Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I honestly do not know, as the information in a news article surely leaves out important details that will be revealed during a trial.

Very unlikely there'll be a trial.

There will. I can tell you that from personal experience .

And what personal experience would that be and where did it play out?

Apache County Az, Feb.2016.

Than you need to look at Florida law.

Than??????

 

[kaz]

Gun safety starts with avoiding dangerous situations where possible. You don't create a dangerous situation where there could be a shooting. If you're screaming at a woman and her boyfriend is coming out, that right there is setting up a dangerous situation.

The shover created the situation. Until then it was all verbal.

So if you came out of a store and some guy was screaming at your wife in the parking lot, you wouldn't be worried for her safety? You're seriously claiming that? It was threatening, it wasn't just verbal.

Also the victim was not being aggressive when the shooter shot him. He shoved him once to get him away from his wife.

And again, that's not my argument.

When you're armed and repeatedly aggressive, it will end up in a shooting. I hope you're not a gun owner. Life isn't the shooting gallery you apparently believe it is

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Then let us watch as it plays out in the Fla court system

Stand your ground.
Case dismissed.

The attacker was retreating. Manslaughter.

 

[kaz]

Very unlikely there'll be a trial.

There will. I can tell you that from personal experience .

And what personal experience would that be and where did it play out?

Apache County Az, Feb.2016.

Than you need to look at Florida law.

Than??????

You're right, but wow, spell and grammar checking message boards is mega lame

 

[kaz]

Then let us watch as it plays out in the Fla court system

Stand your ground.
Case dismissed.

The attacker was retreating. Manslaughter.

I could buy that if he did it once. But when he kept repeating being armed and aggressive, it was inevitable it would end up in a death. That's why I say murder, not manslaughter

 

[kaz]

When you're screaming at a woman in the parking lot waiving your hands, that isn't just words. So seriously, if that happened to your wife, you'd say that? They're just words? Or would you have been very concerned for your wife's safety?

And regardless, when someone shoves you and backs away, that doesn't give you the right to shoot them.

Again, where I'm from, if I'd been armed and screaming at the woman, my community would stop supporting what I did right there. They'd have said I had already violated gun safety standards and created a hostile situation, which you don't do when armed. Then I get shoved by her boyfriend and I gank him? No way, it's not right.

At least not where I was raised

Technically, on the video, the guy advances and only retreats, slightly when the gun is pointed at him..... but between the backing up and shooting there isn't time, and he got shot..... Again, the guy violently attacked the victim....

If you start screaming at a woman in a parking lot while her boyfriend is in the shop while you're armed, you don't belong around guns

It depends on the situation there sport. I agree in principle, but so long as you don't pull the weapon, then what is your beef?

Gun safety starts with avoiding dangerous situations where possible. You don't create a dangerous situation where there could be a shooting. If you're screaming at a woman and her boyfriend is coming out, that right there is setting up a dangerous situation. I mean duh. How do you not get that?

I'm disappointed in all of you who apparently don't view being armed in public as a responsiblity. Particularly 2aguy who is a longtime ally in arguing 2nd amendment rights. What about try NOT to use your gun eludes you?

Armed, or not one is obligated to act responsibly in public. It’s a good idea to do the same in private as well. As to what constitutes him screaming at her... That’s subjective, and we have no idea if she was “screaming” at him in kind. Nor who “screamed” first.
As for doing this while her boyfriend was coming out of the store... It’s unlikely that the victim knew he was being approached by her boyfriend. Otherwise he would likely have made some move to defend himself against an approaching threat. As for the assailaints moral high ground... Muh dicking for your girlfriend gets no traction. He could have just as easily displayed his virtue by telling the driver not to park in the handicapped spot.
And for those bleeding hearts who assume the assailants location indicated the assault was over... You‘re merely speculating. The assault is only over when the assailant decides its over; or when he’s rendered incapable of furthering the assault. The victim made the choice in this case, by opting for choice two.

Yes, and by repeatedly being aggressive and armed, death was the eventual outcome, which is why it was murder. That isn't how you act when you're armed

 

[OODA_Loop]

So if you came out of a store and some guy was screaming at your wife in the parking lot, you wouldn't be worried for her safety? You're seriously claiming that? It was threatening, it wasn't just verbal.

So in this case from the video....my wife would be in Condition Yellow and have had the window up and her lawfully concealed weapon at the ready. She would not engage him.

I would have exited in Condition Yellow and made my way to the passenger side with my lawfully concealed weapon at the ready. I would not go hands on as this individual did for fear of deadly escalation.

We backup and leave.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Justified. If the guy on the ground was in fear of his safety.

Didn't watch the video, did you? I'm a strong second amendment supporter, but that was just murder. There was no rational self defense. I'd call it first degree murder given that the guy clearly was trying to create that exact situation

Of course I watched the video. We cannot hear what was said if anything but it happened fast. I don't think the the shooter was wrong. Did he have to shoot him? We don't know, maybe not, but what we do know is that he did shoot him after being violently knocked to the ground. If that had not happened, he would not have gotten shot. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree!

Bull shit. When he shot him, the man was not threatening him

He was close enough too him to still be a threat.

The word "too" means "also".

He was close enough also him to (correct usage) still be a threat.

Does that make any sense?

 

[sealybobo]

If you’re attacking me and I pull a gun and you stop, I can’t shoot

Not necessarily.

I just ran this scenario by my dad. He said of course he’d shoot someone who violently threw him to the ground. What more does he need to do to me before I get to shoot?

