California man seen pointing AR-15 at protesters arrested, charged with assault

[Wendell]

A California man captured on camera pointing a loaded AR-15 rifle at a group of advancing protesters has been arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon. Jacob Daniel Bracken, 38, of Rancho Cucamonga, faces two counts of assault with a deadly weapon related to the incident in Upland on Monday, the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office said. Upland Police Chief Darren Goodman said they have videos as well as still photos that “conclusively showed” Bracken pointing the weapon at some point. “On June 1, 2020, the Upland Police Department was monitoring a peaceful protest in their city. The police officers were notified by protestors of a potentially life-threatening incident. The officers immediately investigated the incident. Bracken was arrested by the Upland Police Department, and the case was forwarded to our office for filing consideration,” the district attorney’s office said. “This incident was captured on video by the peaceful protestors who cooperated with law enforcement, which is encouraging to the community. Thankfully, through the restraint of the protestors and the swift investigation by the Upland Police Department, a potential tragedy may have been avoided," the office said.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-man-filmed-pointing-ar-15-at-protesters-arrested-charged-assault

[RevolverRob]

Stupid games, stupid prizes.

Don't point a gun at people unless you believe you are fully justified to pull the trigger.

Besides the fact that it sounds like the AR15 wielder was part of a group that sought to antagonize the crowd. If you rile them up to advance on you, you don't get to claim self-defense.

Adios motherfucker.

[Patrin]

Stupid games, stupid prizes.

Don't point a gun at people unless you believe you are fully justified to pull the trigger.

Besides the fact that it sounds like the AR15 wielder was part of a group that sought to antagonize the crowd. If you rile them up to advance on you, you don't get to claim self-defense.

Adios motherfucker.

Waving American Flags on private property = antagonizing? Nope.

Good to see CA LE has their priorities straight. :rolleyes:

[Nephrology]

I saw that video. Looked like an AR pistol with a one of the Magpul 60rd drum magazines; that is to say, California unfriendly. Wonder if they found the gun.

[Darth_Uno]

Yawn. Fox News is just outrage porn for the right at this point.

I'm not so sure what he did was particularly wrong. But if you're the only guy pulling out an AR saying, "Back the fuck up,"...you coulda maybe gauged the situation a little better.

[Baldanders]

Yawn. Fox News is just outrage porn for the right at this point.

I'm not so sure what he did was particularly wrong. But if you're the only guy pulling out an AR saying, "Back the fuck up,"...you coulda maybe gauged the situation a little better.

Is MSNBC as bad for the left? I love not having "real TV."

24 hour cable news is a scourge.

[RevolverRob]

Waving American Flags on private property = antagonizing? Nope.

Good to see CA LE has their priorities straight. :rolleyes:

Try again.

Go watch the video in the FoxNews link.

The crowd is standing in the street, no one is particularly near him. The “flag wavers” are standing in the street and they are screaming at the protesting crowd. At one point one of the “flag wavers” even mimes throwing her water bottle at the crowd.

This isn’t a “we were just standing there in our yard waving our flags, singing the national anthem and they attacked us!” Situation. Those folks went looking for trouble and found it.

Stupid games, stupid prizes.

[BehindBlueI's]

On my shitty laptop speakers it sounded like they were chanting "beat their meat" but I'm assuming that's not right...

[pooty]

Waving American Flags on private property = antagonizing? Nope.

Good to see CA LE has their priorities straight. :rolleyes:

Nah the guy on the US flag waving side pulls his gun from the truck, 'brandishing it' while the other group (Rainbow flag?) was still across the street, the relevant video is embedded in the first twitter post. The Fox website is confusing since the main video isn't even relevant to the headline, all it show is several groups of teens obtaining clothes and shoes for going to school.

[Nephrology]

On my shitty laptop speakers it sounded like they were chanting "beat their meat" but I'm assuming that's not right...

Or maybe.... it is

o_0

[MichaelD]

24 hour cable news is a scourge.

This. So very much this.

[0ddl0t]

The twitter video doesn't show the assault, just him flagging the legs of his buddies while yelling at the protesters. But there was also a still photo showing him shouldering & aiming the weapon:

55411

[Patrin]

Yes, the protesters, given their track record, quietly and politely walked by those waving American flags.

I watched the video and remained unconvinced, as I know, and you should too, a cut of a video doesn’t tell me the entirety of the exchange.

On private property, given the current climate of hate against even looking white and patriotic, I have no problem with him brandishing if he felt threatened and outnumbered by a hostile crowd in a state where LE has given permission to these ‘protesters’ to destroy private property.

