It seems odd that castle doctrine doesn't apply because they were "invited" inside while the attackers came in under false pretenses. It's like saying con men are innocent because you voluntarily handed them money after they lied to you to get it.
yah, it's odd, that would also imply if a criminal was posing as a repairman or salesman and you invited them in to your house castle doctrine doesn't apply either?
@@imacomputer1234 Not all laws are absolute and I think this attorney was siding on the err of caution... I'm 100% sure a jury or court wouldn't convict somebody who defended themselves like this. Of course, It depends on the state. Places where democrats have a dictatorship rule, it's possible the castle doctrine wouldn't help you.
“If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim” col Jeff Cooper USMC
@@armenianispogs8087 It doesn't change, it's still called vigilantism. When the 'victim' takes the law into their own hands they become a vigilante (I'm just stating the dictionary definition)
Crazy time when a victim has to be so careful not to be punished by the system. These laws only put law abiding citizens, women and children in danger.
Yup and the sad part is that the US has more protection for citizens over criminals than most other countries but it still isn’t enough. For example I live in Canada and we pretty much can’t defend ourselves from criminals legally, castle laws don’t exist, the strict gun laws basically make it impossible to have a firearm readily available for self defence and you aren’t even allowed to defend yourself in your own home without breaking any laws. I heard a story of a man who’s wife was raped at knife point in his own bed and he shot the guy and went to jail because he didn’t use “equal force” meaning if he killed the guy with a knife he would have been okay legally… it’s a joke.
I’m baffled with the fact that because he was hired to drive them it became him inviting them into his car is no longer covered under castle law…once they tried to carjack him the invite should have no longer been in effect as a form of protection for a freaking criminal…where is his right to protect himself at that point?
Pretty sure castle law would be restored if they were invited under false pretense. That said, someone would have to be exceedingly stupid to order a ride linked to their own account. Edit: Watching further in, I find it odd that the lawyer confirms that castle doctrine is voided by the invite, despite the false pretense.
Lyft would rather their drivers get shot to death than defend themselves against violent criminals. Hey, they aren't real employees, just subcontractors.
What is disgusting are people who use "self defense" as an excuse to murder people and escalate a situation that didn't need to be escalated. If you are trained to use a weapon, you should also be trained on when not to use it. And that will always be tested. Because this is not a game. If you don't understand that every bullet carries with it a lawyer, then you DO NOT carry. Period. And if you go to prison for it, you will never carry again. So the system does work after all.
@@HalkerVeil Are you not disgusted enough by the robber that you'd say good riddance if he was deceased? That's the immediate instinct that I get. Like, good, he'll never put someone through that level of stress again. He's put down. Like the dog he is. Why does he deserve any level of decency after thinking that was something he could get away with?
@@biff3917 If you want nobody to have guns, good luck having the absolute hell of armed assailants starting to shank people like happens in other countries that have banned them. No guns doesn't stop people from having weapons or using anything they can find as a weapon.
You type simpletons never look at the bigger scope of the matter. We are not in the Wild West and even then they frowned on shooting anybody “in the back”.
At least you have some rights! Come and live in the UK,we can't even carry pepper spray,it's considered a firearm 🙄 and if a burglar or home invader breaks into your home, you are legally not allowed to touch or defend yourself and family from said intruder/intruders. It's disgusting. Saying that,if someone did break into my home it'll be the biggest mistake of their lives. F the UK and it's pathetic nanny state laws.
Police would rather clean a mess after the fact than stop an active crime. Too many people think they can depend on the police state for their protection
My best guess is specifically "castle doctrine" doesn't apply, but a different "self defense" will. You have to comprehend courts are a giant, "private corporation" , bond harvesting program. Words mean everything.
This angers me so much that someone being attacked has to also think about not committing a crime at the same time. It's a joke that appeases to criminals. We need a reverse in policies in this country.
NOPE…. Attorney!!!! If you invite a person in your home or car or not… once they attack you and you’ve put in a life threatening situation… according to ALL states you are allowed to protect yourself! And in a state that has the castle doctrine you are legally allowed to blast them in your car! Store owners, banks etc invite customers in their stores and can shoot the bad guy! The attorney needs to freshen up on the law!
Good thing the one in the back seat that got his knife didn't decide to stab him in the neck...I would say in hindsight don't put a knife where the criminal can use it against you. That was a really scary moment. Thank God he's ok
@@mikehaverstick321 I thought about trying to explain the obvious relevance to you, but I worry that it's a waste of time. so instead, I'll just leave you this: 🤡
He needs to be a Law of self defense platinum member. He is aware of the five elements of self defense: Innocence, Avoidance, Imminence, Reasonableness, Proportionality.
He is a hero. He did fight back. I can't help but be a little leary of the fact that now his name and where he's from is plastered all over social media as well as how many guns he carries and where he usually has them in the car. NEVER reveal your secrets.
*Exactly! I was **_stunned_** that the interviewer (a former police officer) would ask and then publish this information… smh* *With ‘friends’ like that, who needs enemies?*
Love how this dude handled that situation especially when he knew they were no longer a threat to him. I just hope those two punks learn from that close call and are never a threat to anyone else.
Well ,they screamed like little girls once the table was turned , So generally speaking they are good and quick thinking to play whatever role is required for the little demons to win .
@@neutrino78x they will still try to rob people weapon or not. Think logically man, no matter what they will get brave to do it again, maybe next time they will actually use something. History proves how criminals progress. They could’ve been stopped for good though…
If you're on a jury because a person killed a criminal , sit, listen and vote not guilty no matter what. Even if the criminal was trying to flee. That's the only way these prosecutors will get the message. not guilty!
Absolutely right you have these Nimrod libtards that are going to do the opposite no matter what but the good news is they're taking their clot shot and boosters they won't be breeding or voting much longer!
In many places, you can only brandish a gun if you are in imminent danger of grave physical harm. In some ways it's easier to justify pulling a gun if you shoot at someone. Although practically that also means even more legal trouble.
@@catocall7323 es2984 is talking about the cops taking his firearm at the gas station after this incident... and the reason for that is the cops don't know what is going on in the moment. With the cops on scene it's best if they are the only ones with the guns. If somebody starts shooting, it is easier to identify who the good and bad guys are. That way no good guy citizens pulls a gun to help the cops but then gets shot by the cops because they have a gun out shooting.
@@catocall7323Yet police can point guns at virtually anybody they perceive might possibly try to harm them.I saw bodycam video of cops mag dumping a guy in a wheelchair as he rolled away from them.
The fact he did everything by the book....didn't shoot anyone in the back, but still feels the need to take his Lawyer to the interview shows how messed up the justice system is and he's not taking any chances.
It’s a shame that when you’re in the midst of defending your life, that you have to question everything you’re doing. Am I in the right here, can I legally shoot, did I invite these criminals into my car. Hamstringing yourself to a higher standard than the criminal. When 70 yrs ago no one required this! Thanks you damn lawyers!
video looks kinda staged... are they promoting not using our guns? seems like some kind of propaganda on a BIG yt channel. the guy behind him put the cellphone gun on him and he looked to the side instead of worrying about the gun and sticking his hands up
@@SirPraiseSunthere's nothing about this video that looks staged. People react differently under these situations. He was looking to the side because there was another person on the side of him. It's alot easier to pay attention to the threat infront of you instead of behind you. He could already assume what the hell was behind him so there was no point in looking behind lol
The fact that he stayed so calm during this is absolutely insane. And the fact that getting a gun pointed at you isn’t enough to fire back legally is crazy
This guy chose not to fire because the guy immediately stopped trying to attack him and fled as soon as he pointed the weapon- which was probably the right decision, legally speaking. I don't think the robber actually had a gun, just something he could shove into the victim's back to make him think it's a gun. Either way, in most jurisdictions I know of you are permitted to use lethal force if you have a reasonable expectation that someone might kill or maim you, which would include them trying to make you think they have a gun to your back.
Dude almost took the room temperature challenge using his cellphone as a pretend gun. This is right up there with bad decisions like that guy who tried robbing the taco shop with a toy gun. Fortunately for these two clows, this guy has a cooler head than most. There's a very real chance I would've pulled the trigger and I'm confident that I'm not alone in that sentiment.
