@robertgraham This is an inaccurate statement. You can't invoke the 5th as a blanket statement. It only protects you from self incrimination. You would be required to answer non-incriminating questions or face possible obstruction charges.
@KurtSchlichter@MCCCANM What fucking benefit? A viral clip? Fly the water in a direction where if there is a malfunction the crowd isn't at risk.FAA rules are written by blood.
Here's some more "dramatic video": The Sknyliv air show disaster of 2002. A Su-27ย fighter crashed directly into a densely packed spectator area after losing control during an unauthorized low-altitude maneuver. 77 killed. 500 injured.
@thevivafrei We all justifiably acknowledge pointing a gun at someone, even when we are certain it is unloaded, is a reasonable precaution.
I don't understand why we don't apply that same logic to flying a jet at low altitude over a densely populated beach.
@thestinkeye I hate that clip. Everyone see a cool viral video. I see a risk vs. reward scenario. Cool viral video at the risk of a mass casualty even.
Any chance this was an error or was it 100% intentional?
@Steven_Swenson@NatetheLawyer I tend to lean towards self defense too based on what we see. But what we see starts with the gun already beeing out. It would take additional evidence, but it is possible that drawing a gun unnecessarily is provocation, which would loose self defense.
@GoodCitizebimg@NatetheLawyer I've already conceded that there is a deparity in size and that would go to her case of self defense. Don't know why you need to assume I'm a raging racist right off the rip.
@Steven_Swenson@NatetheLawyer I can't even try to defend the way the man handled the situation. Totally moronic. But the argument could be her pulling the gun caused him to fear for his life and he acted. It's similar to how they are prosecuting the chud the builder case.