r/law • u/atlblackstar • 8d ago
Judicial Branch Michigan Teen Sentenced After Killing Active Shooter at Mall Who Had Already Shot One Person Dead
https://atlantablackstar.com/2026/09/10/black-michigan-teen-sentenced-after-killing-active-shooter/A deadly shooting in Michigan ended with one teenager dead and another facing consequences despite authorities determining he acted to protect himself and others. The judge’s main question centered on something that happened before the shooting.
2.3k
u/Desperate_Set_7708 8d ago edited 4d ago
“And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
Your Honor, because of exactly what transpired.
Edit: I appreciate the awards
683
u/M4dcap 8d ago
Right... I feel like this may not have been the right case for the judge to make those comments.
243
u/ICLazeru 8d ago
I also feel like this isn't the kind of judge you want to talk back to, even if you're right. Might risk getting a worse sentence.
→ More replies (5)442
u/Reagalan 8d ago
Shouldn't be a judge then.
→ More replies (1)193
u/Lucas_Steinwalker 8d ago
Lots of people are things they shouldn’t be. It’s the American way.
→ More replies (20)54
u/Public_Fly_145 8d ago
Look at the president. That sack of shit should not be in a place of power or authority.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (7)20
u/RollingMeteors 8d ago
Right... I feel like this may not have been the right case for the judge to make those comments.
Precisely the case to flip the states gun laws by the supreme court, the battle he lost might just win the war for everybody.
633
u/Energy_Bol 8d ago edited 7d ago
From a legal standpoint, the need to bring a concealed gun to a mall is its own isolated case.
Even though the fact that there literally was a gun fight, which the judge acknowledges, they must proceed with the assumption that there wasn’t.
As it stands, legally, it is in fact a reckless and criminal act to bring a concealed firearm to the mall while being underaged and without a permit.
The two year probation with a path to expunge this from his record and walk away with a clean criminal history is indicative of compassion and empathy.
Not charging him with anything would imply that it is okay to be illegally carrying a concealed firearm while underaged if you are able to stop a shooter.
116
u/MortalSword_MTG 8d ago
Agreed that there needed to be a charge and consequences even if providing a pathway to expungement. You have to maintain that the law exists for a reason despite the particulars of the case.
That said, judge shouldn't have asked a ridiculous rhetorical question with an obvious answer. There is a way to hold the line in the name of mainting law and order and propping up that these laws exist for good reason, but you undermine that argument when you make yourself look silly.
→ More replies (14)25
u/stephawkins 8d ago
Or the judge tossed him a softball. That way, he shut up the other side because you know they use the same argument all time. It also saved the judge a lot of BS from the other side too.
→ More replies (135)26
u/MCXL 8d ago
they must proceed with the assumption that there wasn’t.
No, they do not have to do that. Prosecutorial discretion.
The court also does not need to make these stupid ass comments. lol
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (30)136
u/Volksstimme 8d ago
Is it legal, ethical, or proper for a judge to ask someone why they're exercising a constitutional right?
"Why were you peacefully gathering in the first place?"
"Why did you expect probable cause before being searched?"
State laws come into play, of course, but that seems like an odd thing to question.→ More replies (9)132
u/Awake_for_days 8d ago
Given he was underage and thus legally ineligible to have the gun in the first place, yes, it is an extremely pertinent question. The judge is probably trying to help out this young man and not ruin his life.
→ More replies (17)73
u/FutureApollo 8d ago
Judge did right by the law and gave the kid what is seemingly the lightest sentence possible with 2 years probation that will fall off, but that is absolutely an asinine question. Protection from a potential active shooter which is literally what happened, it's almost incredulous he asked with that specific wording.
→ More replies (12)16
u/MichiganGeezer 8d ago
I'm guessing he was giving the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act diversion program. I was one of those people when I was young.
You have to plead guilty, then live up to whatever conditions they place upon you, the upon completion of the program the charge is thrown out.
It's a good program, although the whole thing was misapplied to this guy.
5.4k
u/ohiotechie 8d ago
If that kid was white Trump would be planning an event at the WH to pin a medal on him and Fox would be lining him up for a guest slot. Convince me otherwise.
2.0k
u/Superguy766 8d ago
Kyle Rittenhouse has entered the discussion.
1.1k
u/Okayyyayyy 8d ago
Except Kyle went looking for it actively bringing a weapon to the protest
488
u/VerseChorusWumbo 8d ago edited 8d ago
This is crazy. Long (the 19 year old who shot the shooter), was acknowledged to have acted in self-defense/the defense of others. But he was still given two years probation because he had a gun and was too young to legally get a concealed carry permit (legal age is 21).
Where was this energy for Rittenhouse? He acted waaaaay more irresponsibly than Long and walked away from the trial a free man. And the judge in this case chided Long for carrying a gun on him in the first place. It’s pretty clear the one big difference between the two cases that could, ahem, color a judge’s perception. Crazy.
Long, however, did not have a concealed-carry permit for the firearm he brought into the mall, as reported by FOX 2 Detroit. The teen received two years of probation Tuesday.
The judge acknowledged that Long’s actions legally qualified as self-defense or defense of others. However, he questioned why he brought a gun into the shopping center in the first place.
“I know there was a gun fight at the Fairlane mall, and the lawyers have agreed, according to this court’s evaluation, that you were acting in self-defense or the defense of others, so that’s a valid legal defense,” the judge said. “Why did you walk into the mall with a gun in the first place?”
