

The Commonwealth's Attorney was represented by Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Pamela Jones, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys Eden Holmes and Khaliyah Waters, and the victim witness case manager and paralegals.

Source: Loudoun County

---

---

So in the end the actual victim is now a felon?