My friend Annalise from Chicago has impeccable style. She regularly chooses to accessorize with a variety of jewelry; some days it’s a striking cocktail ring, others it’s a assortment on both hands. Annalise is the epitome of chill sophistication.

So when I saw your post I immediately thought of her. She’s a brilliant historical archivist and splits time between DC, Chi-Town and LA. I reached out to say hey and see if she was around for the holidays. Sure enough, she said she managed to fly in Saturday after her Friday flight fell through. And I said, let me guess, you were wearing mid-calf boots, mid-thigh length jacket, and dark pants?

She went silent. And then she was like, yeah, that’s almost my exact outfit. Plus she said she was carrying her Bellroy backpack!

That’s when I knew it was her and told her about this post. How there was rhis forlorn tallish guy in the blue hoodie who kept casting sidelong glances and felt her connect with him.

Annalise… she totally remembered you. And had really been hoping you’d come up to her; maybe touch her hand; and say… well, just say anything. Because she’s a strong, decisive woman who can really only open up to that same kind of man. But you didn’t. And so, this.

She wants me to let you know, blue-hooded dude, to always shoot your shot. Otherwise it slips away and into the white noise of 330 million wayward souls drifting about the country like so much wind blown snow.

Maybe though, just maybe, your eyes will discretely meet at some other gate on some other fateful day. She said she would give you a second chance!

Just put your hazards on at 20 mph and you’ll blend right in.

> If safe to do so. Cars are faster than people and it’s hard to retreat if one was accelerating towards you.

He was chasing them. Which, if on the lookout for armed robbers, is certainly not retreat. It’s vigilante justice.

> It doesn’t appear that he fired until the car was already driving towards him. If he was firing at the car when it was initially driving away, I’d agree that his life wasn’t in danger at that time and the shots wouldn’t be lawful.

Did you even watch the video? He shot it after it went by. It’s clear as day in the video. And the holes are in the back of the SUV. Even without the video that’s beyond dispute. Unless they have boomerang bullets now. Do they have boomerang bullets?

> All parties involved seem to agree that the owner mistook the cop for a potential robber intent on robbing the gun store as had been done in multiple recent incidents. A ‘description of the vehicle and direction its is heading” isn’t immediately helpful if you think that vehicle is full of armed robbers intent on robbing you right now.

If you think a vehicle is full of armed robbers that’s the exact moment your duty to retreat begins. You can’t chase after a car you think is full of armed robbers, shoot at them, and claim self-defense. That, and the fact he shot after they had passed, is the exact reason he is in jail with no bond. Your views on the justice system aside. It’s crystal clear textbook first-degree assault.

He has a duty to retreat.

And he can’t claim self-defense when he is chasing someone. See: https://i.imgur.com/exKYYCR.jpg

The police were on a routine patrol. Which is what you would expect them to do on areas of increased criminal activity.

A reasonable person who a suspects there is a robber in the area would call the police, give them a description of the vehicle, and the direction it is heading. At 12:30 in the morning with limited traffic that should be easy enough for them to find it.

As for what you think, it’s irrelevant. A judge has ruled the charges are warranted and that he be held without bail because he is a danger to the community

He does alter his path. He takes two steps to the right while he’s drawing his gun before jumping to the left.

You trying to tell me that the police were trying to run him over and missed? Y’all stretching waaaaay far to reach for something here.

> There are numerous examples around the country of police shooting at cars accelerating at them.

That’s because they are law enforcement, not vigilantes. But that’s pretty irrelevant. Because in this case, the criminal shot as the car accelerated away from them.

No. The interaction started when the gunman started chasing after the vehicle. Then, after the vehicle turned around and tried to leave the site, the gunman intentionally stepped into the path of the vehicle.

Did you watch the video?

The police, conducting routine patrols in areas of increased crime, don’t have to notify anybody of anything. But what, they are supposed to call every employee at odd hours of the morning to let them know they are driving through the lot?

Having met with him in person two days prior, I’m sure they would have said “we’ll be keeping an eye on things.” And the subject of that meeting was a sedan that owner had seen on video acting suspiciously, not an SUV.

The interaction started when the owner started chasing after them on foot. And then tried to step in front of them while drawing a weapon. He’s damn lucky they didn’t straight run his ass over then as they would have been well within their rights to do so at that point.

The owner then fired two shots after they drove by him and were clearly not a threat.

This is supposed to be the model of responsible gun ownership here. That’s what’s comically farcical about this.

If anyone should have called anyone it should have been the owner, letting the police know that he was going to be lurking about outside his building and shooting anything that moved.

What if this had been a random civilian who made a wrong turn? This is why vigilante justice, citizens arrest, 2nd amendment heros don’t work. Just ask these guys.

“Pay attention to your belongings when playing sports.” Hard stop.

I’ve played sports for years, organized and otherwise, all over the US and that’s always been the rule. Anywhere. Forever. None of your rant or anything you’ve just posted has any bearing on that.

• “Increase of theft” << “out of control”
• “Limited manpower” (i.e. ‘we are sorry we can’t post an officer to babysit your bags’) << “criminals aren’t being punished”
• “feeling secure in our playing locations” << “real crime”

Maybe Volo league can supply an extra official to watch your bags. Or you could all just throw them in the back of the goal and call it a day.

As for staying safe in my bubble… I’m not the one worrying about stubbing my toe at the soccer field here 😆

> Reading responses blaming the victim and calling me alarmist for a reminder to everyone to be more attentive…

That’s a straw man. Your ‘reminder’ was offered as an aside (‘in the meantime…’) to a rant about ‘real crime’ being ‘out of control’ because ‘criminals aren’t being punished.’

Perhaps that’s why your post isn’t being as well received as you desire.

https://i.imgur.com/IHQQOJJ.jpg

I left a pile of anecdotes on my porch and when I woke up they were gone. Now they’re showing up everywhere on Reddit :(

Be safe out there!

Popping a squat on the beltway is a sure fire way to get smooshed. No doubt. 💩 🚘 ☠️

The cameras take two pictures for a violation. The first is triggered to capture your plate if your speed is such that it expects you will run the light (or cross the stop bar). The second captures you in the act.

Crossing the stop bar before coming to a stop is a violation. That’s why the stop bar exists.

If you crossed the stop bar without coming to a complete stop, there is nothing to contest.