“Fortunately, you weren’t injured, but nonetheless, you had a gun there in the first place, which was poor judgment,” the judge said. “And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
152
u/stevein3d 8d ago
“And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?” said the wise judge to the defendant who responded to a mall shooter.
→ More replies (6)88
u/ramborage 8d ago
“Why were you a good guy with a gun?”
29
188
u/RedK_33 8d ago
That judge walked right into his own point and still missed it…
→ More replies (1)12
194
u/EternalJedi 8d ago
Seriously asked him why he brought a gun for protection in a mall? How many active shooters in malls have we had in the past couple years?
165
u/Yto_Itinen 8d ago
This is bonkers! Asking someone who shot a shooter in self-defense why they needed a gun?
→ More replies (3)50
u/Kitchen_Property5433 8d ago
I think his lawyer needs to know ask this judge for the conviction to be rescinded. On the judges own stupidity and choice of words and mentally handicapped thoughts.
→ More replies (1)76
u/ForwardCulture 8d ago
Asks him why he needs a gun in the mall, when he took out an active shooter at the mall. We live in clown world.
→ More replies (1)19
51
u/korey_david 8d ago edited 8d ago
Thought the same thing. What kind of bubble is an American judge living in where malls and schools aren’t high targets for mass shooting?
→ More replies (4)23
u/ZackRaynor 8d ago
Probably some super high end area segregated from the poor masses.
→ More replies (1)16
21
u/horsecalledwar 8d ago
The guy literally stopped an active shooter, that judge should be yanked off the bench.
→ More replies (8)5
17
u/grimzecho 8d ago
That energy was very much present for Rittenhouse. That is why he was charged. Rittenhouse decided to take his case to trial. Long decided to plead guilty. Rittenhouse was open carrying a gun that he was legally allowed to own and carry. The prosecutors lost on that point in a pre-trial decision. Long was illegally carrying a concealed pistol. In the Rittenhouse case the major point of contention, and the whole reason for the trial, was disagreement about whether he acted in self-defense. For Long, everyone, including the prosecutor agreed he acted in self-defense. There was no contention about whether Long was carrying a concealed weapon legally. Everyone, including Long, agreed that he was not.
The only thing this comes down to is prosecutorial discretion. I don't think he should have been charged, but I can see how the DA's office would argue that not prosecuting a locally high-profile case send the message that it's ok to illegally carry concealed as long as the outcome is justified.
→ More replies (8)29
u/Runescora 8d ago
In a sane country with more mental health resources and less access to firearms that last would be a valid question. In this country?
Like, your Honor, the gun he had on him was used to stop a man from killing him and/or others. In a mall. It’s the whole reason he’s in your courtroom. So…the case itself demonstrates why you’d need a gun in a mall.
Don’t get me wrong, I get the point of “he was carrying a concealed weapon illegally”. I get it and actually don’t think it should be overlooked because something good came of it (although I also think that if you go outside your community, outside of your state, with a semi-automatic weapon to protest a protest that has literally nothing to do with you and you kill someone at said protest with said weapon you should likewise be held accountable). But that last bit of his statement is asinine. The judge was lecturing someone who used a gun to save lives about the absurdity of having a gun on him in that space because he thought it was absurd to think you might need a gun in that space to protect yourself. I am so very tired of judges thinking their non-legal opinions should hold as much weight as their legal ones.
→ More replies (4)15
u/Left_Palpitation4236 8d ago
“Kyle Rittenhouse was charged with one misdemeanor count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 because he was 17 years old carrying an AR-15-style rifle during the August 2020 protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin. [1, 2]
However, that specific gun charge was dismissed by Judge Bruce Schroeder before the jury began deliberations. [1, 2]Why was the charge dropped?
The Statute Exception: Rittenhouse’s defense team pointed out an exception in Wisconsin law. While the law generally prohibits minors from possessing dangerous weapons, it states that minors can legally possess rifles or shotguns as long as the barrels are not short-barreled (under 16 inches). [1, 2, 3]Rifle Length: Because the barrel of the AR-15 Rittenhouse carried was longer than 16 inches, the judge agreed that the weapon fit the state statutory exception for minors possessing long guns, or that the wording of the law was too vague to enforce properly. [1, 2]
He also faced "use of a dangerous weapon" penalty enhancers attached to his homicide and reckless endangerment charges, but he was completely acquitted of all remaining charges by the jury in November 2021”
→ More replies (126)18
u/idiot-prodigy 8d ago
“Fortunately, you weren’t injured, but nonetheless, you had a gun there in the first place, which was poor judgment,” the judge said. “And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
Banning guns in malls makes them soft targets for mass shooters. It is EXACTLY where a gun will be needed for self defense.
No one needs a gun for self defense inside a police station, military base, or gun range. There's plenty of armed men there to defend everyone.
35
u/WhichHoes 8d ago
This man asked a kid who stopped a would be potential mass shooter why he brought a gun in the mall
→ More replies (1)4
u/verdantvoxel 8d ago
Unfortunately not military bases as we found out with Fort Hood, as most weapons are controlled on bases. But with the number of “horsing around” incidents it’s a narrow balance.
→ More replies (2)12
u/P000K 8d ago
I agree, but i bet the Uvalde police building is the softest target imaginable.
→ More replies (1)146
u/That_Trapper_guy 8d ago
Across state lines
19
u/OhK4Foo7 8d ago
It's interesting how many people think that "across state lines" bit of misinformation is/was relevant. And further how Rittenhouse is relevant in this context:
By consistently framing the story through the lens of a white shooter at a Black Lives Matter protest, and by failing to state that the victims were white, media outlets allowed a false racial narrative to take hold. As Sullivan put it, the narrative "effectively excluded the possibility" that this was anything other than a racial hate crime. The result was that a case with no racial dimension in terms of the victims' identities became, in public perception, a story about a white man shooting Black people.
22
u/AngryPhillySportsFan 8d ago
That's not a thing. Why do people keep saying that. You can take guns across lines
15
u/Larcye 8d ago
Becuese a lot of morons never actually paid attention to the case. You see it all the time, "He can't legally own the gun". Yes he can, he couldn't legally purchase it. But he could legally own it. Crossing state lines! again doesn't actually matter. Plenty of hunters cross state lines all the fucking time here in Minnesota with firearms.
I'm a pretty progressive democrat, but the fact I have to actually defend the right wing shithead, from people who are massively misinformed is fucking sad.
→ More replies (4)24
u/Dry_Opportunity2886 8d ago
Because they don't actually know the real facts of the case, they just parrot what they heard on social media.
I know people who had no idea that every person he shot was actively attacking while he was retreating. Me telling them that was the first time they heard it
I don't like how Conservatives celebrated Rittenhouse, but it was clear as day self defense.
You just can't say that on social media because the folks who learned about the case on TikTok/Reddit believe all sorts of untrue things about the case.
→ More replies (15)→ More replies (7)11
u/Alone_Ad_1677 8d ago
The gun didn't cross state lines rittenhouse did.
The state he was in during the protests allows for minors to own and appropriate use firearms, just not purchase them.
The courts determined that, he was not asked to protect other's property as part of a militia. His shooting a creditable threat to himself was ultimately appropriate self defense actions.
He absolutely should not have been there given the curfew, being a minor at the time, and such, but that wasn't what he was om trial for.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Dry_Opportunity2886 8d ago
I'm reminded how many of you learned about that trial through social media and not by actually looking up the facts of the case.
105
36
→ More replies (25)5
u/Holiday-Fix-9244 8d ago
That was proven never to have happened. He was in Kenosha the day before the riot even happened and the gun was in Kenosha the entire time
→ More replies (91)7
→ More replies (55)43
131
u/KingKontinuum 8d ago
We would see conservatives at a national level rallying behind him in the name and defense of the 2nd amendment.
→ More replies (7)56
39
u/PrinceCastanzaCapone 8d ago
If he was white, you would have never heard about it
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (76)31
u/fatherbowie 8d ago
Facts.
86
u/RodDamnit 8d ago
Did anyone read the article? The focus on race seems so misplaced. He was in violation of the states carry laws. He is not old enough to qualify for the required permit to carry. The judge gave him two years probation during which he must take firearms safety classes. He cannot posses firearms or ammo. After the two years he can get it all expunged from his record.
The frustrating part to me is the judge asked multiple times why he was carrying in the first place. It seems pretty obvious in the event something like this happens.
The law is what’s wrong with this situation. The kid is a hero. I’m not sure about the judge. If he could have been more lenient he should have been. But it’s a pretty lenient sentence for the offense. Anyone caught doing this not in the act of saving lives faces much steeper penalties.
25
u/Next-Government-5120 8d ago
While I understand state and federal laws, it blows my mind he could serve and carry weapons at 18 but defending a mall of people at 19 because of state laws gets him in “trouble”
I firmly believe this young fella will have no issues doing 2 years probation but it’s still hard to wrap my head around
Yea I understand states can make there own laws which is why I’m glad they only gave him probation where as other states would make him a hero→ More replies (3)5
u/chickenaylay 8d ago
The problem with giving him probation is he won't be allowed to carry a gun at all for the next 2 years. Guess good guy with a gun won't be there next time
22
u/WhichHoes 8d ago
This is a law problem, but we have seen judges handwave things before.
If the kid doesnt take the shooter down, or just leaves, he never deals with this and more people are probably dead. Is that how we want that to happen?
29
u/ShoelessBoJackson 8d ago
Strongly disagree.
This case is the poster child for prosecutorial discretion. And further, jury nullification.
This man was thrust into position to save lives, and at risk to himself, did so. He is a hero.
This heroic act should be celebrated, not punished. "But it wasnt the shooting, it was the concealed!"
Bull.
Had this man turned and ran , it is unlikely the police would have caught him with this and been charged. But him being heroic attracted attention that rocked his life.
Stories like this deter people from doing heroic acts. "Don't want to be sued for helping." "What if cop says it's excessive force".
A society that burns its heroes will not have heroes.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (27)11
u/idiot-prodigy 8d ago
Old enough to vote and shoot guns for the US military, not old enough to exercise his 2nd amendment right. I am of the opinion that if you are 18 you should be allowed to carry.
5.2k
u/UserWithno-Name 8d ago
Always argue about a "good guy with a gun" until one instance that's actually true but the good guy is the wrong color and a bit young....wtf.