Stupid games, Revolver Bob, are a hostile organization to memorialize a career criminal, and use the negligent act of one Officer, to burn the country.

...and, given that still image, they’re pushing people to far, and these ‘protesters’ are not going to like the prize they might receive.

[LittleLebowski]

I saw that video. Looked like an AR pistol with a one of the Magpul 60rd drum magazines; that is to say, California unfriendly. Wonder if they found the gun.

There are legal Magpul D60s in Cali thanks to a really awesome judge.

[BehindBlueI's]

The twitter video doesn't show the assault, just him flagging the legs of his buddies while yelling at the protesters. But there was also a still photo showing him shouldering & aiming the weapon:

55411

Holy chicken wing, Batman.

[Nephrology]

There are legal Magpul D60s in Cali thanks to a really awesome judge.

Whoa, really? Like, full capacity D60s or pinned for 10rd?


Holy chicken wing, Batman.

Holosun mounted on the rail ....

Kilt. In. Da. Streetz.

[J0hnny]

There are legal Magpul D60s in Cali thanks to a really awesome judge.

The honorable judge Roger Benitez

https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-stays-his-own-order-to-allow-high-capacity-gun-magazines/

[0ddl0t]

Whoa, really? Like, full capacity D60s or pinned for 10rd?

Freedom week in April 2019 allowed us to buy whatever magazines we wanted. The courts soon imposed an injunction, but whatever we bought in that week remains legal.

[Nephrology]

Freedom week in April 2019 allowed us to buy whatever magazines we wanted. The courts soon imposed an injunction, but whatever we biught in that week remains legal.

Wow. How did I not hear about this?

[RevolverRob]

Yes, the protesters, given their track record, quietly and politely walked by those waving American flags.

I watched the video and remained unconvinced, as I know, and you should too, a cut of a video doesn’t tell me the entirety of the exchange.

On private property, given the current climate of hate against even looking white and patriotic, I have no problem with him brandishing if he felt threatened and outnumbered by a hostile crowd in a state where LE has given permission to these ‘protesters’ to destroy private property.

Stupid games, Revolver Bob, are a hostile organization to memorialize a career criminal, and use the negligent act of one Officer, to burn the country.

...and, given that still image, they’re pushing people to far, and these ‘protesters’ are not going to like the prize they might receive.

You do not need to see the “whole” exchange to see that the flag waving idiots were NOT standing on their private property. If you’re standing in the street, screaming and trying to fight with the crowd, you’ve forfeited your right to claim “they started it”. Maybe they did start it, but that group moved it along further.

There are no heroes in this incident. Just stupid people. If you cannot see that from the video, do us a favor, don’t carry a gun. We talk about responsible gun ownership and use here. Inciting a fight typically causes one to forfeit their right to claim self-defense if they use lethal force to stop the fight. That includes being part of a crowd that is instigating or furthering the situation through an exchange of words, and in the video shoving. If you think that the flag wavers were correct and had a right to do what they did, you have a skewed sense of right and wrong, in addition to a misunderstanding of legal ramifications and legal use of force, ergo please do not carry a firearm.

Furthermore, this event happened in California, where a duty to retreat is absolutely necessary. The individual in question had AMPLE opportunity to retreat, obvious even from the edited video, and instead chose to arm himself and brandish that weapon at the crowd. He is the criminal in this situation, full stop.

Whether you agree with the the words of the flag wavers or the protesters is irrelevant to the legal facts of this matter. The protesters have a legal right to protest, the flag wavers have the same. However, when some portion of the flag waving party waded into the protest party to fight, the flag wavers became the aggressors. When AR dude chose to pull put a gun and brandish it, he chose to express lethal force, but definitely failed to meet the standards of such use, in most states and certainly failed to meet that standard in California.

Stupid games, stupid prizes. This individual committed the crime and should and likely will be jailed.

[Patrin]

To fight? Yeah, not seeing it in the video. Insinuation.

American Flag patriots have as much right to be in the street, at the foot of their property, as those ‘protesters’ do...and defend their point of view.

I don’t care about the legal facts of unjust CA socialist laws. Only that individuals have a right to not be intimidated by hostile organizers on private property.

You side with who you like, the video shows me what I need.

Plenty of good video over the last week to show me who is right and wrong, and who the law is applied too.

[Wise_A]

I dunno. As a law-abiding armed citizen, I always kinda thought that it was incumbent on my to obey all the laws, not just the ones I liked, and that when carrying an implement of lethal force, that I should always employ good sense so as to preserve life. I have thus far managed to avoid whipping my gat out in public, sometimes through strong language, walking away from idiot situations at others, and very frequently, by not being someplace stupid to begin with.

But I guess that just makes me a pussy.