I think the message behind stand your ground is keep your hands off people

 

[kaz]

So if you came out of a store and some guy was screaming at your wife in the parking lot, you wouldn't be worried for her safety? You're seriously claiming that? It was threatening, it wasn't just verbal.

So in this case from the video....my wife would be in Condition Yellow and have had the window up and her lawfully concealed weapon at the ready. She would not engage him.

I would have exited in Condition Yellow and made my way to the passenger side with my lawfully concealed weapon at the ready. I would not go hands on as this individual did for fear of deadly escalation.

We backup and leave.

So you would fear for your and your wife's safety. Obviously you weren't being honest when you said it was "only verbal." Threats are far more than verbal.

So you claim you'd be mega careful to not escalate, yet your'e defending someone who was armed and actively confronting people, one after another. And you're OK with that. Hmm

 

[kaz]

If you’re attacking me and I pull a gun and you stop, I can’t shoot

Not necessarily.

I just ran this scenario by my dad. He said of course he’d shoot someone who violently threw him to the ground. What more does he need to do to me before I get to shoot?

I think the message behind stand your ground is keep your hands off people

Did you mention the part to your dad where in the scenario he is in the parking lot screaming at the guys wife when he came out of the store?

 

[kaz]

Justified. If the guy on the ground was in fear of his safety.

Didn't watch the video, did you? I'm a strong second amendment supporter, but that was just murder. There was no rational self defense. I'd call it first degree murder given that the guy clearly was trying to create that exact situation

Of course I watched the video. We cannot hear what was said if anything but it happened fast. I don't think the the shooter was wrong. Did he have to shoot him? We don't know, maybe not, but what we do know is that he did shoot him after being violently knocked to the ground. If that had not happened, he would not have gotten shot. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree!

Bull shit. When he shot him, the man was not threatening him

He was close enough too him to still be a threat.

The word "too" means "also".

He was close enough also him to (correct usage) still be a threat.

Does that make any sense?

If you're going to fix the Internet, you have a big job ahead of you

 

[OODA_Loop]

So you would fear for your and your wife's safety. Obviously you weren't being honest when you said it was "only verbal." Threats are far more than verbal.

So you claim you'd be mega careful to not escalate, yet your'e defending someone who was armed and actively confronting people, one after another. And you're OK with that. Hmm

I am not following your logic.

Because its is only "verbal" I am in Condition Yellow beating a hasty retreat. It is if and when it goes hands on I go Condition Red is my response as warranted.

I can take verbal all day.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Challenging someone for parking actions verbally is a lawful act. Lawful with a gun if you have a CCW.

Anybody know if the shooter had a disabled placard and the couple was preventing him from accessing a parking space he needed?

 

[kaz]

So you would fear for your and your wife's safety. Obviously you weren't being honest when you said it was "only verbal." Threats are far more than verbal.

So you claim you'd be mega careful to not escalate, yet your'e defending someone who was armed and actively confronting people, one after another. And you're OK with that. Hmm

I am not following your logic.

Because its is only Verbal I am in condition yellow beating a hasty retreat. It is if and when it goes hands on is my response as warranted.

I can take verbal all day.

You can take someone screaming at your wife and you admit she's feeling threatened all day? Seriously?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I thought it said they were still deciding. He should be charged minimum second degree murder. I'd convict him of first degree murder based on the film given that he was repeatedly trying to stage that scenario

I'm not sure how you can say he staged it,let alone repeatedly.

The store owner's testimony says as much.

Just went back and read the story again....
I didnt see anything like you're stating.
Some other link I'm missing?

Theres a video in the OP, with the store owner being interviewed and a video of the incident as well.

Where's the interview from the store clerk?

The video of the shooting pretty much clears the shooter.

Someone pushes you down and backs away and your response is to kill him? I hope you have a pretty mouth, because it might keep you alive in prison.

 

[OODA_Loop]

You can take someone screaming at your wife and you admit she's feeling threatened all day? Seriously?

Matter of proximity and ability to inflict great bodily injury or death..

Outside of car with her in it, armed. Sure. All day.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Someone pushes you down and backs away and your response is to kill him? I hope you have a pretty mouth, because it might keep you alive in prison.

Not in this case.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

A Florida man fatally shot another over a parking space — and it was legal. Here’s why.

Gunman in parking space shooting not charged because of 'Stand Your Ground' law

WATCH: Pinellas County Sheriff says no charges for 'Stand Your Ground' shooter

Then you have this one....
Stand Your Ground: Shooter in parking space dispute will not be arrested

From your link...

This will go to the state attorney. Drejka will not be charged [and] will not be arrested by us," Sheriff Gualtieri said. "The state attorney will review it and either he’ll concur or not. And, if he concurs, then there’ll be no charge. Period. If he doesn’t concur, then he’ll make a determination as to what to do with it. And, if he feels like he can overcome that heavy burden at a Stand Your Ground hearing of proving by clear and convincing evidence that Drejka was not entitled to use force in this circumstance, then that’s the state attorney’s determination to make."

Why do you think I said then you have this one?

Seems the Sheriff has decided not to charge him based on his interpretation of Stand your Ground

The State Attorney May interpret differently and respond to public pressure

While the DA may pursue charges they have to prove the guy wasnt in fear for his life.
Pretty tough case to make.

They can’t prove if he was afraid. Of course he was. But was it justifiable homocide? No.

If you’re attacking me and I pull a gun and you stop, I can’t shoot

The cops think otherwise.
Whether the DA does remains to be seen.

 

[OODA_Loop]

The cops think otherwise.
Whether the DA does remains to be seen.

Went to SYG hearing. Its done. No DA.