@SV Barry Duckworth no its just we live in too polite of a society. I've seen it over and over, the vicitim tends to call the criminals gentlemen, but not for the purpose of being ironic, and rather for the purpose of being polite. It's a sickness. I didn't notice any particular inflection in his voice when he said "gentlemen," nor did he use quotations (finger quotes) or anything else to suggest he was purposing irony. He was serious. He was being polite. It's not an uncommon thing unfortunately here in America anyway.
Shouldve played the old movie that the kid plays in home alone to ward off the burglars: "im gonna give ya till the count of 10, to get your lousy, yella.."
@@JimmyCrackCorn_ this is a thought that came to mind. I sure would like to know for sure. I'm not really interested in gambling. can you provide some hard evidence? I'll then make a donation I feel appropriate 😎
Scott did everything right except talking to police without an attorney, but I'm glad it all worked out for him. They didn't say whether or not the attackers were caught.
Well he did have clear video footage documenting the entire event within his personal vehicle, that in all by itself removed all doubt that it was, in fact, a clear indication of self defense with factual evidence admissable in court. Easy win. He had something pressed in the back of his neck and had every reasonable belief his life was in danger.
@@TheShopGrandOpening Yes, like I wrote, it all worked out. But as his attorney stated, our memory in the immediate aftermath of a life and death event can be faulty. You always want to err on the side of caution and, if possible, have your attorney review camera footage before turning it over to police (yes, in this case police were checking the car for fingerprints and probably would have noticed the camera). You also want to give yourself time before making a statement, like the 72-hour rule that cops get when they shoot someone. It lets you collect your thoughts and make sense of what you witnessed, including refreshing your memory with other evidence like camera footage. It is NEVER smart to talk to police without a lawyer except to give your personal info and to say that you were the defender & the other person was the aggressor.
*STATISTICALLY, THEY WERE ALREADY CAUGHT AND LET OUT WITHOUT IT BEING KNOWN THEY WERE THE PERPETRATORS OF THIS EVENT* ol narrator voice. Foreal tho. Incompetence
He’s the victim so the police would treat him as the victim. As a victim you don’t need an attorney to talk to the police. You’re so misguided about the police it shows in your comments. Woke movements and people like yourself is why he felt the need to have an attorney.
Citizens don't work for the government and behalf of all of us. Citizens typically move away from danger, officers are required to move towards danger and stop the threat.
@thystaff742 so you'll be responding to the next armed robbery, violent armed domestic situation, active shooter etc? The reality on planet earth is the police do 100 times more good than bad.
It’s ridiculous he has to even explain himself at all especially with video, once those guys demonstrated true intent to harm he should be able to defend himself in any means necessary
^ so it’s a *partial* happy ending, sure. But if the bad guys don’t go to prison for a long time, then it’s not a full happy ending (I haven’t finished the video yet).
@@byronfoppola8676The correct literal translation is,”Thou shalt not commit murder.” Killing two dangerous criminals who are robbing you is a public service, not murder.
@@psmith2403 C'mon bro this ain't James Bond stuff. 2 F**kin Retards tried to Carjack this guy.. Really think Detectives are on the case? 🤣Cops don't give a F**k. . Carry Concealed Firearms Protect Yourself, My Neighbor was beating up his Girl in the driveway. The Cops showed up 37 minutes after I called, 😂
At 10:30 pm after youalmost get car jacked.... call the police... where in this time does one have an attorney on speed dial to run through your statement with??? Any takers on this?
imagine the headlines that would have been put out . Then the black families would have been in an uproar about the black guy not having a gun but instead a phone . Blessing to this Uber driver ❤
Yes, I understand exactly what you mean. After viewing thousands of bodycam videos worn by Law Enforcement in this country, it's clear that very serious reforms are needed to ensure that citizens rights aren't abused by officers who break the law, and aren't held accountable.
I'm glad to see you're okay. I saw this and I was saying, give them whatever they want even if it's the car. It's not worth your life. There was an unfortunately similar case where the guy drove a woman to the woods and killed her. Her passenger drove her to the woods and killed her. It was so sad, she was still warm when they found her.
A family member of mine did just this. Robbed at gunpoint, ended up gaining the upperhand and inflicted deadly injuries on the perp. Did not report anything and never heard anything about it.
Exactly! What sense does it make to call organized criminals to go after the common ones. If you handled the situation as best you could, move along without inviting more risk.
Scott, the physical handling of the gun in a life or death, potentially, situation needs to happen on autopilot, because your active attention must be reserved for the situational assessment. This saved my life. No fumbling or gun-handling distractions. This is the core of "practice".
The first thing he said wrong was that he didn’t know what was being pressed against him. Until you know otherwise, it’s absolutely a gun. Anyone willing to put you in that position has to be assumed to have a gun. And quite honestly, I would not talk about this until I know for sure that I am not facing any legal consequences.
@@RealNaisuCinema That's what the perp was expecting him to think, that it was a gun. That's why if he shot the guy nobody would charge him. We'd all expect it was a gun.
@@oneisnone7350 IN MY VIEW/ Somehow I imagine if this man had actually been shot to death you probably would say "The good news is the victim avoided saying anything that could have been used against him."
17:07 No shots fired yet still they 👮♂️ disarmed the carjacking victim of BOTH his lawful firearms⁉️ 🙄WTAF 👮♂️ likely [🐂💩] excuse: "For officer safety" I say this as someone who "back the Blue till it happens to you" was threatened by a 🗑️👮♂️ dirty cop with being shot until dead- IF I tried to call 911 again for a Sgt/Deputy (1st 911 call was about his GF trying to steal my sports car 📬📄 title)- With total impunity claiming fear for office safety I will say "I though the cellphone was a firearm so I was forced to fire my sidearm until he stopped being a threat/ 💯☠️" He then continued to order the keys to be transferred to his GF while holding his gun in a threatening manner. When I declined he said he could arrest me for resisting (carjacker W badge arrest?) and she'd get the keys left behind anyway. City attorney and his PD made me sue them in civil court while they took stolen 📬 title from Police evidence and sold/ transferred my car out of state. I was left holding the replacement title for a sport car that was MIA!
This might not be a super popular opinion but huge kudos to the Lyft driver for not shooting the escaping criminals in the back. Very clear thinking and understood that the threat had passed. Respect.
Scott... so sorry to hear this tragedy happened to you. Glad to hear you are ok and that you will be celebrating one more Father's Day with your family today. Scott mentioned playing the "what if game". I do that all the time - when I'm walking down the street and when I carry at any time. I have always done that and I was also reminded of that in my CC class. Thank you Scott for practicing your Second Amendment rights and thank you to you so much also to Amy for giving such great advice. I learned something today. I need to look further into membership with USCCA, too. Update: I just joined USCCA!
That was quick thinking, not to open fire seeing that they were fleeing. I guarantee those guys will think twice about doing this again, seeing their lives flashed before their eyes. Smh.
Without sounding like a keyboard warrior I’m about 90% sure I would have immediately shot while they were still facing me. And I’m 100% sure he would of been justified
You would MURDER some young kids that are forced to do petty harmless crime just to survive from the government? MONEY CAN BE REPLACED YOUNG MISGUIDED HUMAN LIVES CANNOT BE
@@ib1ray put ur self in the robbers position, it’s dark and ur not gonna look into a door panel while wrestling with the driver cmon be a little smarter
@@barackosamabinladen8180 Experts recommend keeping your weapon on your body genius for this exact reason, also accidents are a thing, genius. Where do you think that gun is going if you hit another car?
@@barackosamabinladen8180 I'd also like to remind you that a lot of these criminals have done this many times. If they were a first time offender, I might believe they are scared... but somebody that has done this many times isn't going to be nearly as scared...
I don’t understand some of these laws man, they protect the criminal more than the victim. Yes he invited them in to his car, but as a rideshare not to rob him. At what point again is it ok to protect yourself? That’s just plain idiotic. Then when he got to his gun he still didn’t know what the guy in the back seat was pressing against him. If it had been a gun there probably would’ve been shots fired by either or both sides…? Luckily for him and the criminals he was able to keep his wit’s in check. Seems like the exception not the rule.