PS--A duty to retreat outside the home isn't exactly uncommon, and thus I wouldn't exactly call it an "unjust socialist law".

[Patrin]

No, you’re smart. I’ve practiced the same for 17 years of carry.

But if you find yourself with protesters that have a track record of ‘burning it down’, outside your home, I’m willing to give a brother a lil latitude.

Now duty to retreat, socialist and wussy, but I’m in a stand your ground state, so I’m biased. :cool:

[Wise_A]

He brought a firearm to a situation where it was reasonable to expect conflict, when there was no need to be there in the first place. He didn't live at the house in question. He's not attempting to take up a defensive position, or retreat, or disengage. At the time, he was engaged in mutual combat, and should be punished as such. Would I prefer to see more "protesters" getting told to either calm down or go for a ride? You bet. But clearly, Bracken's actions constitute a threat and a hazard. To look at it another way, what would you do if one of the mob pointed a gun at you? Besides, just think about the thought process involved--"Imma go out and counter-protest, but I know those protesters are a violent sort, so Imma bring my AR with the 60-rounder!". Well, which is it? Is it a deadly situation, or an okay place to be?

Thugs like Bracken undermine all citizens forced to defend themselves in a riot situation, whether it's the driver of a car that has to roll through a hostile mob, or someone required to work in a downtown office building that lawfully totes a travel-size AR. Just the same as the looters and terrorists undermine the misguided souls that are legitimately protesting. Although at this point, I would say that any lawful individual should be nowhere near these mobs.

[FrankinCA]

The charge most likely will be reduced to brandishing. He didn’t point it directly at anyone. unfortunately, he will most likely be charged under one of the assault rifle statutes, and lose his 2A rights.

[FrankinCA]

To fight? Yeah, not seeing it in the video. Insinuation.

American Flag patriots have as much right to be in the street, at the foot of their property, as those ‘protesters’ do...and defend their point of view.

I don’t care about the legal facts of unjust CA socialist laws. Only that individuals have a right to not be intimidated by hostile organizers on private property.

You side with who you like, the video shows me what I need.

Plenty of good video over the last week to show me who is right and wrong, and who the law is applied too.

Patron, agree with you. Patriots have as much right to be in the street, but given the current state of affairs, not a good idea. Too many variables, including the police. If a police officer had seen him, he could have been shot. I hope someone does a go fund me for his legal defense, I’ll chip in happily

[revchuck38]

On my shitty laptop speakers it sounded like they were chanting "beat their meat" but I'm assuming that's not right...

How can you have any pudding if you don't...?

[blues]

How can you have any pudding if you don't...?

Or combine them and get "Meaty, Beaty, Big and Bouncy"

[paherne]

Yes, the protesters, given their track record, quietly and politely walked by those waving American flags.

I watched the video and remained unconvinced, as I know, and you should too, a cut of a video doesn’t tell me the entirety of the exchange.

On private property, given the current climate of hate against even looking white and patriotic, I have no problem with him brandishing if he felt threatened and outnumbered by a hostile crowd in a state where LE has given permission to these ‘protesters’ to destroy private property.

Stupid games, Revolver Bob, are a hostile organization to memorialize a career criminal, and use the negligent act of one Officer, to burn the country.

...and, given that still image, they’re pushing people to far, and these ‘protesters’ are not going to like the prize they might receive.

Yeah, that's PC 245 in CA. No matter what your feels are.

[paherne]

Furthermore, this event happened in California, where a duty to retreat is absolutely necessary. The individual in question had AMPLE opportunity to retreat, obvious even from the edited video, and instead chose to arm himself and brandish that weapon at the crowd. He is the criminal in this situation, full stop.

.

I would like to point out that California, for non-peace officers, is a True Man, Old West state with no duty to retreat.

[RevolverRob]

I would like to point out that California, for non-peace officers, is a True Man, Old West state with no duty to retreat.

Huh, I was clearly mistaken. No duty to retreat, but also no stand your ground - it appears when you’re not on your home property, there is the standard burden of “reasonable” for the use of deadly force.

Does California consider brandishing to be equivalent of deadly force?

[RevolverRob]

Yeah, that's PC 245 in CA. No matter what your feels are.

Wow, I just went and looked up that chapter. If convicted under 245(3), assault with a machine gun, assault weapon, or .50 BMG rifle, this guy could serve anywhere from 4 to 12 years in state prison.

Assault with a simple firearm (non-AW) is WAY more lenient by comparison (245(2) for those wondering).

[paherne]

Huh, I was clearly mistaken. No duty to retreat, but also no stand your ground - it appears when you’re not on your home property, there is the standard burden of “reasonable” for the use of deadly force.