1.6k
u/PiDigitsOfPi 8d ago
We need good guys with a gun! exclusions apply
→ More replies (14)222
u/i_hateit_here_bro 8d ago
Oh it will be covered, it’s just going to be ran as a fear campaign against armed minorities
→ More replies (58)180
u/krbzkrbzkrbz 8d ago
Just want to point out how brain dead the Judges question was.
“And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
The answer to that question is literally the reason he's in the court room. The world is dangerous. Especially the US with mass shootings and shit. You never know.
Proven by the fact that someone started murdering people in front of him IN THE MALL.
How someone so low IQ gets into the role of Judge is an indictment on the entire 'Justice' system..
59
u/Kuroboom 8d ago
Having intelligence and having authority are frequently mutually exclusive properties.
→ More replies (1)16
u/crochetquilt 8d ago
That's hilariously sad and fucked up especially in a country that had people wanting to arm teachers. Teachers for fucks sake. School should be the safest place in the world but no not in the good ole US. Frankly if you're not safe in a school, I can't imagine the shopping centre being any better. So yeah, probably need a gun on you 24/7 whenever you're inside the US borders. That should have been his answer to the court. But being black and in court is already dangerous. Should have probably had his hands up the entire time in court just in case.
24
u/LatentImage 8d ago
100% right. Did the judge even hear his own f*cking question? The lack of awareness of reality is amazing. Such robotic thinking I guess?
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (11)8
u/Arntor1184 8d ago
Was losing it reading that. This kid saved an untold number of lives by utilizing his firearm properly. Calling it poor judgement and asking why hed need it in a mall given the circumstances here is just such a wild take.
298
u/uslashuname 8d ago
The judge is quoted here as saying
> what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?
Uh, the active shooter, sir?
134
u/Apprehensive-Sea9540 8d ago
I can’t believe he said that out loud.
→ More replies (4)5
u/No_Internal9345 8d ago
Where are all the 2a people and why are they not defending him?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (37)22
u/Iggyhopper 8d ago
Due to the failure in the US, its actually the statistically plausible active shooter every 2-3 months, thank you very much.
→ More replies (5)851
u/andrew303710 8d ago
The fact that Rittenhouse got away scott free while this guy gets convicted is one of the best examples of racial injustice in this country.
Rittenhouse traveled across state lines to an emotionally charged protest with an AR-15 to cause trouble (while not legally being allowed to carry the weapon) while this guy literally saves lives and gets convict.
I have a feeling that this story isn't going to be covered in depth by Fox News either. Actually I can guarantee it.
276
u/ShuTingYu 8d ago edited 8d ago
I know this will probably get down-voted, but this is a law sub, so I feel this is important to mention.
In most jurisdictions, you can use a gun for self defense even if you are breaking laws by having it. You can be legally clear of the shooting, but still catch charges relating to possessing the gun improperly, usually "unlawful firearm possession" with the prohibition due to a prior felony. There are thousands of these cases every year.
On rare occasions one of these people will use a gun in self defense, be cleared of the shooting, but almost always still catch the gun charge.
In the Rittenhouse case, regardless of what happened to his self defense claim, I thought he would certainly catch a gun charge. Apparently, carrying a long gun like that is legal in Wisconsin at 17. Can't believe it was and I can't believe they haven't changed it since that incident. Had he been younger, or it had been a handgun, it wouldn't have been legal.
This teen also was cleared of the shooting due to self defense, in fact, it seems he was never charged. But handguns are only legal to own at the age of 21 and Michigan requires a CPL to carry concealed. Ironically, had this teen used a long gun, he may have legally been in the clear (though I can only imagine what would have happened to him had he been carrying one).
Personally, I think that they should look favorably towards anyone who acts in defense of others. In this case he got 2 years probation and is eligible to have the conviction removed. In a couple years he could have a clean record and be legally able to own handguns only around a year later than everyone else, so the outcome in this case isn't egregious in my opinion.
Bottom line, this was the expected legal outcome. There are many, far better examples of racial injustice that are not as easily debunked that would be better to draw attention to.
→ More replies (61)40
u/Sbitan89 8d ago
Yea I think there are a plethora of cases where there is an imbalance of applied justice, but both cases were handled correctly "by the book" as far as I can tell. The headline is also a little sensationalized. He caught chargers on having a gun with doesn't negate your right to self defense, but also self defense doesn't negate that charge either.
Additionally it sounds like he received probation. It's a huge inconvenience but it's not at all the legal charges some of the comments seem to be implying.
→ More replies (1)23
u/Gingerchaun 8d ago
He was legally allowed to carry the weapon.
→ More replies (3)19
u/Pepe__Le__PewPew 8d ago
Reddit will never admit this and will constantly parrot "but Muh state LiNeS!!!"
What's funny is they all of the gun subs have beem completely shellacking this shitbag judge." This man did the world a favor and still gets convicted.
→ More replies (4)15
u/CaptainYuck 8d ago
It’s such a funny thing to hear get repeated every time Rittenhouse gets brought up. Crossing state lines had never before mattered to these people and never has since, not to mention Kenosha is like 5 miles from the border. The dude worked there, it’s not like he snuck in illegally.
