Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference ( People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), defendant's guilt of criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Under Penal Law § 265.15 (4), defendant's possession of the gun was presumptive evidence of his intent to use it "unlawfully against another", as required by Penal Law § 265.03 for second degree possession liability ( People v. Lee, 154 A.D.2d 399, 400, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 772), and the requisite intent was in any event inferable from the evidence that defendant removed the gun from his car, pulled back the slide which would chamber a round, and pointed it at someone in the crowd. Nor were the People required to prove that defendant knew that the gun was then loaded ( People v. Ansare, 96 A.D.2d 96, 97).
Defendant's argument that the court should have charged the jury on the law of temporary and lawful possession of a weapon is unpreserved for appellate review, and in any event without merit. Even under defendant's version of the incident, the elements of this defense were not established ( see, People v. Karim, 176 A.D.2d 670, 671, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 859).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.