jarfil , (edited )
@jarfil@beehaw.org avatar

his lawyer argues that the third charge, “use of firearm for aggravated malicious wounding” shouldn’t be applicable

It says he’s been found “not guilty” of that one. The charge he’s been found guilty of is “malicious discharge of a firearm within an occupied dwelling”, which… well, he did.

It’s like the laws against shooting bottles in your suburban home backyard: without the right precautions, those bullets can travel a long way, and what goes up ultimately comes down. There have been cases of stray bullets hitting someone totally unsuspecting a block or a few away.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines