Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[HereWeGoAgain]

I WAS INCORRECT - THE OTHER THREAD INDICATED THIS HAD BEEN ADJUDICATED IN A SYG HEARING. IT HAS NOT GONE TO THAT HEARING,

Yeah I know what you mean....
I've adjusted my views as the facts come in but all I hear about is my original post.
I hate it when people jump into a thread and start shit before reading the whole thing.
It's been particularly bad in this thread.

I was wrong in thinking the SYG hearing had happened, The take away is keep to yourself. You never know who can and will seriously ruin your day if you get stupid.

They're not ruining my day by any stretch.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I WAS INCORRECT - THE OTHER THREAD INDICATED THIS HAD BEEN ADJUDICATED IN A SYG HEARING. IT HAS NOT GONE TO THAT HEARING,

Thank you! How many times were you asked to verify that assertion because it did not seem possible?

 

[2aguy]

He shoved the old man to the ground violently.
Thats about as in your face as you can get.
Tough case...personally I wouldnt have shot the dude just to avoid the potential legal ramifications being in Florida or not.
But then I wouldnt have attacked an old man either.

Who knows,maybe the guy said something that made the guy think it was in his best interest to cap the guy. He didnt seem inclined to shoot at first.

I guess we just come from very different cultures. I grew up outside Kalamazoo, Michigan (hence "kaz"). Once you left the city in the 70s, it was country. I was taught that carrying is a responsibility. You avoid conflict, you don't create it. Screaming at a woman then capping her boyfriend when he tried to protect her wouldn't fly. Those are my values

I wouldnt have said anything either.
But words dont give you the right to attack someone.

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....

Bullshit. I’d bet you a million bucks he’s going to prison. I’ll bet a jury will agree too

Past history doesn't matter when you have the video of the attacker initiating the violent attack..... He may have been shouting at the woman, he didn't initiate the violence....

 

[2aguy]

the dude who got trigger happy and murdererd that guy is going away to the slammer. GUARANTEED

Already a thread on this.
The guy was justified but I think he went to far.

It’s not the first time this clown has confronted people at this store, over a parking space. But it will be the last. Knocking someone down who doesn’t see it coming is assault. The victim has no way to know what the perpetrators intentions are beyond having already been assaulted. Clean shoot. And another wannabe bad ass is off the street. Who he died in front of is of little relevance. Who knows? Maybe the 5 year old will learn not to make the same mistake that got his father killed...

Legally yes.
Personally I wouldnt have shot the dude.

LOL. You’d be in prison. Watch the video again and dig deep; you know in your heart of hearts that encounter didn’t warrant the use of deadly force

I think the guy is going to walk.
Not that the guy should have shot him.
When the cops come right out and say they're not going to charge him it's a pretty good indication how the DA will go.

Now that the incident has hit the news, the public outcry may force the DA to bring it to trial. Kind of like Zimmerman.

And how did that go?

 

[2aguy]

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

So as long as your afraid, your justified in taking another mans life? Taking another mans life is dependent on your emotional state?

That is the law..... you have to be in fear of death or grievious bodily harm..... and since the attacker attacked the guy violently and then kept advancing..... it was on him....not the victim.

You are the only poster on this thread who sees the man advancing. Why is that?

You have to watch the video, he hikes up his pants and steps forward..... he only steps back as the man points the gun at him.... and by then it is too late...

 

[2aguy]

My premise remains the same. In a self-defensive shooting or other lethal force you are allowed to present a SYG defense to a judge who can settle the matter without further legal action. (*in Florida)

It may be, but he was on the ground, Stand Your Ground won't apply.

 

[2aguy]

Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

In the link below is an article with a video that shows a "stand your ground" incident in Clearwater Florida. A women illegally parked in a handicapped spot and got into an argument with a man who confronted her about it. The women's boyfriend, who was in the store at the time, comes out to see the argument and pushes the man to the ground. With the man on the ground he pulls out a gun and aims at the man who assaulted him. The man who committed the assault then backs up. Despite backing away, the man fires his gun anyways hitting the man in the chest. The injured man then runs into the store where he collapses on the ground and dies in front of his five your old son.


My opinion:

Both the women and her boyfriend committed illegal acts which led to the incident. But, I do not feel the man who was assaulted was justified in shooting his attacker. The Attacker had backed off after the gun was pulled. Parking in handicap spot and pushing someone to the ground or both illegal, but punishment for those actions would never warrant the death penalty. Had the attacker continued to assault or move towards the man pushed to the ground, then you might have a case where shooting the gun might be warranted. But that is not what happened. The attacker backed away after the gun was pulled. Then he was shot and killed, dying in front of his five year old son in the store. The man has two other children as well.