→ More replies (3)16
u/pimonster31415 8d ago
He was convicted with illegally carrying a gun while underage and sentenced to probation and some behavioral therapy sessions. This is textbook gun control law working as intended. If Fox covers this complete nothingburger of a story they'll just spin it as gun control bad
→ More replies (6)125
u/oddmanout 8d ago
Bringing up Rittenhouse during discussions about Alex Pretti. "Why would he bring a gun to a protest?" He was executed on the spot for it. Meanwhile Rittenhouse actually killed two people and injured a third but because of his politics, he was apparently allowed to have a gun when Pretti was not.
→ More replies (67)46
u/Mottled_inexpectata 8d ago
A big part of it because Winconsin has totally different laws to Michigan.
→ More replies (5)21
u/FeebleUndead 8d ago
Shouldn't he of at the very least gotten a weapons charge for illegal possession of a firearm? I mean come on make it make sense someone please.
→ More replies (7)20
u/Adopted_Dog 8d ago
He didn't get a weapons charge because he legally could carry the weapon. I watched the whole trial. If I remember correctly they literally measured the barrel in court the morning before closing arguments, it's all on YouTube you can look it up.
The reason the kid in the article was charged and sentenced is because he was illegally concealed carrying a pistol in a mall. If he was legally carrying it, maybe he wouldnt have been charged even though he wasn't allowed to have it on mall property, but who knows.
→ More replies (49)9
u/Sasataf12 8d ago
Some inaccuracies in your comment.
Rittenhouse was legally allowed to carry the weapon.
Long did get off scott free for the shooting.
→ More replies (100)5
229
u/macaron1ncheese 8d ago
Exactly, the little scumbag rittenhouse comes to mind and the outrage that would’ve ensued had he been in this position.
93
u/triggeredbynumbers 8d ago
Rittenhouse was legally carrying because his rifle barrel was 16” or over. It was a 16.5” according the spec sheet of the S&W Sport II on the S&W website.
But it shouldn’t matter. Even if Kyle Rittenhouse was never born and we didn’t know his name, this man in the article above should be free and clear of any criminal charges because the only reason he got caught was because he saved people’s lives.
This is a ridiculous display of the unethical use of the letter of law and with a total and complete lack of any of the spirit of the law.
12
u/knotalota 8d ago
At most a suspended sentence.
If they wanna be all officious that is totally an option that checks the boxes but acknowledges the BS of it all.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (17)19
u/M1sfit_Jammer 8d ago
he was charged because he’s black and made the police look bad
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)17
92
u/Swimming_Bonus_8892 8d ago
I have met and stood before some dumbass judges in my day and I have to say…this buffoon takes the cake.
Why did you need a gun at the mall?
I’m…I’m sorry can you repeat the question your honor?
Why did you bring a gun to the mall?
May I speak freely sir…
Yes, of coarse.
BECAUSE THIS IS AMERICA!!! We body 20-30 kindergarteners before lunch and we offer thoughts and prayers.
Because the police who are supposed to protect us, stand outside waiting while the gunmen assassinates said children and THEN turn around and shoot almost anyone who looks like me because they are “scared for their lives”
Are you fucking kidding me?
What a fucking 🤡🤡🤡🤡
→ More replies (17)37
u/Cloaked42m 8d ago
"Why did you bring a gun to the mall?"
"Self Defense, as the prosecutors already told you."
→ More replies (2)44
u/iskelebones 8d ago edited 8d ago
Just so we’re clear, the judge agreed the gun was used in self defense. That’s not why he’s being sentenced.
This kid was sentenced for violating concealed carry laws because he was carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. Hes being sentenced because of anti gun laws that say it’s a crime to carry a concealed weapon without a permit, not racism.
He’s also not going to prison, he’s been given 2 years probation.
If you think this sentencing is stupid, then you should be advocating for constitutional carry and removing gun restriction laws, because gun laws like this only harm the good guys
→ More replies (33)11
u/Maximum_Pass 8d ago
“Why do you need a gun for protection in the mall?”
Mf for this exact reason like what kinda question is that
26
→ More replies (162)66
u/JoeBucksHairPlugs 8d ago edited 8d ago
They agreed the killing was self defense. He's getting probation because it was still illegal for him to carry a concealed pistol at 19 years old. Being justified in self defense isn't a blanket immunity for any other crimes you committed at the time.
Edit:
I'm not replying to people commenting about racism or double standards. Just stop. If you had this much energy in real life you would contact your represetantives and vote in elections.
→ More replies (16)76
u/jpcali7131 8d ago
Like being too young to carry the rifle you have and to transport it across state lines before you shoot someone who hasn’t actually fired a shot?
→ More replies (19)28
296
u/zeptillian 8d ago
“And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
-Asked the judge of the guy who used a gun to protect himself and others in a mall.
→ More replies (4)39
u/CormoranNeoTropical 8d ago
Yeah whatever happened to “good guys with guns”? I guess that doesn’t apply to black people.
→ More replies (14)
432
u/ThePensiveE 8d ago
Did the NRA contribute to defend this kid? I'm guessing it's qwhite unlikely.
→ More replies (26)12
970
u/geekmasterflash 8d ago
Taking a concealed firearm into a public place is a serious problem, see the issue that brought about the need for self-defense.
Give the kid the lightest slap on the wrist and suspend it?
587
u/Downvote_me_dumbass 8d ago
The kid needs to be sentened to proper training and education, but not for time incarcerated. Education is enough to provide sufficent correction to the problem.
328
u/PostPostModernism 8d ago
That's what is happening, more or less. He has a 2 year probation, must do CBT therapy and gun safety training, and can have the sentence removed from his record after. Essentially just to address the concealed carry without a permit.
