They'll argue this, but the defense can argue that there is no law (outside of open carry) where it specifically states he could not discharge a weapon in self-defense (which the case for is pretty much a slam dunk at this point) and thus demonstrated need.
They'll argue this, but the defense can argue that there is no law (outside of open carry) where it specifically states he could not discharge a weapon in self-defense (which the case for is pretty much a slam dunk at this point) and thus demonstrated need.