You can call the police to report the incident and not make a statement. I've always heard that if you do have to shoot someone once the police show up to put down your gun and shut up. Anything you say can and will be used against you. Honestly if I was in that guys position IDK if I would even call the cops. No one got shot and nothing was stolen, why even involve them when it can only get yourself in trouble.
@@mattkaydus7973- *Because if the robbers call the cops first, YOU could be the one being arrested and charged for assault with a deadly weapon.* *Luckily this guy had video.*
Yes, you absolutely should call your attorney first. They will then call the cops and tell them where you are and what happened. They can not use the words of the attorney against you and they know what things to say and what things not to say. Then when the police get there tell them that you are willing to answer questions but not until your attorney gets there. Then be quiet and don't say anything unless it's run through your attorney first.
@@Asidebarthis is why we can’t LAWFULLY protect ourselves because of people like you putting up so much red tape that it’s to the point of there is no self defense. Actual Logic dictates that if you feel your life is in danger you have the right to defend yourself and shouldn’t even need a lawyer to defend what is RIGHTFULLY self defense…. PERIOD! Pisses me off seeing people like you post 💩.
I was holding a guy at gun point who broke into my garage and accidentally shot him. I had him lying on the ground with his arms and legs spread. I warned him not to move. My wife was standing behind me on the phone with police dispatch. The guy suddenly jumped up. I jerked back and when I did the gun discharged into his shoulder and he ran off. Good thing he ran away and not after me because my pistol jammed after the first shot. The only thing that kept me from being arrested was my neighbors camera caught everything; even audio. That was a little embarrassing though. It was four thirty in the morning and I was standing outside in the rain in just my underwear holding this guy at gun point until the police arrived; ten minutes later. I told myself I’d never point a gun at someone agin. Three days later I was holding a gun on a guy while a police officer was handcuffing him. I hate guns. 🤷♂️
I only care if he literally destroyed them otherwise I'm sick and tired of these words being used to supposedly make somebody feel bad on the Internet. And of course one of the defining attributes is always true
The chance that these two individuals will engage in a life long criminal career is likely, would have made society a huge service and avoided a lot of innocent suffering by taking out the trash
The problem is that he would have shot them in the back because they immediately ran away like cowards... The driver would have then been charged with murder...
I know a really good guy who had a really bad past that used to do some really stupid stuff. He got clean and stopped the nonsense and now has a daughter. If someone killed him his wife would never have met him and her daughter would not be born. I've looked into her eyes, she is absolutely beautiful and completely innocent. It's hard to describe the innocent look in a child's eyes but it is like unreal. Instant eternity in there. The real question is : Do you believe a person can change?
That whole explanation of the castle doctrine is wild. Imagine threatening someones' life in their property and the owner cannot use the castle doctrine just because they started as a behaving guest.
Attorney gave good explanation on why his vehicle was not castle doctrine. However, the video was evidence he had the right to defend himself from the THUGS!
it isnt wild at all. you can defend against a threat end of story. you invite someone into your home the same would apply. lets be honest most peopel here want to see revenge not defence. when we get to that point the criminals will just start shooting first and the criminal always has the advantage of the ambush
@@warrenpeasIf the criminals want a war then we should give them a war. The criminal doesn't fear the police nor the judge, so then we should teach him to fear his victim.
@@farzana6676 criminals also dont vote and these judges and law makers are elected by voters. our justice system is a reflection of us voters to a big degree. example: why dont we have huge prison sentences for all felonies commited with a gun? we all agree its the criminals using the guns to commit crimes so why even in a state like montana that has the most conservative voters the wont just vote for 20 yr minimum for any felony with a gun?
3:10 - "once the gentleman behind me...". That's a lot of respect considering the situation, but I guess he is also keeping it respectful so his comments can't be used against him for his self-defense allegation.
The statement about the "castle doctrine" not applying to the car because the intruders were "invited in" is a stretch. There are a lot of home invasions where someone has the door opened by the homeowner, and everything goes south from there. If the intruders are in your house, it doesn't matter HOW they got there, it's the principle of defending yourself in these situations is what really matters.
The biggest reason, in my opinion, every person should take a concealed carry course is to understand the rights (you don't have) to protect yourself. People would be astonished how many people are attacked, and escape, only to have the assailants call 911 and cry for help. There's a lot to know and it's never a good thing to fight for your innocence behind bars (and that's how it works most of the time).
You don't need to take a concealed course to know your rights. That should be taught in schools across the country about our rights and the Constitution, yet that has been taken out cause they want absolute rule and compliance.
Even though the "gentlemen" were invited into his car, once the individual in the back seat feigned pressing a gun against the driver's neck, couldn't he reasonably fear for his life? And when he exited the vehicle, wouldn't it be reasonable to believe that he would be shot as they stole his car? So wouldn't it be reasonable to at that time to just turn and shoot the individual that's in the car "with the gun" before he has a chance to shoot you? Could the driver do that? Or would he be charged with manslaughter???
The castle doctrine being removed by “invited them in.” pisses me off. They’re clearly automatically disinvited when they begin to attack and came for the reason of attacking which is other than why they were invited in. Good to know that possibility thou so now we must be extra careful with who we invite in
If you get carjacked first thing you do is called a lawyer that shouldn't cost much should it it's not a lose-lose situation is it maybe we'll get lucky and Russia will take over the United States the penalty for that and Russia is death so it just don't happen over there
It looks really good to a jury if the victim doesn't show demonstrable malice towards his attackers. This could be used against him by the attorneys of the prosecutor or the attackers to show that he wanted that fight, and wanted to kill them. That he specifically put himself in that position to use his weapon. It is the same reason why having "punisher" emblems and such is a really bad idea if you ever have to use your weapon.
@@dampsok Sorry, I'm a retired police officer, and what he said would never make any sense in any court. He would prove they weren't enough of a threat to make him call them anything else, but " gentlemen ", which would make any jury question his decision to pull out his gun..or any type of weapon
@@markhoffman4587 That would be a very dunce jury. One look at the video would make any sane person agree that he had every right to pull his gun. Calling them gentlemen or thugs don't change what they were seen doing in the video. Ever heard the saying "a rose by any other name....." ?
@@pargolf3158 A Rose is not committing crimes, and that's it, it's just a Rose. Not sure how not just calling them " suspects ", or " subjects ", or just using their names wouldn't be better than calling them " gentlemen "...but I guess all the training and schooling, and real life experiences I've went through were all for nothing, and these amazing gentlemen were just trying to be like ROSES
I hope the driver realized that leaving his gun in the door panel is a bad idea because if the criminal that swung the door open noticed the gun, this story would have had a different outcome 😕. And now that this story is out there, I hope all drivers don't make the same mistake, or they too would have a different outcome.
@@Asidebar the thug in the car took the knife. I am talking about the thug outside the car that open the door. He could have taking the gun if he would have seen it. That being said, and like I said earlier, if the thug that open the door and saw the gun, you don't think he would have taking it like the thug inside the car that took the knife? I rest my case
Dude is really lucky these mofos didnt get his car, gun or his life. Im not gonna say what shouldve happened to these pos scumb@gz but were all thinkin it. Plus im sure next victim may not be so lucky.
Props to the driver. Too many comments second guessing him. Running on fear. The reality was the guys focused on the driver, the items on his body, & to remove him from the car. The readily available firearm is what worked. He had enough data to confirm they were no longer a threat. End of story.
When he said the moment they ran away, the moment they were no longer a viable threat. Those words right there tell me that he truly studied martial arts. A good instructor will teach you from day 01. This not about kicking ass. It is about self defense.
Great story and great outcome. The only question I have is - were the firearms returned right then or did it take an act of Congress to get back? (slight exaggeration)
This attorney, unless different in other states, is completely wrong in regards to the castle doctrine. An invited guest can turn aggressor and become uninvited at any time. Doesnt matter if he let them in.
My question... If you thought the guy in the car had a weapon (wasn't sure about it til after the situation), because he pressed it against your back, why didn't you shoot if there could've been a possibility of the bad guy In the car having a gun?
I think he said to avoid shooting the back-seat guy in the back because by the time he got it together with the gun the back-seat guy's back was facing him. In the video it looked like the gun was pointed at the carjacker's face but apparently the driver wasn't ready to shoot.
Thats crazy asf and I total respect the patience he had to not pull the trigger. Not sure If I would do the same with all that adrenaline but hopefully they learned their lesson.