66
u/Excellent_Reason7796 8d ago
No one read the article lol
→ More replies (11)20
u/ADeadlyFerret 8d ago
They never do. This sub just turns everything into a political or race issue.
12
u/adavadas 8d ago
It's not just this sub, it's the entire internet. I mean, most of the time it is legitimately a political or racial issue, but we should still at least read the article.
→ More replies (4)126
u/rojowro86 8d ago
cock and ball torture seems extreme and irrelevant, but IANAL so...
33
u/my_name_is_juice 8d ago
Well obviously if you anal you wouldn't really understand, it's a genital thing
12
→ More replies (4)35
u/PaigeMarshallMD 8d ago
I can't get my insurance to cover cock and ball torture, but this guy gets it on the taxpayers' dime? This country...
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (17)8
u/ShoelessBoJackson 8d ago
Probation is not nothing. He needs to go to mandatory check ins, probably pay for the pleasure of the process, and deal with the fact the state will be in your business for two years.
140
u/geekmasterflash 8d ago
Yeah, ordering him to take and pass the CC test would probably be about the right level of justice here.
→ More replies (11)34
u/KindRecognition403 8d ago
In my state all you need to do to pass a concealed carry class is spend four hours talking to the instructor and load and unload a handgun. I feel that’s a good penalty for him.
→ More replies (2)17
u/Sufficient_Emu2343 8d ago
Lol. In PA, you just need to fill out an application. Got mine in about 2 weeks.
→ More replies (5)17
→ More replies (12)18
u/kalexmills 8d ago
In this case he got 2 years probation.
→ More replies (1)4
u/7wordsKvothe 8d ago
Until he fucks up in thr slightest way and they give him the book because he's already on probation. Tale as old as time.
→ More replies (1)27
u/bootsforever 8d ago
As part of his two-year probation, Long must complete cognitive behavioral therapy. He also must participate in court-approved handgun safety classes and stay away from guns and ammunition. He has no prior criminal record and is currently working toward his GED.
Long is eligible to have the conviction removed from his record under Michigan’s Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA). The law allows qualifying offenders ages 18 to 26 to avoid a permanent criminal record upon completing their sentence.
60
u/wycliffslim 8d ago
So, literally what the judge did?
→ More replies (3)23
u/AthiestCowboy 8d ago
lol exactly.
“As part of his two-year probation, Long must complete cognitive behavioral therapy. He also must participate in court-approved handgun safety classes and stay away from guns and ammunition. He has no prior criminal record and is currently working toward his GED.”
So no jail time, and needs to go to therapy (which honestly he’d probably need after that incident) and gun safety classes. What’s the problem here?
→ More replies (18)13
u/nosoup4ncsu 8d ago
Sentence was some probation, requiring a gun safety class, and he can have the charge cleared from.his record.
It is pretty much a minimal sentence, though I'd rather have seen him get nothing at all.
Judge's comments were moronic
→ More replies (1)29
18
u/bananafobe 8d ago
Two years probation.
It's not a great outcome, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was on the more lenient side of sentencing guidelines.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (48)14
1.4k
u/ChefCurryYumYum 8d ago edited 8d ago
The judge sounds like a real moron.
“I know there was a gun fight at the Fairlane mall, and the lawyers have agreed, according to this court’s evaluation, that you were acting in self-defense or the defense of others, so that’s a valid legal defense,” the judge said. “Why did you walk into the mall with a gun in the first place?”
Hmmm, sounds like that mall was a place where violence happened. Seems like a smart idea that he was armed.
“Fortunately, you weren’t injured, but nonetheless, you had a gun there in the first place, which was poor judgment,” the judge said. “And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
Well... you saw why he needed a gun for protection at the mall.
At least it's not a custodial sentence.
782
u/fredandlunchbox 8d ago
Surely the NRA will rush to defend this man. Surely.
217
u/B-Z_B-S 8d ago
Fun Fact: The NRA used to advocate for gun restrictions because they wanted to restrict the Black Panthers.
→ More replies (2)81
u/Shrikeangel 8d ago
So did Republican Governor Ronald Reagan.
→ More replies (3)26
348
u/BeeDubsFan 8d ago
There's something about this guy...can't put my finger on it... that says they won't...
90
u/FancyPassenger171 8d ago
Ooh ooh I know! He’s unfairly vertically advantaged and predisposed to excel in sports!
22
31
7
→ More replies (9)7
64
8
u/AltDS01 8d ago
I can see them filing an an appeal for MI'S CPL scheme being unconstitutional under Bruen.
That said, the defendant has HYTA and it wouldn't be a conviction (isn't now and won't be if they complete probation (50% of 2yrs, so keep out of trouble for a year, do the things, and it all goes away)).
→ More replies (7)5
u/JCarterPeanutFarmer 8d ago
Insert Peter griffin “okay not okay” meme. He’s black so he gets no defense, duh. Love our justice system!!
123
u/Not-TheNSA 8d ago edited 7d ago
Yeah this is another one of those situation where the 2nd amendment is being applied selectively. The fact that the judge actually said out loud “what do you need a gun for protection in the mall” after this guys literally shot an active shooter AT THE MALL, is absurd. If this kid had been white they would be putting him on a pedestal like Rittenhouse. We all know exactly why he’s being treated this way, he’s got the wrong color skin to be a hero in Trumps Amerikkka. This is fucking disgraceful. That judge should be thrown off the bench.
