Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[OODA_Loop]

I said you keep telling me everything I say is speculation, yet you admit no such thing for yourself.

You're the one evading a discussion by doing that. It's a form of ad hominem argument

You speculate when you say he thought, said or wanted to do "x".


How exactly do I speculate ?

 

[Vastator]

[ The guy set up a loop where he was armed and the aggressor and was going to kill anyone who fought back. Then he kept repeating it until he got what he wanted. That's murder one

Yeah...………….not your last point, that it's Murder One: it isn't because he didn't specifically plan that specific murder. The most it is, is manslaughter, IMO.

But I think you make a good point that needed making: this guy WAS a loaded gun. He wanted very badly to kill someone, and yeah, he just kept on and on till he got what he wanted.

These types are probably best avoided...…...

You have no way of knowing what a complete stranger wants. You should quit believing you do. That's how mistakes are made.

The guy was screaming at his girlfriend in the parking lot. How is that possibly unclear to you?

What is undetermined is "who started "screaming" first", and what was being "screamed", and if both parties were screaming at each other. What is clear, is that the victim presented no physical threat to the woman. What is equally clear is that the victim never screamed at the man who initiated the assault.

Go to the one minute mark of the video.

And did you just say that someone screaming at your wife is OK as long as they don't scream at you? A man views it the reverse, just so you know

And if you assault someone for screaming at a third party; you risk legal action against you. Or even injury, or death. Just so you know. White knighting is not a legal defense for committing a crime.

 

[kaz]

He's talking about his fists, moron. I mean duh. How did you possibly not get that?

In that case did he place his hands on anyone ?

You already admitted that you and your wife would both have felt threatened if it had been you

Yes but the threat has not risen to a level requiring lethal force absent hands on or brandishing a weapon.

Neither was getting knocked down by a guy defending his woman from him who then backed off

 

[BlackSand]

That shooting does not fit the law. Period.

Read the article ... The sheriff disagrees with you.
And whereas you may disagree with the sheriff ... What you think doesn't matter ...

.​

 

[kaz]

Actually the video is quite clear. The murderer was white and the victim was black

Ahhhhhh………..a race murder by a black, then, if you are right. The black screaming at a white woman.

Sheeeeesh. BLM.

Fuck you, dick. I answered your question. Don't ask a question if you don't want it answered

 

[OODA_Loop]

Neither was getting knocked down by a guy defending his woman from him who then backed off

The act of knocking down was the escalation that resulted in lethal force.

Play stupid games - win stupid prizes.

 

[Vastator]

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....

So someone threatening your family is not initiating violence, got it

You dont know what was said between the two.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

I didnt hear what the guy and the chick were saying.

Neither did I...

 

[kaz]

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....

So someone threatening your family is not initiating violence, got it

You dont know what was said between the two.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

I didnt hear what the guy and the chick were saying.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

 

[kaz]

[ The guy set up a loop where he was armed and the aggressor and was going to kill anyone who fought back. Then he kept repeating it until he got what he wanted. That's murder one

Yeah...………….not your last point, that it's Murder One: it isn't because he didn't specifically plan that specific murder. The most it is, is manslaughter, IMO.

But I think you make a good point that needed making: this guy WAS a loaded gun. He wanted very badly to kill someone, and yeah, he just kept on and on till he got what he wanted.

These types are probably best avoided...…...

You have no way of knowing what a complete stranger wants. You should quit believing you do. That's how mistakes are made.

The guy was screaming at his girlfriend in the parking lot. How is that possibly unclear to you?

Does one forfeit their right to defending themselves against an assault by a third party, if the third party decides he doesn't like your tone?

Strawman

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

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....

So someone threatening your family is not initiating violence, got it

You dont know what was said between the two.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

I didnt hear what the guy and the chick were saying.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

Already did.
I couldnt hear what they were saying.

 

[Lewdog]

That shooting does not fit the law. Period.

Read the article ... The sheriff disagrees with you.
And whereas you may disagree with the sheriff ... What you think doesn't matter ...

.​

No the sheriff says the way the law is worded it isn't up to him to arrest the guy because it is up to the prosecutor whether charges can be pressed or not. Learn 2 read.

 

[kaz]

[ The guy set up a loop where he was armed and the aggressor and was going to kill anyone who fought back. Then he kept repeating it until he got what he wanted. That's murder one

Yeah...………….not your last point, that it's Murder One: it isn't because he didn't specifically plan that specific murder. The most it is, is manslaughter, IMO.

But I think you make a good point that needed making: this guy WAS a loaded gun. He wanted very badly to kill someone, and yeah, he just kept on and on till he got what he wanted.