This video is proof that gun owners are not just angry men looking for an excuse. They’re responsible and Choose life if given the chance by a deadly criminal.
throw that camera away inside your car you still got to get a lawyer thousands of dollars the lady just said there going to try to use that camera against you we're talkin about the victim Bizarro world
My biggest fear of being the victim from reckless, violent, and physically intimidating people is to get caught sitting in the driver's seat of my car while they try to take me hostage or force me out of the car. As someone who only drives a personal vehicle alone, that is why I ALWAYS lock those doors first and pay attention to the surroundings. Remember, appearances can be deceiving. Kudos to all the Lyft and Uber drivers that lawfully conceal carry a handgun with adequate training. You never know when you might need to take action. Sometimes inaction leads to failure. A failure that might be permanent.
@@LC-xu5qf She explanation what the laws is there! She is a good attorney. Just because you have no law degree and fail to comprehend what the law is do not claim her legal definition is ridiculous.
It seems odd that castle doctrine doesn't apply because they were "invited" inside while the attackers came in under false pretenses. It's like saying con men are innocent because you voluntarily handed them money after they lied to you to get it.
I think States need to look at laws for that. It seems weird they havn't with taxies.
Attorney gave explanation why it was not castle doctrine.
yah, it's odd, that would also imply if a criminal was posing as a repairman or salesman and you invited them in to your house castle doctrine doesn't apply either?
@@imacomputer1234 Not all laws are absolute and I think this attorney was siding on the err of caution... I'm 100% sure a jury or court wouldn't convict somebody who defended themselves like this. Of course, It depends on the state. Places where democrats have a dictatorship rule, it's possible the castle doctrine wouldn't help you.
that's just "self defense"....plain and simple.
“If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim” col Jeff Cooper USMC
That's called a vigilante'
What causes violent crime? Sounds like a dum@ss interested in dealing with the problem and not the cause. "If violent crime is to be curbed..." LOL. 🤡
Never pick up Mask Holes!
@@PyroChimp75 irrelevant, read again lol
@@armenianispogs8087 It doesn't change, it's still called vigilantism. When the 'victim' takes the law into their own hands they become a vigilante (I'm just stating the dictionary definition)
Bro the fact that the man still calls them “gentlemen” after they almost rob his car just shows he has lots of respect.
too much! thugs aren’t gentlemen. they’re just men.
@@alisklar They're not even men.
They're punks
@@alisklar
Animals
Too much respect
I bet he won't call them gentlemen off camera
Crazy time when a victim has to be so careful not to be punished by the system. These laws only put law abiding citizens, women and children in danger.
You can blame Democrats for that
Well American voted for that
@@snehalkrishnan618 jewish activists*
yep.
women should be the biggest proponent for Guns since it is a force equalizer.
Bad guys having guns is why good guys need to have guns.
It is just ridiculous how much protection criminals have, and how little protection innocent citizens have.
yes and I am convinced that it's intentional.
There should be something akin to qualified immunity for actions taken against aggressors.
Remember, itvictim
This is all by design. Look at South Africa. That is our future.
Yup and the sad part is that the US has more protection for citizens over criminals than most other countries but it still isn’t enough. For example I live in Canada and we pretty much can’t defend ourselves from criminals legally, castle laws don’t exist, the strict gun laws basically make it impossible to have a firearm readily available for self defence and you aren’t even allowed to defend yourself in your own home without breaking any laws. I heard a story of a man who’s wife was raped at knife point in his own bed and he shot the guy and went to jail because he didn’t use “equal force” meaning if he killed the guy with a knife he would have been okay legally… it’s a joke.
I’m baffled with the fact that because he was hired to drive them it became him inviting them into his car is no longer covered under castle law…once they tried to carjack him the invite should have no longer been in effect as a form of protection for a freaking criminal…where is his right to protect himself at that point?
Exactly 💯
I can pretty much guarantee that they did not order the ride.
Pretty sure castle law would be restored if they were invited under false pretense.
That said, someone would have to be exceedingly stupid to order a ride linked to their own account.
Edit: Watching further in, I find it odd that the lawyer confirms that castle doctrine is voided by the invite, despite the false pretense.
Exactly what I was thinking. Under the pretense of using Lyft services.They became unwelcome as soon as the assault began.
Its disgusting that A victim has to walk on egg shell , watch what you say, and have a lawyer , for being assaulted and defending yourself
Lyft would rather their drivers get shot to death than defend themselves against violent criminals.
Hey, they aren't real employees, just subcontractors.
And the polticans are quick to make any kind of shooting “political” is also disgusting
What is disgusting are people who use "self defense" as an excuse to murder people and escalate a situation that didn't need to be escalated.
If you are trained to use a weapon, you should also be trained on when not to use it. And that will always be tested. Because this is not a game.
If you don't understand that every bullet carries with it a lawyer, then you DO NOT carry. Period. And if you go to prison for it, you will never carry again. So the system does work after all.
@@HalkerVeil Are you not disgusted enough by the robber that you'd say good riddance if he was deceased? That's the immediate instinct that I get. Like, good, he'll never put someone through that level of stress again. He's put down. Like the dog he is. Why does he deserve any level of decency after thinking that was something he could get away with?
@@HalkerVeil me using self defense as an excuse to shoot someone who pulled a "gun" to the back of my head. He forfeit his life in this act, so be it
What a joke this country has become. Can't legally protect yourself in your own vehicle.
Almost as big of a joke as that 2nd amendment thing turned out to be.
@@biff3917 If you want nobody to have guns, good luck having the absolute hell of armed assailants starting to shank people like happens in other countries that have banned them. No guns doesn't stop people from having weapons or using anything they can find as a weapon.
You type simpletons never look at the bigger scope of the matter. We are not in the Wild West and even then they frowned on shooting anybody “in the back”.
At least you have some rights! Come and live in the UK,we can't even carry pepper spray,it's considered a firearm 🙄 and if a burglar or home invader breaks into your home, you are legally not allowed to touch or defend yourself and family from said intruder/intruders. It's disgusting. Saying that,if someone did break into my home it'll be the biggest mistake of their lives. F the UK and it's pathetic nanny state laws.
oh but he can and did
From a police officer… hats off to you brother. Thanks for carrying and keeping yourself safe.
Sure
Uber doesn't allow us to carry !!! My husband still does when driving and figures it's better to be alive and get fired than die cause Uber is dumb.
Police would rather clean a mess after the fact than stop an active crime. Too many people think they can depend on the police state for their protection
@@joshmanwaring3848this is a really dumb statement
@@joshmanwaring3848this is the dumbest statement ever
Nice to see a good guy fight back.
Annnd not see him charged with a bogus crime by an overzealous rookie officer.
@@Misfit-from-Zanti often times its not the officer, it's the prosecutor(s) looking to make an example of someone.
Yeah, the white man needs to stand up!
And then be prosecuted by scum bag DA who only cares about their own political gain, and FU to everyone else. District Attorneys are evil.
@@Slay_No_More Very true, its not over yet..... The commie takeover can't have us fighting back.
So if the criminal tricks you into letting them in it counts as ‘inviting them’ and their safe? WTF
My best guess is specifically "castle doctrine" doesn't apply, but a different "self defense" will. You have to comprehend courts are a giant, "private corporation" , bond harvesting program. Words mean everything.
No, it doesn't. Just delete the video. Lmao
@@sk1ll_z1lla82 that's never worked for anyone but Killary.
I guess we could call that "vampire doctrine", castle doctrine's sworn enemy!
Moral of the story is don't be an uber/lyft driver sacrificial pawn.
This angers me so much that someone being attacked has to also think about not committing a crime at the same time. It's a joke that appeases to criminals. We need a reverse in policies in this country.
Amen to that
Blah blah blah
@@grey6063 That's a really intelligent reply.
Doesn't matter what you think he is pressing into your neck, you had every right to open fire to defend yourself in this situation.
He wanted you to think it was a gun. Treat it like a gun.
NOPE…. Attorney!!!! If you invite a person in your home or car or not… once they attack you and you’ve put in a life threatening situation… according to ALL states you are allowed to protect yourself! And in a state that has the castle doctrine you are legally allowed to blast them in your car! Store owners, banks etc invite customers in their stores and can shoot the bad guy!