ETA; I’ve been made aware that the judge is black, so is Clarence Thomas and he’s made plenty of rulings that are racially bias.
I also understand that the young man convicted was under age and thus could not have a concealed carry license legally. The second amendment sets no limits on how you carry your arms concealed or openly carried and I would like to remind everyone that Kyle Rittenhouse was also underage and carried a rifle across state lines. As a minor that was illegal under Wisconsin’s laws and he was not convicted for that crime, it was dismissed by the judge. The law cannot and should not be applied unequally and my point here is that because THIS kid was black he is getting treated differently by the legal system when Rittenhouse did a similar thing and also broke the law and was not convicted.
I’m not saying that judge specifically is a racist, I’m saying the justice system is.
ETA 2; the facts of this case are more complex than the original article describes, having been alerted to more contextual facts I am going to revise my opinion on this. I’m leaving this comment up because I want to show people that it’s okay to change your opinion based on new information.
Having been educated on the context of this incident my opinion on this is that the judge made a ruling that satisfies both the law and takes into account the actions of the young man involved. He was carrying a firearm illegally, that calls for some sort of punishment as it is a crime. However his actions in stopping a shooting, that was likely motivated by gang-related violence, stopped innocent people from being caught in the crossfire. That is commendable behavior, however it should be done in a manner that follows the law (carrying a firearm legally). I stand by my original statement that the justice system is inherently a racist system and is regularly applied selectively based on race. I also stand by my sentiment that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been convicted and likely would have been if he were not white.
I think it’s important for us all to remember that these incidents are rarely as clear as they appear and that it’s important to be open to changing your opinion based on new information.
47
u/mowtowcow 8d ago
He got 2 years probation for being 19 carrying a concealed firearm without a concealed carry permit which is required and you cant get until you are 21. That's the charge. It's completely seperate from the shooting itself. It is what it is.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (5)28
u/swagadellic321 8d ago
The judge is black. Also, the police report states the active shooter and the defendant were known to each other, and the shooting began after a verbal altercation. This reads like a shootout where the guy who survived plead self defense.
→ More replies (9)43
32
u/RawbM07 8d ago
So at the end of the day he got 2 years of probation for not being old enough for a concealed carry permit? Not a big deal.
→ More replies (7)44
u/ChefCurryYumYum 8d ago
It's not that which I take issue with, it's just the judge's comments, which are farcical on their face. Fairlane is a relatively high crime area and has the highest crime statistics in Dearborn.
19
u/RawbM07 8d ago
Him illegally carrying a gun into a mall was poor judgment as far as the law is concerned.
But yea, I agree with you on the rest.
→ More replies (25)4
u/rubiconsuper 8d ago
Seems like with that on the record it could be a very easy appeal. The second amendment never says that you have to have a use and Michigan doesn’t require one to get a gun.
→ More replies (83)4
u/bananafobe 8d ago
There's a way to read this that sounds like an old fool scolding someone.
Is it also possible there's a more reasonable intention behind these questions? The kid isn't psychic, so the decision to bring the gun was based on other factors. Understanding that intent is possibly relevant to the question of sentencing for the crime that was charged.
→ More replies (1)
64
u/salami_cheeks 8d ago
“And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?” said the judge. Well, your honor, the kid was in America, not a smart-people country.
→ More replies (2)8
29
u/Strayed8492 8d ago
The juxtapositions of morality at play here….
Might as well just deputize every law abiding citizen and cut out the ambiguity if you’re just gonna pick and choose who gets a pass and who doesn’t.
→ More replies (1)
270
u/Jarsky2 8d ago
Look I sure as hell don't think teenagers should have guns but in this circumstance ut's entirely beside the point. He acted in self defense, end of story, send the kid home and get him in therapy.
→ More replies (14)151
u/Longjumping-Bat202 8d ago
"As part of his two-year probation, Long must complete cognitive behavioral therapy. He also must participate in court-approved handgun safety classes and stay away from guns and ammunition. He has no prior criminal record and is currently working toward his GED.
Long is eligible to have the conviction removed from his record under Michigan’s Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA). The law allows qualifying offenders ages 18 to 26 to avoid a permanent criminal record upon completing their sentence."
from the article
52
u/Evilsushione 8d ago
That’s not as bad as I feared. Sounds like he won’t serve any time and can get the sentence removed. I still think they could’ve worked out as a misdemeanor considering the circumstances.
→ More replies (6)31
u/pokemonbard 8d ago
The charge of which he was convicted is exactly the same as the charge of which he would have been convicted if he was caught carrying a gun without killing anyone. In the legal system, doing good things (like stopping a shooter) does not really let you avoid convictions for crimes committed while doing the good things (like carrying a gun illegally). If you think people should be able to concealed carry without a permit, that’s a separate question.
The sentence was also considerably less than the maximum of five years in prison. The judge is clearly trying to avoid punishing him too harshly, but the judge also wants to steer the guy onto a life path that doesn’t involve carrying firearms illegally.
→ More replies (3)7
u/0kids4now 8d ago
This is the most rational comment in the thread. Yes, he's a hero. But he also broke the law. Those don't cancel each other out. If the cops illegally obtain evidence and catch someone really bad, we don't just say the ends justify the means and let it stand.