I've seen people get pushed to the ground like that in the school yard. Its wrong, you have a right to defend yourself. But in this case, taking another mans life was NOT justified. Call the police and the film of the incident would be enough evidence to punish the attacker in an appropriate manner.

The article and video of the incident are in the link below:

https://nypost.com/2018/07/20/stand...r-in-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/

media link from youtube:

Absolutely unjustified, and the shooter will fry for this. The attacker was not armed, was not threatening him after the shove, and was seen backing away. At no time or in any way was the man's life in danger or could he claim he thought was in danger. The brandishing of the gun alone ended the danger. The shooter committed murder. You can't just kill someone for simple assault.

It isn't that simple..... your view from the video is not the same as the guy on the ground.

 

[Lewdog]

Nope. Not justifiable. The man that pushed him down didn't have a weapon. He wasn't even continuing to assault him. For stand your ground you have to feel not just a threat, but a threat for your life. Being pushed to the ground is in no way a threat on your life.

Second Amendment supporters should be saying that this guy goes to jail for murder... because it is actions like his that actually makes their stance look bad. The guy on the ground shot a man that had backed away from him even before he pulled out the gun, and had his hands at his sides.

There really is no argument in this instance. It's not even close.

 

[2aguy]

Nope. Not justifiable. The man that pushed him down didn't have a weapon. He wasn't even continuing to assault him. For stand your ground you have to feel not just a threat, but a threat for your life. Being pushed to the ground is in no way a threat on your life.

Second Amendment supporters should be saying that this guy goes to jail for murder... because it is actions like his that actually makes their stance look bad. The guy on the ground shot a man that had backed away from him even before he pulled out the gun, and had his hands at his sides.

There really is no argument in this instance. It's not even close.

No..... you have to believe you are in imminent danger of death or grevious bodily injury and the attacker doesn't have to be armed, they simply need to have an over whelming ability to inflict harm to you.... and sorry, the time between getting violently attacked and the shooting is so close that the claim of self defense is going to be hard to beat.

 

[Lewdog]

Nope. Not justifiable. The man that pushed him down didn't have a weapon. He wasn't even continuing to assault him. For stand your ground you have to feel not just a threat, but a threat for your life. Being pushed to the ground is in no way a threat on your life.

Second Amendment supporters should be saying that this guy goes to jail for murder... because it is actions like his that actually makes their stance look bad. The guy on the ground shot a man that had backed away from him even before he pulled out the gun, and had his hands at his sides.

There really is no argument in this instance. It's not even close.

No..... you have to believe you are in imminent danger of death or grevious bodily injury and the attacker doesn't have to be armed, they simply need to have an over whelming ability to inflict harm to you.... and sorry, the time between getting violently attacked and the shooting is so close that the claim of self defense is going to be hard to beat.

Read the entire thing I posted. The guy that pushed him down was not only NOT ARMED, he wasn't even continuing to attack him, had backed up, and his arms were down at his side and not in an aggressive position. The guy had backed up EVEN BEFORE the guy pulled the gun.

READ THE ENTIRE POST.

I know these laws. I've had to deal with writing Use of Force Reports. I've studied lord knows how many laws involving self-defense and use of deadly force. This shooter is toast. This isn't even close. Just the icing on the cake is the fact HE HAD a reputation of trying to push people's buttons and looking for confrontation.

 

[2aguy]

Nope. Not justifiable. The man that pushed him down didn't have a weapon. He wasn't even continuing to assault him. For stand your ground you have to feel not just a threat, but a threat for your life. Being pushed to the ground is in no way a threat on your life.

Second Amendment supporters should be saying that this guy goes to jail for murder... because it is actions like his that actually makes their stance look bad. The guy on the ground shot a man that had backed away from him even before he pulled out the gun, and had his hands at his sides.

There really is no argument in this instance. It's not even close.

No..... you have to believe you are in imminent danger of death or grevious bodily injury and the attacker doesn't have to be armed, they simply need to have an over whelming ability to inflict harm to you.... and sorry, the time between getting violently attacked and the shooting is so close that the claim of self defense is going to be hard to beat.

Read the entire thing I posted. The guy that pushed him down was not only NOT ARMED, he wasn't even continuing to attack him, had backed up, and his arms were down at his side and not in an aggressive position. The guy had backed up EVEN BEFORE the guy pulled the gun.