The attorney needs to freshen up on the law!
Good thing the one in the back seat that got his knife didn't decide to stab him in the neck...I would say in hindsight don't put a knife where the criminal can use it against you. That was a really scary moment. Thank God he's ok
Probably, though the legal battle is less difficult and costly with no shots to account for.
They ran away when he was able to reach the weapon. So...no you can't "open fire" at that point in time.
I have a family friend who was murdered while driving for Uber in California.
I’m glad this man had a weapon and was able to protect himself.
So what what does that have to do with this
@@mikehaverstick321 I thought about trying to explain the obvious relevance to you, but I worry that it's a waste of time. so instead, I'll just leave you this: 🤡
@@mikehaverstick321 Wow, nit very bright are you.
@@mikehaverstick321 The victim in this was an uber driver or taxi driver of some sort lol :,D
Sorry to hear….
He needs to be a Law of self defense platinum member. He is aware of the five elements of self defense: Innocence, Avoidance, Imminence, Reasonableness, Proportionality.
He is a hero. He did fight back. I can't help but be a little leary of the fact that now his name and where he's from is plastered all over social media as well as how many guns he carries and where he usually has them in the car. NEVER reveal your secrets.
*Exactly! I was **_stunned_** that the interviewer (a former police officer) would ask and then publish this information… smh*
*With ‘friends’ like that, who needs enemies?*
@@handynothandsome261 Indeed
That is what I was thinking. 😶
How about, if you know if I’m ready/prepared, you don’t see me as an easy mark?🤔
@@polarfunk1756 Let me say this louder for those in the back..ahem..NEVER reveal your secrets.
This man showed mercy on these guys making terrible decisions in their lives. What a man.
Yeah, I doubt I would've been able to stop myself from ending them in that situation.
He made a big mistake. If that was a real gun he would have been dead for not emptying the clip into them when he had the chance!
@@ihanak8814 mistake ?? 😂 GTFOH . DID U WATCH IT ?? THE 2 SHITBAGS MADE THE MISTAKE HOMEBOY
@@VikingKong. well then you'd be in prison.
Systemic Jungle fever
This dude is clearly super level headed. Love to see it.
Love how this dude handled that situation especially when he knew they were no longer a threat to him. I just hope those two punks learn from that close call and are never a threat to anyone else.
Nope.
They're now emboldened and have learned what they did wrong. Next time they will be more efficient.
Well ,they screamed like little girls once the table was turned , So generally speaking they are good and quick thinking to play whatever role is required for the little demons to win .
Unlikely
They will not. Unfortunately, bad luck to the next person who’s gonna be hurt.
Easy answer. They. Won't.
This story sucks. Wish he would’ve taken out the trash. The sad thing is they guys will do it again and the next victim might not be so lucky.
Yep, and after that experience of a victim fighting back, those criminals probably will get a gun when they try to rob the next victim.
Host said once you drop the hammer it changes things.....you might end up get packed out and trash taken out
Lucky for what? They didn't have a firearm. He's the only one who did.
@@neutrino78x they will still try to rob people weapon or not. Think logically man, no matter what they will get brave to do it again, maybe next time they will actually use something. History proves how criminals progress. They could’ve been stopped for good though…
@@neutrino78xhe’s saying the next victim might not be able to stop themselves from being robbed.
You can tell the guy is intelligent and knows self defense just by how he carries himself
If you're on a jury because a person killed a criminal , sit, listen and vote not guilty no matter what. Even if the criminal was trying to flee. That's the only way these prosecutors will get the message. not guilty!
Absolutely right you have these Nimrod libtards that are going to do the opposite no matter what but the good news is they're taking their clot shot and boosters they won't be breeding or voting much longer!
Agreed
It's the only way to even the garbage coming out of our justice system.
@MichaelWooten-ml5fx sure right about that I'm sick of it!
Amen!
If you have a CCW and no shots were fired why would you need to be disarmed for "their safety"?
In many places, you can only brandish a gun if you are in imminent danger of grave physical harm. In some ways it's easier to justify pulling a gun if you shoot at someone. Although practically that also means even more legal trouble.
@@catocall7323 es2984 is talking about the cops taking his firearm at the gas station after this incident... and the reason for that is the cops don't know what is going on in the moment. With the cops on scene it's best if they are the only ones with the guns. If somebody starts shooting, it is easier to identify who the good and bad guys are. That way no good guy citizens pulls a gun to help the cops but then gets shot by the cops because they have a gun out shooting.
@@catocall7323Yet police can point guns at virtually anybody they perceive might possibly try to harm them.I saw bodycam video of cops mag dumping a guy in a wheelchair as he rolled away from them.
@@BrooklynBallabad cops don't make any personal sacrifices. Hell If you know a cop, you're likely to know somebody that's killed somebody.
The fact he did everything by the book....didn't shoot anyone in the back, but still feels the need to take his Lawyer to the interview shows how messed up the justice system is and he's not taking any chances.
It’s a shame that when you’re in the midst of defending your life, that you have to question everything you’re doing. Am I in the right here, can I legally shoot, did I invite these criminals into my car. Hamstringing yourself to a higher standard than the criminal. When 70 yrs ago no one required this! Thanks you damn lawyers!
wasnt the lawyers its the people who voted for this.
Jews as in every other country
Don't blame lawyers, blame democrats.
Blame the politicians and judges, they apply the rules
i don't see anything wrong with keeping checks on ones self. This isn't Africa where life doesn't matter.
Dude had way more restraint than I would’ve.
Absolutely one of them was gone if it was me.
I was lettn em hum
video looks kinda staged... are they promoting not using our guns? seems like some kind of propaganda on a BIG yt channel. the guy behind him put the cellphone gun on him and he looked to the side instead of worrying about the gun and sticking his hands up
@@SirPraiseSunthere's nothing about this video that looks staged. People react differently under these situations. He was looking to the side because there was another person on the side of him. It's alot easier to pay attention to the threat infront of you instead of behind you. He could already assume what the hell was behind him so there was no point in looking behind lol
Bro I own 5, and I can tell you're being schizophrenic. The government can barely wipe it's own ass. Let alone stage a false flag. @@SirPraiseSun
The fact that he stayed so calm during this is absolutely insane. And the fact that getting a gun pointed at you isn’t enough to fire back legally is crazy
This guy chose not to fire because the guy immediately stopped trying to attack him and fled as soon as he pointed the weapon- which was probably the right decision, legally speaking. I don't think the robber actually had a gun, just something he could shove into the victim's back to make him think it's a gun. Either way, in most jurisdictions I know of you are permitted to use lethal force if you have a reasonable expectation that someone might kill or maim you, which would include them trying to make you think they have a gun to your back.
Dude almost took the room temperature challenge using his cellphone as a pretend gun. This is right up there with bad decisions like that guy who tried robbing the taco shop with a toy gun. Fortunately for these two clows, this guy has a cooler head than most. There's a very real chance I would've pulled the trigger and I'm confident that I'm not alone in that sentiment.
Great story. However, I found the most disturbing part of the story was the victim's reference to the two scum bags as "gentlemen."
@@svbarryduckworth628 no.
I caught that too. Lawyer-speak for on-camera recording
@SV Barry Duckworth no its just we live in too polite of a society. I've seen it over and over, the vicitim tends to call the criminals gentlemen, but not for the purpose of being ironic, and rather for the purpose of being polite. It's a sickness.
I didn't notice any particular inflection in his voice when he said "gentlemen," nor did he use quotations (finger quotes) or anything else to suggest he was purposing irony. He was serious. He was being polite. It's not an uncommon thing unfortunately here in America anyway.
It's based on real definitions, not common use definitions.
It would be funny if someone did a Samuell Jackson version of this interview. I guarantee he wouldn't call them "gentlemen."
Shouldve played the old movie that the kid plays in home alone to ward off the burglars: "im gonna give ya till the count of 10, to get your lousy, yella.."
Keep in mind that there are politicians who don't want people to be able to defend themselves in a situation like this.
I’m keeping mine I don’t care what these pandering politicians say!
Lots of them… One whole party is the party for politicians like the ones you’re suggesting.
Exactly, Cops are an extension of Politicians Ideology.. Don't Talk to Cops without an Attorney,...........Never.