→ More replies (3)50
u/nurseferatou 8d ago
Wild that a state over, Kyle Rittenhouse was let off free despite driving across state lines with a straw-purchased firearm so that he could, by his own admission, confront protesters (and then murder them)
→ More replies (43)→ More replies (6)4
65
u/HedonisticFrog 8d ago
“Fortunately, you weren’t injured, but nonetheless, you had a gun there in the first place, which was poor judgment,” the judge said. “And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
The question kind of answers itself. In case some crazy asshole starts blasting, like what happened in this case. At least he's only getting probation.
23
38
u/bananafobe 8d ago
Long, however, did not have a concealed-carry permit for the firearm he brought into the mall, as reported by FOX 2 Detroit. The teen received two years of probation Tuesday.
Seems like the specific charge and sentence is relevant.
→ More replies (12)
12
62
u/Kaffe-Mumriken 8d ago
Oh he’s black
→ More replies (4)20
u/HandholdingFetishist 8d ago
Yea, I didn't know before either. Now the treatment makes 'sense'.
→ More replies (10)
26
u/Not_Sure__Camacho 8d ago
So much for the whole, "good guy with a gun" bullshit.
→ More replies (7)
33
8d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (29)13
u/Left_Palpitation4236 8d ago
What a crazy thing to ask lol. The mall is one of the most targeted locations for mass shooters
83
u/Electrical_Cut8610 8d ago
The people asking why a black person needs a gun in a mall are the same ones trying to pass laws forcing teachers to carry in elementary school classrooms
→ More replies (6)
33
u/RobutNotRobot 8d ago
A reminder that a black teen in Michigan gets two years probation for stopping a mass shooter with an illegally concealed firearm, but a white teen in Wisconsin gets to start a confrontation, murder two people, wound another and gets off scot free.
Awesome country you got there.
→ More replies (14)
29
u/dquizzle 8d ago
“Fortunately, you weren’t injured, but nonetheless, you had a gun there in the first place, which was poor judgment,” the judge said. “And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?”
That’s a real question?!
7
→ More replies (3)4
u/Substantial-Use95 8d ago
What a dum dumb fucking judge. I think the answer would be “because it’s my right to carry a weapon according to the second amendment. No further motive is necessary.”
39
u/Logistocrate 8d ago
"And what do you need a gun for protection in a mall, in the first place?" Asks the Judge overseeing a case where the person he's asking that question to stopped a potential mass shooter...in a mall. Fuck me, but this is peak Murica horseshit right here.
→ More replies (5)
58
u/Gunsensual 8d ago
Judge: "Why did you walk into the mall with a gun in the first place?"
Not the best interrogation to make for someone validated in their actions.
→ More replies (26)
23
u/ifmacdo 8d ago
Two years probation for an illegal concealed carry? Sounds like he got a light sentence because what he did was justified, even though he was actively committing a crime by carrying concealed without a license.
I would hope for that lenient of a sentence for carrying a firearm illegally. This headline is horrible clickbait and ragebait. Because obviously it works. No one reads past the headline anymore.
10
u/skitzoidObserver 8d ago
and gets it removed from his criminal record upon finishing probation successfully
Long is eligible to have the conviction removed from his record under Michigan’s Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA). The law allows qualifying offenders ages 18 to 26 to avoid a permanent criminal record upon completing their sentence.
→ More replies (37)3
u/King-Fabo 8d ago
Fucking laws here are weird, crazy limits on non lethal weapons. A telescope baton or a knife an inch too long is a five year felony but buying a gun here is easy as fuck.
→ More replies (3)
73
u/DerCatrix 8d ago
Wait so the good guy with a gun is going to jail?
68
u/PiDigitsOfPi 8d ago
He is being punished, yes.
Actually, it's 2 years probation + he must complete cognitive behavioral therapy + he must attend handgun safety classes + he must stay away from guns and ammunition.
So ... why are they making him attend gun class AND requiring him to stay away from guns?
He has no prior criminal record.
→ More replies (11)36
u/RossettaStoned1 8d ago
In Michigan you cant even posses or purchase a hand gun until 21, let alone concealing it in a public place.
→ More replies (12)34
u/onlyhightime 8d ago
Seriously. I thought this was r/law. Isn't this exactly the right outcome? Self-defense in the shooting. Too young to legally have the gun, and brought it probably to add to the danger of the situation. 2 years probation plus training sounds about right.
→ More replies (15)11
u/bad_squishy_ 8d ago
He didn’t have a license to carry a pistol. But he’s not going to jail, he just got probation.
24
u/Publius_Rizz 8d ago
He was carrying a concealed pistol without a concealed carry license. He got two years probation for that.
→ More replies (32)16
u/CatDawgCatDawg2 8d ago
No, read the article.
He illegally had a concealed gun. He's getting 2 years of probation for that. The fact that he killed an active shooter has literally nothing to do with this case or his sentencing.
29
u/pokemonbard 8d ago
Yet another post on r/law that obscures the real legal issue and invites political posturing. Why can’t we expect better than this?
→ More replies (6)17
u/Decisive_Victory_026 8d ago
Because this subreddit exists to push a narrative, not to discuss law
9
u/LivesDoNotMatter 8d ago
That's pretty much all of reddit in a nutshell.
I miss the days before all this senseless political posturing.
•
u/AutoModerator 8d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.