Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
According to the article...the machete weilder swung the machete at the father connecting with him.You just pulled that right out of your ass. You have no clue what my Zimmerman take was. For the record I personally thought he murdered the kid like a coward but living in Florida and being a gun owner myself and knowing our laws I was pretty sure his injuries and the lack of eye witnesses, leaving his the only story, would probably get him off legally.
This isn't that case. Zimmerman and Trayvon got into an altercation in the street. If Zimmerman had followed Trayvon all the way home and shot him on his property he'd be in jail right now.
1. Your own question defeats your own argument. At the heart of it is ignorance. You have the legal right to defend yourself from real physical threats, not imagined ones. That's before we get into the particulars of this incident.According to the article...the machete weilder swung the machete at the father connecting with him.
The two then disarmed the man.
He then attempted to flee into the house.
So...my question stands.
How do these men who have just been attacked with a deadly weapon determine weather the attacker is withdrawing permanently or is instead seeking a more powerful deadly weapon?
This is the key transaction right here.The particulars of this incident are that these men followed the victim to his house, prevented from being able to go into his house, then an altercation ensued in which the victim wielded a machete that was taken away from him by the perpetrators
Even if it's the other way you don't have a legal right to shoot a retreating unarmed man, especially one retreating into his own home.This is the key transaction right here.
If it is as you have rendered it...I agree with you.
The way I understand it...the confrontation and the attack come first THEN the prevention to enter the house.
In the second instance, the incident becomes more justifiable.
I'm not so sure in this instance.Even if it's the other way you don't have a legal right to shoot a retreating unarmed man, especially one retreating into his own home.
Based on what? Even if castle doctrine didn't apply, which it does in this instance, it's hard to argue a retreating man poses an immediate physical threat to you such that it warrants the use of deadly force. That's not a right that you have. Not as a citizen or a gun owner. If the threat is retreating away from you and isn't armed with a gun then that threat is effectively over.I'm not so sure in this instance.
Well see that question mark at the end signifies your ignorance. Just because you are fearful that's what they might do it doesn't become a reasonable act of self defense until they actually do it.Retreating as in running away/disengaging?...agree 100%.
Retreating to a more fortified position where more lethal weapons could be available? That is at a minimum murkier.
You have to show lethal capability. A man standing 50 feet from you threatening you with a knife is also lethal intent but from 50 feet away he lacks the capability. If he starts moving towards you then we're having a conversation.The man with the machete has already proven lethal intent.
Based to the fact he has already attacked once with a deadly weapon.Well see that question mark at the end signifies your ignorance. Just because you are fearful that's what they might do it doesn't become a reasonable act of self defense until they actually do it.
www.wistv.com
And the attack ended. Also its not clear who was acting in self defense in that particular part of the altercation. The father and son followed the man home and prevented him from entering his house. Sounds like it was the machete wielding man defending himself from multiple assailants there.Based to the fact he has already attacked once with a deadly weapon.
We have numerous news reports and an arrest. If we have reason to believe anything it's that the father and son were in the wrong. But I'll grant you that tentatively. We have nothing to indicate they were the victim's.Depends on the situation.
We don't have enough information to reach consensus.
the machettie wilder was going int othe the two farmers houseI don't know...it's a tough call.
If someone has just swung a machete at you an you disarmed them...are they retreating into to house to safety...or are they retreating into the house to retrieve another more deadly weapon?
Hard to say.
the article doesnt say he swung at them,, just that they took it away from him,, and they were on his property not he on theirs,,I don't know...it's a tough call.
If someone has just swung a machete at you an you disarmed them...are they retreating into to house to safety...or are they retreating into the house to retrieve another more deadly weapon?
Hard to say.
why are you lying??the machettie wilder was going int othe the two farmers house
“This all started with the Lindlers confronting Newhouse about a trespassing incident they said happened just before at another address,” Koon said. “Before the three men fought, the Lindlers prevented Newhouse from going back into his house.”the machettie wilder was going int othe the two farmers house
Best thing you can do is ignore that lying troll, stupid is all they know. They are not here for debate just seeing how many chains they can pull by posting the dumbest stuff possibleOh.
So you just lie and make shit up.
It's ok- just come out and say you just lie and make shit up.
Says the clowns who love to talk about me but can't touch my arguments. I'd love for one of you to make an intellectual point but the lot of you seem incapable.Best thing you can do is ignore that lying troll, stupid is all they know. They are not here for debate just seeing how many chains they can pull by posting the dumbest stuff possible
Different article ...the article doesnt say he swung at them,, just that they took it away from him,, and they were on his property not he on theirs,,
www.wistv.com
If true... hard to see that they have a leg to stand on.“Before the three men fought, the Lindlers prevented Newhouse from going back into his house.”
It's Fox News, so I am certain there are facts they aren't telling you.
Father and son farmers charged with killing armed trespasser
Two South Carolina farmers, a father and his son, have been charged with murder after allegedly shooting a suspected armed trespasser following an altercation.www.foxnews.com
wonder how this will end out? dude tress passed on their property with machettie and hit them with it. the farmers got it away from him and he still tried to barge in their house. so protect their families they shot him and he died. now they are up for murder. i wonder what machettie dude was mad about?
www.lexingtonchronicle.com
100 percent bullshit.wonder how this will end out? dude tress passed on their property with machettie and hit them with it. the farmers got it away from him and he still tried to barge in their house. so protect their families they shot him and he died. now they are up for murder. i wonder what machettie dude was mad about?
its a local story fox regurgitated,,It's Fox News, so I am certain there are facts they aren't telling you.
