[jatx]

I can see how this individual might have felt intimidated by the group's approach, but I see no indication (and he has not expressed one) that his life was in immediate danger. If even one of the men had been brandishing so much as a stick, the answer would be different. Absent a real threat, though, he would not have been justified in using the weapon against the men. The issue of the dog is a red herring - you are not justified in using deadly force against a human being to protect a pet, tempting though it might be. And if he wasn't justified in using the weapon, he shouldn't have drawn it and and used the threat of force to detain the group. We NEVER pull guns to scare people, we do it is a last resort.

What else could he have done? I've read nothing to suggest that he attempted to put distance between himself and the men. That would have been my first response. Even assuming that his movement was blocked for some reason, did he need to escalate directly to aiming the weapon? No, he could have drawn and held at low ready, continued with his verbal commands and efforts to maximize distance, then escalated if the threat became more immediate. Ideally, the men would have gone on their merry way and he would have dialed 911, leaving law enforcement to the pros.

I do not want to see this guy crucified, and worry that he is likely to become a victim of politics, but he was not using his head.