The " context " here is irrelevant. Guy in the car was parked on a public thoroughfare, and isn't posing a threat to the man outside nor his step son. There was no reason for the elderly man to break windows and threaten the driver.
@@kevinp5119 No, context here only shows why the man was irritated, but it still doesn't justify his actions. And here in the US, that type of response could get you shot.
@@kevinp5119 I disagree. After hearing the backstory, it changes nothing. The elderly man breaking windows is in violation of law, and had no reason to do so.
I would say you do have these inherent, God given inalienable rights. They are just being suppressed by your government who has no recognition of anything greater than itself. There lies the problem.
Smashing my window while i'm parked on a public street is a crime and might prompt your immediate demise. You left your property, walked across the street and damaged someone's property with a potentially deadly weapon. Next time call the Mounties. Sorry, you lose in my court. That's not a self defense case, it's aggravated assault.
In NY the baton is illegal and just displaying it would be considered brandishing. Destruction of property would be another crime in and of itself but the fact that there was an occupant in the vehicle now it is at least menacing. I'm sure that I am missing something but wow. It goes to show that people today, no just Americans and not just younger people, are more willing to resort to violence.
This was,not stupid but super stupid it happens in Canada and you don't even know the laws for sure the situation for sure of really nothing much about it but you are going to do a video about what to and what not to do maybe I really dont know kinda shit but let's Talk about it anyway ? I don't know exactly what to do in this situation but I know that I'm not watching anymore shit like this bye bye
Providing that it is a public street that allows for free public parking, lacking any other possible illegal activity by the vehicle occupant, he has a legal right to be there. Being that this is a situation that has been ongoing for two years, I would say the possibility exists that this same situation has happened in the past and Tissington has called the police and been told they could not force the car to leave. It would appear that Tissington let frustration and anger over the ongoing situation affect his better judgment. However, again, lacking any other possible illegal behavior on the part of the vehicle occupant, nothing exists to justify the breaking of the windows. Also, the breaking of the driver's window could possibly be seen as placing the occupant in the possibility of serious bodily injury. Which, under US law is a felony. I don't know about Canada. I believe in most jurisdictions in the US, under the Castle Doctrine, and laws regarding defensive use of force, the breaking of the driver's window would have given the occupant legal standing to produce a gun and order Tissington to drop the baton and move away, and if Tissington raised the baton to strike again, the occupant would have legal standing to shoot in self defense. Sadly, as you point out, if the vehicle would have just left, it would have been a different outcome. Also, in most cases, people harass other people to get a reaction. If Tissington just ignored the other people in the situation and not reacted, they may have got tired of trying and stopped. This is a case of neither side deferring to common sense.
This reminds me of the video with the young woman who rear-ends the Lambo. When she comes up to the guy's window, she states that he hit her, and everyone thinks she's crazy. But if you watch the whole video that starts about 45 seconds earlier, the Lambo sideswipes her car, and she follows him, thinking that he's going to hit and run. She gets a little overzealous on the throttle and mistakenly hits him following too closely. But the context is that he hit her car first and didn't realize it.
When the old man first told him to leave, he said “You’re going to be in the hospital if you don’t”. That, combined with the weapon would, IMO, constitute a threat of great bodily harm. And the second the first window was broken after that threat, I would think, despite history between them, a deadly force response would have been justified.
@ The threat followed by removing the barrier between the weapon and the driver would imply that the next blow by the weapon would be to the driver’s head. If you want to wait and hope that it’s just another window getting broken next, be my guest. If armed, the driver is fully justified in not counting on the window being the next “victim”. Lucky for the old man, this was Canada where nobody can carry guns.
Regardless as long as there was no restraining order, and you live in an actually free country, and are on public property, then the old man was totally wrong in what he did by threatening the guy with the weapon, and then willingly break his windows in his car simply because he didn't like him parked there. With that being said we don't know the whole situation but in my opinion with them information we have the old man should be arrested and charges with destruction of property at a minimum, and be held responsible for paying for the repairs made on the car!
If the guy in the car was under some restriction , the old guy should have called the police. Even if the guy in the car had some restriction the old guy had no right to destroy persoal property of the guy in the car. If this was a money issue it should have stayed a money issue!
It's not going to be the 51st state, so quit saying it. Edit: I went and read the description of your channel and it doesn't look like you've ever served in the military; you have ZERO business discussing sending troops into a foreign country unless you're willing to do it yourself.
I appreciate the setiment, but it seems a tad overly optimistic in my humble opinion. In the last six years I've seen morons telling me the earth is flat, vaccines are bad, birds aren't real, and people threatening FEMA workers who were trying to help flood victims in NC. I don't think education is going to cut the mustard. America is chock full of butt-reaming morons. You get the laws you deserve and most folks aren't smart enough to handle a plastic spoon. You know those moronic warning lables like "do not eat batteries?" Yeah. A bunch of people started eating batteries.