@@IronCavalier I'll say it. Democrats
Guess what in my country we won’t have that gun issue - fix your culture issues on each side
So normal people like us can be left alone
This guy has amazing restraint! Praises to him for maintaining calm and handling the situation the way he did.
$3000 this was staged!!
@@JimmyCrackCorn_ this is a thought that came to mind. I sure would like to know for sure. I'm not really interested in gambling. can you provide some hard evidence? I'll then make a donation I feel appropriate 😎
@@JimmyCrackCorn_I've got proof.
Pay up mofo!
3:13 -- "Once the gentleman behind me popped my seat belt off..." Don't forget that he's a scholar too.
Scott did everything right except talking to police without an attorney, but I'm glad it all worked out for him. They didn't say whether or not the attackers were caught.
Well he did have clear video footage documenting the entire event within his personal vehicle, that in all by itself removed all doubt that it was, in fact, a clear indication of self defense with factual evidence admissable in court. Easy win.
He had something pressed in the back of his neck and had every reasonable belief his life was in danger.
@@TheShopGrandOpening Yes, like I wrote, it all worked out. But as his attorney stated, our memory in the immediate aftermath of a life and death event can be faulty. You always want to err on the side of caution and, if possible, have your attorney review camera footage before turning it over to police (yes, in this case police were checking the car for fingerprints and probably would have noticed the camera). You also want to give yourself time before making a statement, like the 72-hour rule that cops get when they shoot someone. It lets you collect your thoughts and make sense of what you witnessed, including refreshing your memory with other evidence like camera footage. It is NEVER smart to talk to police without a lawyer except to give your personal info and to say that you were the defender & the other person was the aggressor.
@@TheShopGrandOpening Video was huge benefit for Scott.
*STATISTICALLY, THEY WERE ALREADY CAUGHT AND LET OUT WITHOUT IT BEING KNOWN THEY WERE THE PERPETRATORS OF THIS EVENT*
ol narrator voice. Foreal tho. Incompetence
He’s the victim so the police would treat him as the victim. As a victim you don’t need an attorney to talk to the police. You’re so misguided about the police it shows in your comments. Woke movements and people like yourself is why he felt the need to have an attorney.
If only citizens had the same qualified immunity as cops do
Citizens don't work for the government and behalf of all of us. Citizens typically move away from danger, officers are required to move towards danger and stop the threat.
@@JasonMW45 except Texas cops.
@@JasonMW45 Cops move away from danger more than citizens, guy. The SCOTUS ruled that the police have no duty to protect us from violence.
@thystaff742 actually if you want to have any police officers at all, I'd suggest providing some legal protection for them
@thystaff742 so you'll be responding to the next armed robbery, violent armed domestic situation, active shooter etc?
The reality on planet earth is the police do 100 times more good than bad.
It’s ridiculous he has to even explain himself at all especially with video, once those guys demonstrated true intent to harm he should be able to defend himself in any means necessary
A very unhappy ending: neither of the two thugs was shot.
He's safe and not facing charges. Grow up
^ so it’s a *partial* happy ending, sure. But if the bad guys don’t go to prison for a long time, then it’s not a full happy ending (I haven’t finished the video yet).
Thou shall not kill
@@byronfoppola8676says who? A god who killed many children because of their parents mistakes? religion is for the weak.
@@byronfoppola8676The correct literal translation is,”Thou shalt not commit murder.” Killing two dangerous criminals who are robbing you is a public service, not murder.
Two very important questions I really want to know
1. Did they catch them?
2. Did Lyft terminate you?
Me too!! Great questions
Kinda dumb there's no attempt to offer closure
i came here to ask these questions
In all fairness, this may be something that they couldn't talk about if the investigation is still going on (both the police's and Lyft's.)
@@psmith2403 C'mon bro this ain't James Bond stuff. 2 F**kin Retards tried to Carjack this guy.. Really think Detectives are on the case? 🤣Cops don't give a F**k. . Carry Concealed Firearms Protect Yourself, My Neighbor was beating up his Girl in the driveway. The Cops showed up 37 minutes after I called, 😂
At 10:30 pm after youalmost get car jacked.... call the police... where in this time does one have an attorney on speed dial to run through your statement with??? Any takers on this?
Make consequences for dirtbags popular again.
Mama gonna say Tyrone was a good boy.
imagine the headlines that would have been put out . Then the black families would have been in an uproar about the black guy not having a gun but instead a phone . Blessing to this Uber driver ❤
Glad to hear you're alright Scott! This was an excellent, eye-opening example of what can happen out there. Stay safe out there everyone!
I hate to say it but we need this guys like this on the police force. Level headed even in the face of death
Why do you hate to say it tho?
Yes, I understand exactly what you mean. After viewing thousands of bodycam videos worn by Law Enforcement in this country, it's clear that very serious reforms are needed to ensure that citizens rights aren't abused by officers who break the law, and aren't held accountable.
I think because if the police was competent enough he wouldn't have to say it @@tomasjenco5609
I'm glad to see you're okay. I saw this and I was saying, give them whatever they want even if it's the car. It's not worth your life. There was an unfortunately similar case where the guy drove a woman to the woods and killed her. Her passenger drove her to the woods and killed her. It was so sad, she was still warm when they found her.
It's those polite and sweet young men who never hurt anyone and who always loved their family at it again.
He whu gone college dis fall, he didnuduffin.
What's the irony in that
@pabnaful500 Some Uber/Lyft drivers put partitions in their cars, originally due to Covid19, but then kept them due to situations like this.
And if anything ever happened to them, they'd be screaming "my baby, my baby! He was such a good boy!"
@@chris2790that's right, heez wuz such a good Boi
At what point do we stop reporting things like this? I can’t imagine it will be long before criminals are left for dead in the streets unreported.
We can only hope
A family member of mine did just this. Robbed at gunpoint, ended up gaining the upperhand and inflicted deadly injuries on the perp. Did not report anything and never heard anything about it.
I think its time 😊
@@Goremachinecareful what you say on the interwebs. Good for them though.
Exactly! What sense does it make to call organized criminals to go after the common ones. If you handled the situation as best you could, move along without inviting more risk.
Remember to double tap 'urban youths'.
Scott, the physical handling of the gun in a life or death, potentially, situation needs to happen on autopilot, because your active attention must be reserved for the situational assessment. This saved my life. No fumbling or gun-handling distractions. This is the core of "practice".
The first thing he said wrong was that he didn’t know what was being pressed against him. Until you know otherwise, it’s absolutely a gun. Anyone willing to put you in that position has to be assumed to have a gun.
And quite honestly, I would not talk about this until I know for sure that I am not facing any legal consequences.
He’s saying that in hindsight after knowing it wasn’t a gun. I’m sure he thought it was a gun in the moment
@@RealNaisuCinema That's what the perp was expecting him to think, that it was a gun. That's why if he shot the guy nobody would charge him. We'd all expect it was a gun.
@@RealNaisuCinema yes, I understand that, but my point is maintain that narrative, even after the fact. Words like that can be used against you.
@@oneisnone7350 IN MY VIEW/ Somehow I imagine if this man had actually been shot to death you probably would say "The good news is the victim avoided saying anything that could have been used against him."
@@RealNaisuCinema I’m saadmhksll lindo 14:47 I’ll
17:07 No shots fired yet still they 👮♂️ disarmed the carjacking victim of BOTH his lawful firearms⁉️
🙄WTAF 👮♂️
likely [🐂💩] excuse:
"For officer safety"
I say this as someone who "back the Blue till it happens to you"
was threatened by a 🗑️👮♂️ dirty cop with being shot until dead-
IF I tried to call 911 again for a Sgt/Deputy (1st 911 call was about his GF trying to steal my sports car 📬📄 title)-
With total impunity claiming fear for office safety I will say "I though the cellphone was a firearm so I was forced to fire my sidearm until he stopped being a threat/ 💯☠️"
He then continued to order the keys to be transferred to his GF while holding his gun in a threatening manner.
When I declined he said he could arrest me for resisting (carjacker W badge arrest?) and she'd get the keys left behind anyway.
City attorney and his PD made me sue them in civil court while they took stolen 📬 title from Police evidence and sold/ transferred my car out of state. I was left holding the replacement title for a sport car that was MIA!