READ THE ENTIRE POST.

I know these laws. I've had to deal with writing Use of Force Reports. I've studied lord knows how many laws involving self-defense and use of deadly force. This shooter is toast. This isn't even close. Just the icing on the cake is the fact HE HAD a reputation of trying to push people's buttons and looking for confrontation.

No, the shooter is not toast...... no matter what he did in the past, he didn't attack anyone, the other guy did..... and the time between the initial violent push, drawing the gun and firing the gun isn't going to be the big issue you think it is..... if you actually studied self defense you would know about the effect of adrenaline on your vision and time awareness.....

 

[BlackSand]

.​

Pineapple​

.​

 

[Lewdog]

Nope. Not justifiable. The man that pushed him down didn't have a weapon. He wasn't even continuing to assault him. For stand your ground you have to feel not just a threat, but a threat for your life. Being pushed to the ground is in no way a threat on your life.

Second Amendment supporters should be saying that this guy goes to jail for murder... because it is actions like his that actually makes their stance look bad. The guy on the ground shot a man that had backed away from him even before he pulled out the gun, and had his hands at his sides.

There really is no argument in this instance. It's not even close.

No..... you have to believe you are in imminent danger of death or grevious bodily injury and the attacker doesn't have to be armed, they simply need to have an over whelming ability to inflict harm to you.... and sorry, the time between getting violently attacked and the shooting is so close that the claim of self defense is going to be hard to beat.

Read the entire thing I posted. The guy that pushed him down was not only NOT ARMED, he wasn't even continuing to attack him, had backed up, and his arms were down at his side and not in an aggressive position. The guy had backed up EVEN BEFORE the guy pulled the gun.

READ THE ENTIRE POST.

I know these laws. I've had to deal with writing Use of Force Reports. I've studied lord knows how many laws involving self-defense and use of deadly force. This shooter is toast. This isn't even close. Just the icing on the cake is the fact HE HAD a reputation of trying to push people's buttons and looking for confrontation.

No, the shooter is not toast...... no matter what he did in the past, he didn't attack anyone, the other guy did..... and the time between the initial violent push, drawing the gun and firing the gun isn't going to be the big issue you think it is..... if you actually studied self defense you would know about the effect of adrenaline on your vision and time awareness.....

If you think someone pushing you to the ground is justification for lethal force, you are a prime example of why there needs to be stricter gun laws. Congrats, you have just invalidated every single stat and gun article you have posted, and instead validated every single person that has said you are a gun nut who lacks the reasoning and decision making skills to be a responsible gun owner.

By definition, the man that was pushed down was NOT in imminent danger. He could clearly see the man that pushed him down. The man was not even in range to continue to attack him, the man didn't have ANY KIND OF WEAPON, and wasn't even in any type of hostile stance.

Thanks for validating what I've been saying about you for a long time now.

 

[strollingbones]

i know the laws in nc changed from ...having to retreat as far as you could...to i will just shot them thru the door....

 

[Lewdog]

i know the laws in nc changed from ...having to retreat as far as you could...to i will just shot them thru the door....

This didn't happen on his property. This was in a public parking lot at a convenient store.

 

[strollingbones]

i know that....the shooting was legally a good one...morally it sucked...

 

[Lewdog]

Wow, sure is a lot of people here who don't understand what a Stand Your Ground Law really is. No wonder the U.S. has so much gun violence.

 

[BlackSand]

Wow, sure is a lot of people here who don't understand what a Stand Your Ground Law really is. No wonder the U.S. has so much gun violence.

The Pinellas County Sheriff does and said the shooting "fell between the bookends" ...
of the Stand Your Ground Law.

The law doesn't actually give a shit whether or not you agree with it ...

.​

 

[Lewdog]

Wow, sure is a lot of people here who don't understand what a Stand Your Ground Law really is. No wonder the U.S. has so much gun violence.

The Pinellas County Sheriff does and said the shooting "fell between the bookends" ...
of the Stand Your Ground Law.

The law doesn't actually give a shit whether or not you agree with it ...

.​

That shooting does not fit the law. Period.

 

[strollingbones]

okay let me explain the difference.....before you had to retreat as much as you could and then defend yourself in court....
now there is no mandate to retreat...if you feel your life is in danger...you may shoot and its up to the prosecutor to make the case that you had no right to stand your ground....now please tell me what we dont understand?