You titled this; "If you`re "THIS GUY" don`t carry a gun" but you did a really bad job telling this story or making your point. You continually referred to "he" & then "he" ...but he WHO, WHAT? WHO shouldn`t be carrying a gun? Since there was no gun, who knows, but there WAS a weapon & the man carrying it was not justified in using it. (According to you, a court agreed! I hope he had to pay for the damage) So, GOOD he did NOT have a gun! Also, you told the story without having all the facts, so I, as you, can only make my own assessment. Apparently you were referring to the guy in the car, as the one who should not be carrying, but here in Florida, if that man had threatened me & then attacked my position, damaging my vehicle, breaking glass all over me & exposing my previously protected position behind a rolled up window I would have felt under threat & damn sure would have fired on him before he could hit me, possibly put my eye out or worse, with his weapon! Thumbs DOWN!
Town we live in is knee deep legal guns..Our Police Chief is really big on citizen self protection..IF this happened here.,,.The old guy is at the car for 20 seconds and he's already met the criteria for assault with a deadly weapon..When the windows went..the driver is now showered with glass shards., and in fear for his life..And the video would have corroborated everything...Really bad things would've happened here..This old guy is nuts..
Im sorry, but if I am in an argument with someone and THEY pull out a weapon THEY ARE IN THE WRONG PERIOD! I will absolutely draw MY WEAPON IN RESPONSE because the other guy clearly armed himself with a DEADLY WEAPON. You can lay down and wait to see what happens, but I am going to respond in whatever way I believe keeps me safe from an armed aggressor. The past BS is IRRELEVANT because the old guy PULLED A WEAPON AND STARTED BREAKING WINDOWS OUT OF HIS CAR FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! IDGAF about the "context" because that past context is not an excuse to assault people and destroy property. That guy clearly became way too aggressive regardless of the situation. If the guy was refusing to leave then just call the frigging cops and let them escort him out of the area. Its not like he was on their property or trying to rob him. Sure he was likely being a total asshat but that doesnt justify what that older guy did.
Sorry, but I don’t understand the comment, “Enjoy the HOSPITAL”, which is your first sentence in your line of drawing people into your video. I’ve seen this video before maybe like six months ago or so and I don’t understand that? Thanks.
The old man who busted the window, is the aggressor. The kid who had his window busted has a duty to retreat. Despite how it went, even if there is money involved, this kid would not have the right to bring lethal force as he is in a car, had the ability to leave. End of story. Had the old man actually hit the kid, then the kid could have brought force to bear. Get your justice in a court of law instead of getting it on the side of the road.
I might’ve stuck to using the snapshot of the action for the purpose of inputting your own scenario…speculating on the actual situation won’t make for clear scenarios for less skilled shooters to glean technique from. Sorry, Heg, missed this Shot, Brahda. Just grab a clearer scenario or LARP your own concealed carry videos? Keep at it, we appreciate that you hear us out. I really dig the “fireside chat” mojo of your show!🤩🤘🏽🙏🤓🫡🇺🇸”This We’ll Defend!”
The " context " here is irrelevant. Guy in the car was parked on a public thoroughfare, and isn't posing a threat to the man outside nor his step son. There was no reason for the elderly man to break windows and threaten the driver.
Context means everything
@@flyoverkid55 right? Driver had alot more patience than me. If my loved ones were in the car with me im drawing instantly.
@@kevinp5119 No, context here only shows why the man was irritated, but it still doesn't justify his actions. And here in the US, that type of response could get you shot.
@@kevinp5119 I disagree. After hearing the backstory, it changes nothing. The elderly man breaking windows is in violation of law, and had no reason to do so.
That’s assault and malicious destruction of property.
Old man would've been put down in America
Situation doesn't matter. It's clearly assault and malicious destruction by the old man. The guy was in his car on a throughway.
I'm Canadian. we don't have any rights. no guns, no self defense, no free speech
Uncle Donald is gonna make you the 51st state and you'll have plenty of rights 😊
I would say you do have these inherent, God given inalienable rights. They are just being suppressed by your government who has no recognition of anything greater than itself. There lies the problem.
@@ENCAGED79😅😂 Make Canada great for once 😂😂
you canadians ROCK!! love yall, and your beautiful country, awesome tough patriots in canada, ive met hundreds
This would not have happened here in the USA.
Smashing my window while i'm parked on a public street is a crime and might prompt your immediate demise. You left your property, walked across the street and damaged someone's property with a potentially deadly weapon. Next time call the Mounties. Sorry, you lose in my court. That's not a self defense case, it's aggravated assault.
Never take legal advice from people off the internet.
in my state we have stand your ground laws, when someone attacks you with violence, if you feel you are in threat of harm, you can defend yourself
its exactly why i love my state of kentucky
You can sit in the street with the expectation of not getting your windows smashed in...