This might not be a super popular opinion but huge kudos to the Lyft driver for not shooting the escaping criminals in the back. Very clear thinking and understood that the threat had passed. Respect.
Nope. That’s a crime that would have landed the driver in jail. Not my opinion, just ask any lawyer you know (it’s covered in law school curriculums).
@@TheGoodLifeStarterPackdumb comment , we all know it's illegal but also how many people can be clear thinking in this scenario
@@TheGoodLifeStarterPackabsolutely crooked that you must exchange your liberty for your life, i thought we were guaranteed both
@@joshmanwaring3848 It's called the law. Have a problem with it? Come up with $100K racks and lobby your local, state, and federal representatives 💅
I applaud you, Scott, and how you mainted self-control and was able to diligently process the situation 🙌
Play stupid games win stupid prizes
Don’t ever say “I wasn’t sure what it was” say “I believed it was a gun and I feared for my life”.
Exactly.
Scott... so sorry to hear this tragedy happened to you. Glad to hear you are ok and that you will be celebrating one more Father's Day with your family today. Scott mentioned playing the "what if game". I do that all the time - when I'm walking down the street and when I carry at any time. I have always done that and I was also reminded of that in my CC class. Thank you Scott for practicing your Second Amendment rights and thank you to you so much also to Amy for giving such great advice. I learned something today. I need to look further into membership with USCCA, too. Update: I just joined USCCA!
That was quick thinking, not to open fire seeing that they were fleeing. I guarantee those guys will think twice about doing this again, seeing their lives flashed before their eyes. Smh.
Without sounding like a keyboard warrior I’m about 90% sure I would have immediately shot while they were still facing me. And I’m 100% sure he would of been justified
Murder is not the response to theft
@@byronfoppola8676 it wasn’t theft. He was pretending to hold a gun to the back of his head you momo
You would MURDER some young kids that are forced to do petty harmless crime just to survive from the government? MONEY CAN BE REPLACED YOUNG MISGUIDED HUMAN LIVES CANNOT BE
@@byronfoppola8676 if they’re pointing a gun at you, it is
@@KristinkaAranova no, the bible is clear.
Lucky the criminal didn't notice and retrieve the handgun from the door panel.
That's what i was thinking!
@@ib1ray put ur self in the robbers position, it’s dark and ur not gonna look into a door panel while wrestling with the driver cmon be a little smarter
@@barackosamabinladen8180 Experts recommend keeping your weapon on your body genius for this exact reason, also accidents are a thing, genius. Where do you think that gun is going if you hit another car?
@@barackosamabinladen8180 I'd also like to remind you that a lot of these criminals have done this many times. If they were a first time offender, I might believe they are scared... but somebody that has done this many times isn't going to be nearly as scared...
I don’t understand some of these laws man, they protect the criminal more than the victim. Yes he invited them in to his car, but as a rideshare not to rob him. At what point again is it ok to protect yourself? That’s just plain idiotic.
Then when he got to his gun he still didn’t know what the guy in the back seat was pressing against him. If it had been a gun there probably would’ve been shots fired by either or both sides…? Luckily for him and the criminals he was able to keep his wit’s in check. Seems like the exception not the rule.
Wait, so when you get robbed, instead of calling the cops people should call an attorney first? This is ridiculous!
That's how it has always been. If you don't like it, you can leave.
You can call the police to report the incident and not make a statement. I've always heard that if you do have to shoot someone once the police show up to put down your gun and shut up. Anything you say can and will be used against you. Honestly if I was in that guys position IDK if I would even call the cops. No one got shot and nothing was stolen, why even involve them when it can only get yourself in trouble.
@@mattkaydus7973- *Because if the robbers call the cops first, YOU could be the one being arrested and charged for assault with a deadly weapon.*
*Luckily this guy had video.*
Yes, you absolutely should call your attorney first. They will then call the cops and tell them where you are and what happened. They can not use the words of the attorney against you and they know what things to say and what things not to say. Then when the police get there tell them that you are willing to answer questions but not until your attorney gets there. Then be quiet and don't say anything unless it's run through your attorney first.
Why does someone who was being robbed by assailants need to hire an attorney???
NOW THAT IS A FINE QUESTION. IN A GOOD & LAWFUL SOCIETY, HE WOULD NOT HAVE TO. BUT HE DOES TODAY.
Bcuz America is messed up rn
It’s a clown world
If you listen to the video and have any common sense you should be able to understand why!
@@Asidebarthis is why we can’t LAWFULLY protect ourselves because of people like you putting up so much red tape that it’s to the point of there is no self defense. Actual Logic dictates that if you feel your life is in danger you have the right to defend yourself and shouldn’t even need a lawyer to defend what is RIGHTFULLY self defense…. PERIOD! Pisses me off seeing people like you post 💩.
I was holding a guy at gun point who broke into my garage and accidentally shot him. I had him lying on the ground with his arms and legs spread. I warned him not to move. My wife was standing behind me on the phone with police dispatch. The guy suddenly jumped up. I jerked back and when I did the gun discharged into his shoulder and he ran off. Good thing he ran away and not after me because my pistol jammed after the first shot. The only thing that kept me from being arrested was my neighbors camera caught everything; even audio. That was a little embarrassing though. It was four thirty in the morning and I was standing outside in the rain in just my underwear holding this guy at gun point until the police arrived; ten minutes later. I told myself I’d never point a gun at someone agin. Three days later I was holding a gun on a guy while a police officer was handcuffing him. I hate guns. 🤷♂️
I only care if he literally destroyed them otherwise I'm sick and tired of these words being used to supposedly make somebody feel bad on the Internet. And of course one of the defining attributes is always true
Good story to tell. Level headed thinking. He didn't need to shoot and have to answer for that.
Im no lawyer but who would blame him?
@@brucewayne4483 sadly the liberal prosecuters
@@rickhadley1976 Jews and their useful minorities*
Risking your life for money is crazy
He didn’t blast those guys. People like him are a huge part of the problem.
The chance that these two individuals will engage in a life long criminal career is likely, would have made society a huge service and avoided a lot of innocent suffering by taking out the trash
The problem is that he would have shot them in the back because they immediately ran away like cowards... The driver would have then been charged with murder...
I know a really good guy who had a really bad past that used to do some really stupid stuff. He got clean and stopped the nonsense and now has a daughter. If someone killed him his wife would never have met him and her daughter would not be born. I've looked into her eyes, she is absolutely beautiful and completely innocent. It's hard to describe the innocent look in a child's eyes but it is like unreal. Instant eternity in there. The real question is : Do you believe a person can change?
@@ib1ray Yep
The only mistake he made was not wasting both of them.
@blackbriarwolf Using a phone. No keyboard. Not at war, either. :)
I don't know where this happened, but if he was anywhere besides Texas, he would be punished worse than the criminal.
@@Thepringler1 Not true. Many states have Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine statutes. Here in Missouri you’d be 100% justified.
This Man is a good person....in spite of. SMH some entities are just filth, no good, low- down rats...always trying to sneak and take and scatter.
That whole explanation of the castle doctrine is wild. Imagine threatening someones' life in their property and the owner cannot use the castle doctrine just because they started as a behaving guest.
Attorney gave good explanation on why his vehicle was not castle doctrine. However, the video was evidence he had the right to defend himself from the THUGS!
@@Asidebar - Right. Castle Doctrine is just a more narrowly encompassing form of self defense but not a requirement.
it isnt wild at all. you can defend against a threat end of story. you invite someone into your home the same would apply. lets be honest most peopel here want to see revenge not defence. when we get to that point the criminals will just start shooting first and the criminal always has the advantage of the ambush
@@warrenpeasIf the criminals want a war then we should give them a war. The criminal doesn't fear the police nor the judge, so then we should teach him to fear his victim.
@@farzana6676 criminals also dont vote and these judges and law makers are elected by voters. our justice system is a reflection of us voters to a big degree. example: why dont we have huge prison sentences for all felonies commited with a gun? we all agree its the criminals using the guns to commit crimes so why even in a state like montana that has the most conservative voters the wont just vote for 20 yr minimum for any felony with a gun?
Most people shake shi*less and aren’t able to do nothing, but this guy… what a boss
3:10 - "once the gentleman behind me...".