Does California consider brandishing to be equivalent of deadly force?

Brandishing is not deadly force in CA.

The relevant CA Penal Code section is:

417.(a) (1) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any deadly weapon whatsoever, other than a firearm, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who in any manner, unlawfully uses a deadly weapon other than a firearm in any fight or quarrel is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than 30 days.

(2) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who in any manner, unlawfully uses a firearm in any fight or quarrel is punishable as follows:

(A) If the violation occurs in a public place and the firearm is a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months and not more than one year, by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(B) In all cases other than that set forth in subparagraph (A), a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months.

(b) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any loaded firearm in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who, in any manner, unlawfully uses any loaded firearm in any fight or quarrel upon the grounds of any day care center, as defined in Section 1596.76 of the Health and Safety Code, or any facility where programs, including day care programs or recreational programs, are being conducted for persons under 18 years of age, including programs conducted by a nonprofit organization, during the hours in which the center or facility is open for use, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months, nor more than one year.

(c) Every person who, in the immediate presence of a peace officer, draws or exhibits any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, and who knows, or reasonably should know, by the officer’s uniformed appearance or other action of identification by the officer, that he or she is a peace officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties, and that peace officer is engaged in the performance of his or her duties, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than nine months and not to exceed one year, or in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three years.

(d) Except where a different penalty applies, every person who violates this section when the other person is in the process of cleaning up graffiti or vandalism is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months nor more than one year.

(e) As used in this section, “peace officer” means any person designated as a peace officer pursuant to Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2.

(f) As used in this section, “public place” means any of the following:

(1) A public place in an incorporated city.

(2) A public street in an incorporated city.

(3) A public street in an unincorporated area.

[RevolverRob]

Brandishing is not deadly force in CA.

The relevant CA Penal Code section is:

417.(a) (1) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any deadly weapon whatsoever, other than a firearm, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who in any manner, unlawfully uses a deadly weapon other than a firearm in any fight or quarrel is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than 30 days.

(2) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who in any manner, unlawfully uses a firearm in any fight or quarrel is punishable as follows:

(A) If the violation occurs in a public place and the firearm is a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months and not more than one year, by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(B) In all cases other than that set forth in subparagraph (A), a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months.

(b) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any loaded firearm in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, or who, in any manner, unlawfully uses any loaded firearm in any fight or quarrel upon the grounds of any day care center, as defined in Section 1596.76 of the Health and Safety Code, or any facility where programs, including day care programs or recreational programs, are being conducted for persons under 18 years of age, including programs conducted by a nonprofit organization, during the hours in which the center or facility is open for use, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months, nor more than one year.

(c) Every person who, in the immediate presence of a peace officer, draws or exhibits any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, in a rude, angry, or threatening manner, and who knows, or reasonably should know, by the officer’s uniformed appearance or other action of identification by the officer, that he or she is a peace officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties, and that peace officer is engaged in the performance of his or her duties, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than nine months and not to exceed one year, or in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three years.

(d) Except where a different penalty applies, every person who violates this section when the other person is in the process of cleaning up graffiti or vandalism is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than three months nor more than one year.

(e) As used in this section, “peace officer” means any person designated as a peace officer pursuant to Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2.

(f) As used in this section, “public place” means any of the following:

(1) A public place in an incorporated city.

(2) A public street in an incorporated city.

(3) A public street in an unincorporated area.

Hmm, well he should try to plead out to brandishing and serve 3-6 months in county. Maybe that will give him some time to sit and think about his whole set of decisions leading up to this incident and use his brain better in the future. (One can hope).

[AlwaysLearning]

I would like to point out that California, for non-peace officers, is a True Man, Old West state with no duty to retreat.

Indeed. Here (https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/3400/3471) are the California Criminal Court jury instructions regarding self defense by an aggressor/initiator of a fight. What's especially notable about California is that a person who starts a fight (!) but chooses to clearly withdraw, can then use deadly force to protect themselves from an advancing opponent. I've been told by very experienced criminal defense attorneys that when they want to know a summary of the law for a particular criminal law section, they look at the official jury instructions.

The original case on this issue is People v. Hecker, 109 Cal. 451 (1895). As far as I can tell this is still good law in California. As a California Supreme Court case it's unlikely to be overturned.

Once upon a time, California gun laws were pretty reasonable -- a person could carry a loaded gun in their car through the early '80s, and in many rural places it was tacitly accepted until pretty recently, despite being illegal. Nowadays, of course, most of the rural parts of CA, as well as the more conservative leaning urban counties (Orange, San Diego, Sacramento) widely issue CCW permits.