You don't seem to know much here, yet you keep maundering on with an aimless ramble. A waste of time...
"It happened in Canada." Of course it did. He felt comfortable knowing the guy in the car would not be armed.
Kinda weird this 2016 incident is being covered in 2025
@@Adiscretefirm you will see this video every few years and maybe by different posters because videos like this get veiws and views make money!
In NY the baton is illegal and just displaying it would be considered brandishing. Destruction of property would be another crime in and of itself but the fact that there was an occupant in the vehicle now it is at least menacing. I'm sure that I am missing something but wow. It goes to show that people today, no just Americans and not just younger people, are more willing to resort to violence.
This was,not stupid but super stupid it happens in Canada and you don't even know the laws for sure the situation for sure of really nothing much about it but you are going to do a video about what to and what not to do maybe I really dont know kinda shit but let's
Talk about it anyway ? I don't know exactly what to do in this situation but I know that I'm not watching anymore shit like this bye bye
The simple truth is that they both should have removed themselves from the situation.
Providing that it is a public street that allows for free public parking, lacking any other possible illegal activity by the vehicle occupant, he has a legal right to be there. Being that this is a situation that has been ongoing for two years, I would say the possibility exists that this same situation has happened in the past and Tissington has called the police and been told they could not force the car to leave. It would appear that Tissington let frustration and anger over the ongoing situation affect his better judgment. However, again, lacking any other possible illegal behavior on the part of the vehicle occupant, nothing exists to justify the breaking of the windows. Also, the breaking of the driver's window could possibly be seen as placing the occupant in the possibility of serious bodily injury. Which, under US law is a felony. I don't know about Canada. I believe in most jurisdictions in the US, under the Castle Doctrine, and laws regarding defensive use of force, the breaking of the driver's window would have given the occupant legal standing to produce a gun and order Tissington to drop the baton and move away, and if Tissington raised the baton to strike again, the occupant would have legal standing to shoot in self defense. Sadly, as you point out, if the vehicle would have just left, it would have been a different outcome. Also, in most cases, people harass other people to get a reaction. If Tissington just ignored the other people in the situation and not reacted, they may have got tired of trying and stopped. This is a case of neither side deferring to common sense.
I agree.
The old man is lucky. You don’t get too many chances to act like that. But yeah, avoidance is super important!
Rumor has it that old man tissington breaks out the expandable baton on mornings that he doesn't have his sanka and rye toast with plum jelly.
It serves as his laxative😅
@js1451 🤣😂
This reminds me of the video with the young woman who rear-ends the Lambo. When she comes up to the guy's window, she states that he hit her, and everyone thinks she's crazy. But if you watch the whole video that starts about 45 seconds earlier, the Lambo sideswipes her car, and she follows him, thinking that he's going to hit and run. She gets a little overzealous on the throttle and mistakenly hits him following too closely. But the context is that he hit her car first and didn't realize it.
Two separate incidents. Both are wrong
When the old man first told him to leave, he said “You’re going to be in the hospital if you don’t”. That, combined with the weapon would, IMO, constitute a threat of great bodily harm. And the second the first window was broken after that threat, I would think, despite history between them, a deadly force response would have been justified.
No justified self defense. It’s just a car window not the driver’s head. This is a police matter.
@ The threat followed by removing the barrier between the weapon and the driver would imply that the next blow by the weapon would be to the driver’s head. If you want to wait and hope that it’s just another window getting broken next, be my guest. If armed, the driver is fully justified in not counting on the window being the next “victim”. Lucky for the old man, this was Canada where nobody can carry guns.
In a stand-your-ground state probably. In a state where you have a duty to retreat no.
Thank god I don’t live in one of those states.
That's what matches are for.
It's Canada if you actually watched the video, so not even close
If you're sitting in a perfectly good, running car and you shoot someone , I think you're going to jail no matter where you are. Just my opinion.
Regardless as long as there was no restraining order, and you live in an actually free country, and are on public property, then the old man was totally wrong in what he did by threatening the guy with the weapon, and then willingly break his windows in his car simply because he didn't like him parked there.
With that being said we don't know the whole situation but in my opinion with them information we have the old man should be arrested and charges with destruction of property at a minimum, and be held responsible for paying for the repairs made on the car!
Driver should have taken off BEFORE the attack, attacker should be jailed for assault with a deadly weapon.
What does this have to do with your headline? There were no guns?!?
If the guy in the car was under some restriction , the old guy should have called the police. Even if the guy in the car had some restriction the old guy had no right to destroy persoal property of the guy in the car. If this was a money issue it should have stayed a money issue!
It's not going to be the 51st state, so quit saying it. Edit: I went and read the description of your channel and it doesn't look like you've ever served in the military; you have ZERO business discussing sending troops into a foreign country unless you're willing to do it yourself.
Today in USSCA there is a video about Canada are banding 225 Guns that you cannot have you must see the video
Instead of advocating for restrictions based on a few incidents, we should focus on promoting proper training and education for all gun owners.
I appreciate the setiment, but it seems a tad overly optimistic in my humble opinion. In the last six years I've seen morons telling me the earth is flat, vaccines are bad, birds aren't real, and people threatening FEMA workers who were trying to help flood victims in NC. I don't think education is going to cut the mustard. America is chock full of butt-reaming morons. You get the laws you deserve and most folks aren't smart enough to handle a plastic spoon. You know those moronic warning lables like "do not eat batteries?" Yeah. A bunch of people started eating batteries.
What training
Worthless video… horrible explanation of circumstance…
How old is this video?
Gee, if Canadians had DIGSAFE ....
You seem to speculate a lot.
I saw no gun?
You titled this; "If you`re "THIS GUY" don`t carry a gun"
but you did a really bad job telling this story or making your point.
You continually referred to "he" & then "he"
...but he WHO, WHAT?
WHO shouldn`t be carrying a gun?
Since there was no gun, who knows, but there WAS a weapon & the man carrying it was not justified in using it.
(According to you, a court agreed! I hope he had to pay for the damage)
So, GOOD he did NOT have a gun!
Also, you told the story without having all the facts, so I, as you, can only make my own assessment.
Apparently you were referring to the guy in the car, as the one who should not be carrying, but here in Florida, if that man had threatened me & then attacked my position, damaging my vehicle, breaking glass all over me & exposing my previously protected position behind a rolled up window I would have felt under threat & damn sure would have fired on him before he could hit me, possibly put my eye out or worse, with his weapon!
Thumbs DOWN!
I have absolutely no idea whats going on,thats some really bad storytelling
No need to be breaking windows. Get outta there. Both were stupid.
Yup.
Town we live in is knee deep legal guns..Our Police Chief is really big on citizen self protection..IF this happened here.,,.The old guy is at the car for 20 seconds and he's already met the criteria for assault with a deadly weapon..When the windows went..the driver is now showered with glass shards., and in fear for his life..And the video would have corroborated everything...Really bad things would've happened here..This old guy is nuts..
The speaker in this video lacks common sense! Thanks for making the video! I won’t waste my time with you videos anymore.
Im sorry, but if I am in an argument with someone and THEY pull out a weapon THEY ARE IN THE WRONG PERIOD! I will absolutely draw MY WEAPON IN RESPONSE because the other guy clearly armed himself with a DEADLY WEAPON. You can lay down and wait to see what happens, but I am going to respond in whatever way I believe keeps me safe from an armed aggressor. The past BS is IRRELEVANT because the old guy PULLED A WEAPON AND STARTED BREAKING WINDOWS OUT OF HIS CAR FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! IDGAF about the "context" because that past context is not an excuse to assault people and destroy property. That guy clearly became way too aggressive regardless of the situation. If the guy was refusing to leave then just call the frigging cops and let them escort him out of the area. Its not like he was on their property or trying to rob him. Sure he was likely being a total asshat but that doesnt justify what that older guy did.
How is this a 10+ minute video.
Sorry, but I don’t understand the comment, “Enjoy the HOSPITAL”, which is your first sentence in your line of drawing people into your video. I’ve seen this video before maybe like six months ago or so and I don’t understand that? Thanks.
Castle doctrine in my state.😉
Don’t mess with old timers, they don’t play games, they’ve already lived their life. They got an axe to grind, anything’s possible.
Older doesn't mean wiser
@ never said anything about wiser. Definitely meant less F’s given.
Matt, c r s. ... get him out of prison.. your fellow you tuber !! Get him out, with reparations!!
Greetings from Louisiana
The old man who busted the window, is the aggressor. The kid who had his window busted has a duty to retreat. Despite how it went, even if there is money involved, this kid would not have the right to bring lethal force as he is in a car, had the ability to leave.
End of story. Had the old man actually hit the kid, then the kid could have brought force to bear.
Get your justice in a court of law instead of getting it on the side of the road.
This video happened at least 2 years ago.
And?
Wow...
I believe the gun laws in Canada will be revised in the near future.
What makes you an expert? You’re a terrible storyteller bro.
and - - - *Don't* live in Canada ... lol
Nanananananananana, B S.
I might’ve stuck to using the snapshot of the action for the purpose of inputting your own scenario…speculating on the actual situation won’t make for clear scenarios for less skilled shooters to glean technique from. Sorry, Heg, missed this Shot, Brahda. Just grab a clearer scenario or LARP your own concealed carry videos? Keep at it, we appreciate that you hear us out. I really dig the “fireside chat” mojo of your show!🤩🤘🏽🙏🤓🫡🇺🇸”This We’ll Defend!”