That's a lot of respect considering the situation, but I guess he is also keeping it respectful so his comments can't be used against him for his self-defense allegation.
The statement about the "castle doctrine" not applying to the car because the intruders were "invited in" is a stretch. There are a lot of home invasions where someone has the door opened by the homeowner, and everything goes south from there. If the intruders are in your house, it doesn't matter HOW they got there, it's the principle of defending yourself in these situations is what really matters.
Your argument unfortunately is legally dubious.
Castle doctrine is irrelevant. It was an armed assault against his person and he was fearing for his life.
@@ElCid70 Yes, but since the subject was brought up, the lawyers comment made no sense.
having your home door open and a vehicle that is used for public transpiration are entirely different. Your comparison is meritless.
@@ElCid70 what law school did you attend to make that WRONG options.
The biggest reason, in my opinion, every person should take a concealed carry course is to understand the rights (you don't have) to protect yourself. People would be astonished how many people are attacked, and escape, only to have the assailants call 911 and cry for help. There's a lot to know and it's never a good thing to fight for your innocence behind bars (and that's how it works most of the time).
You don't need to take a concealed course to know your rights. That should be taught in schools across the country about our rights and the Constitution, yet that has been taken out cause they want absolute rule and compliance.
😂😂😂 Not here in Florida. We are good here
I keep a pamphlet of the constitution in my car at all times.
It happened to me. I was attacked by a guy with a butcher knife. He called 911 and said I attacked him.
Even though the "gentlemen" were invited into his car, once the individual in the back seat feigned pressing a gun against the driver's neck, couldn't he reasonably fear for his life? And when he exited the vehicle, wouldn't it be reasonable to believe that he would be shot as they stole his car? So wouldn't it be reasonable to at that time to just turn and shoot the individual that's in the car "with the gun" before he has a chance to shoot you? Could the driver do that? Or would he be charged with manslaughter???
I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST AS YOU APPROACH A PICK UP TO UNLOCK YOUR SEAT BELT AT ALL TIMES SO TO BE READY FOR THIS TYPE OF SITUATION,MY OPINION
And have your own door locked.
@@robertbarnum7541 AMEN BROTHER
best thing to do is when you see 'their kind' to drive away
@@Sercer25 Thugs like that with mask on drive away.
The castle doctrine being removed by “invited them in.” pisses me off. They’re clearly automatically disinvited when they begin to attack and came for the reason of attacking which is other than why they were invited in.
Good to know that possibility thou so now we must be extra careful with who we invite in
Yeah, I'm not sure about that. Customers were invited in, however these guys were not customers so there's that.
If you get carjacked first thing you do is called a lawyer that shouldn't cost much should it it's not a lose-lose situation is it maybe we'll get lucky and Russia will take over the United States the penalty for that and Russia is death so it just don't happen over there
Why would he call his potential carjackers " gentlemen " ?!?
It looks really good to a jury if the victim doesn't show demonstrable malice towards his attackers. This could be used against him by the attorneys of the prosecutor or the attackers to show that he wanted that fight, and wanted to kill them. That he specifically put himself in that position to use his weapon. It is the same reason why having "punisher" emblems and such is a really bad idea if you ever have to use your weapon.
@@dampsok Sorry, I'm a retired police officer, and what he said would never make any sense in any court. He would prove they weren't enough of a threat to make him call them anything else, but " gentlemen ", which would make any jury question his decision to pull out his gun..or any type of weapon
@@markhoffman4587 That would be a very dunce jury. One look at the video would make any sane person agree that he had every right to pull his gun. Calling them gentlemen or thugs don't change what they were seen doing in the video. Ever heard the saying "a rose by any other name....." ?
@@pargolf3158 A Rose is not committing crimes, and that's it, it's just a Rose. Not sure how not just calling them " suspects ", or " subjects ", or just using their names wouldn't be better than calling them " gentlemen "...but I guess all the training and schooling, and real life experiences I've went through were all for nothing, and these amazing gentlemen were just trying to be like ROSES
@@bingbong7 Now you're imagining things I've never said...and I'm not surprised
I hope the driver realized that leaving his gun in the door panel is a bad idea because if the criminal that swung the door open noticed the gun, this story would have had a different outcome 😕. And now that this story is out there, I hope all drivers don't make the same mistake, or they too would have a different outcome.
where he had the gun worked. Recall that thug took a knife out his pocket. Best thing is not to let masked thugs get close.
@@Asidebar the thug in the car took the knife. I am talking about the thug outside the car that open the door. He could have taking the gun if he would have seen it. That being said, and like I said earlier, if the thug that open the door and saw the gun, you don't think he would have taking it like the thug inside the car that took the knife? I rest my case
Dude is really lucky these mofos didnt get his car, gun or his life. Im not gonna say what shouldve happened to these pos scumb@gz but were all thinkin it. Plus im sure next victim may not be so lucky.
@@TLhike facts
Props to the driver. Too many comments second guessing him. Running on fear. The reality was the guys focused on the driver, the items on his body, & to remove him from the car. The readily available firearm is what worked.
He had enough data to confirm they were no longer a threat. End of story.
To be quiet frank i am totally pleasantly surprised the police didn't ask guilt seeking questions to thes man...very pleasantly surprised!
The guy in car would’ve been a 💀 mf
😊
When he said the moment they ran away, the moment they were no longer a viable threat. Those words right there tell me that he truly studied martial arts. A good instructor will teach you from day 01. This not about kicking ass. It is about self defense.
Absolutely as well as self control :) Speaking as a BB in TWD & trained in Krav Maga.
video looks kinda staged... are they promoting not using our guns? seems like some kind of propaganda on a BIG yt channel.
This was crazy! He kept his focus and did not panic. Amazing!
Great story and great outcome. The only question I have is - were the firearms returned right then or did it take an act of Congress to get back? (slight exaggeration)
I wondered that too
This attorney, unless different in other states, is completely wrong in regards to the castle doctrine. An invited guest can turn aggressor and become uninvited at any time. Doesnt matter if he let them in.
He would have been justified 100% to send them to the Shadow Realm
Good man there! Much respect for him and his obvious grasp of the risks and rewards of his profession.
Why do u refer to the backseat punk as a "gentleman?!" He does NOT meet the criteria, dude!🙄
My question... If you thought the guy in the car had a weapon (wasn't sure about it til after the situation), because he pressed it against your back, why didn't you shoot if there could've been a possibility of the bad guy In the car having a gun?
Watch the video jackass. Its in there
Scott gave explanation on why he didn't;t shoot them, try listening to the video and use common sense.
I think he said to avoid shooting the back-seat guy in the back because by the time he got it together with the gun the back-seat guy's back was facing him. In the video it looked like the gun was pointed at the carjacker's face but apparently the driver wasn't ready to shoot.
Great job being calm, and to keep thinking in a high stress situation.
The Carjackers ran away so they were no longer a threat. Unfortunately they definitely will be a threat to their next victim's.
Thats crazy asf and I total respect the patience he had to not pull the trigger. Not sure If I would do the same with all that adrenaline but hopefully they learned their lesson.
This video is proof that gun owners are not just angry men looking for an excuse.
They’re responsible and Choose life if given the chance by a deadly criminal.
throw that camera away inside your car you still got to get a lawyer thousands of dollars the lady just said there going to try to use that camera against you we're talkin about the victim Bizarro world
Glad it went well. In CA everything is in reverse.
Dang
My biggest fear of being the victim from reckless, violent, and physically intimidating people is to get caught sitting in the driver's seat of my car while they try to take me hostage or force me out of the car. As someone who only drives a personal vehicle alone, that is why I ALWAYS lock those doors first and pay attention to the surroundings. Remember, appearances can be deceiving.
Kudos to all the Lyft and Uber drivers that lawfully conceal carry a handgun with adequate training. You never know when you might need to take action. Sometimes inaction leads to failure. A failure that might be permanent.
If it were me, I don’t think I would have revealed where I keep my firearms in my vehicle. Keep the element of surprise on your side.
I would never hire this woman to be my attorney
@@LC-xu5qf She explanation what the laws is there! She is a good attorney. Just because you have no law degree and fail to comprehend what the law is do not claim her legal definition is ridiculous.