The old guy was yelled at, then showed that he had a gun. The youngster, rather than being calmed down on the grounds that it isn’t a good idea to show up to a gunfight without a gun became more agressive and punched and pushed the old guy. He had the option of behaving, but chose to initiate a fight which he ought to have known would be a gun fight.
The punk was standing still, which is better than still hitting him, but as he was not going away, the fight was not necessarily over—should the old guy have waited to let the punk get in a few more licks or try to take his gun before using the equalizer?
Sounds like self-defense or very close to self-defense to me.
So, its journalistic malpractice again?
He would have gotten at least trials if I had been on the jury. I would have voted not guilty and sat until hell froze over.
“Sounds like self-defense or very close to self-defense to me.”
It seems murder to me. The old guy escalated the situation by showing his weapon perhaps in a threatening manner. The young guy may have been acting in self defense feeling that the display of the weapon was a threat. Showing a weapon is an offensive action when there is no threat.