These types are probably best avoided...…...

You have no way of knowing what a complete stranger wants. You should quit believing you do. That's how mistakes are made.

The guy was screaming at his girlfriend in the parking lot. How is that possibly unclear to you?

But you have no idea what he was saying.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

 

[Vastator]

You have no way of knowing what a complete stranger wants. You should quit believing you do. That's how mistakes are made.

The guy was screaming at his girlfriend in the parking lot. How is that possibly unclear to you?

What is undetermined is "who started "screaming" first", and what was being "screamed", and if both parties were screaming at each other. What is clear, is that the victim presented no physical threat to the woman. What is equally clear is that the victim never screamed at the man who initiated the assault.

There are plenty of character witnesses against the shooter that show his state of mind. The OWNER of the convenient store said the shooter goes out in the parking lot and yells at people all the time.

Prior behavior doesn't prove state of mind in the moment. Have they witnessed the victims behavior while he was being assaulted, in the past? I saw no evidence to suggest they had.

Yes it does. Just the fact you are asking that question tells me you haven't actually watched the video.

How many pages have you been arguing and haven't even watched the fucking video? Or are you watching it and not listening to the sound?

No it doesn't. No matter how much you need it to, in order to support your position.

 

[kaz]

Actually the video is quite clear. The murderer was white and the victim was black

There was no "murder" shown on the video. Unless you meant to post this in another thread. Feel free to post a link for clarification of your post if you wish.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

I watched it many times now. Do you have a point?

You said I don't know what the guy was thinking. Go to the one minute mark of the video and the store owner tells you what he was thinking

How can the store owner possibly know what was said?

Go to the one minute mark of the video

 

[Circe]

What is clear, is that the victim presented no physical threat to the woman.

Ummmmmm……….no, that's wrong for sure: WE know that the shooter, the parking space defender, did present a serious threat to the woman, because he had a gun, and inside three minutes, he killed her boyfriend. He could of course have killed her. Now, she presumably did not know about the gun, although I would think if I lived in Florida I would assume anybody might be armed, especially a crazy. Yep, come to think of it, this may be the point of this thread: as America becomes more and more armed on every street, as in Heinlein's Beyond These Horizons, wonderful novel on this topic, I recommend it. We had better start assuming every crazy and maybe everyone else too might be armed.

I think I'll start doing that.

 

[kaz]

Any full grown man knows that yelling at a woman in a parking lot is threatening. We're bigger and stronger than they are and it's psychotic behavior. That isn't just "verbal."

Can you process the point and move on now?

Yelling absent action is nothing.

Your point is words can deserve violence.

They don't. You should have learned that in Kindergarten.

You already admitted you and your wife would have felt threatened. You can't unring that bell

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

[ The guy set up a loop where he was armed and the aggressor and was going to kill anyone who fought back. Then he kept repeating it until he got what he wanted. That's murder one

Yeah...………….not your last point, that it's Murder One: it isn't because he didn't specifically plan that specific murder. The most it is, is manslaughter, IMO.

But I think you make a good point that needed making: this guy WAS a loaded gun. He wanted very badly to kill someone, and yeah, he just kept on and on till he got what he wanted.

These types are probably best avoided...…...

You have no way of knowing what a complete stranger wants. You should quit believing you do. That's how mistakes are made.

The guy was screaming at his girlfriend in the parking lot. How is that possibly unclear to you?

But you have no idea what he was saying.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

Are you a parrot?

 

[Lewdog]

[ The guy set up a loop where he was armed and the aggressor and was going to kill anyone who fought back. Then he kept repeating it until he got what he wanted. That's murder one

Yeah...………….not your last point, that it's Murder One: it isn't because he didn't specifically plan that specific murder. The most it is, is manslaughter, IMO.

But I think you make a good point that needed making: this guy WAS a loaded gun. He wanted very badly to kill someone, and yeah, he just kept on and on till he got what he wanted.

These types are probably best avoided...…...

You have no way of knowing what a complete stranger wants. You should quit believing you do. That's how mistakes are made.

The guy was screaming at his girlfriend in the parking lot. How is that possibly unclear to you?

But you have no idea what he was saying.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

They aren't going to watch the video because they've already made up their minds. A white guy shot a black guy simply because he got pushed on his ass.

So they don't have the same sympathy for the Black guy, and secondly they don't want to admit that a gun owner that was carrying in public lost his cool and murdered someone in broad daylight. That undermines their stance on gun control laws.

 

[OODA_Loop]

You already admitted you and your wife would have felt threatened. You can't unring that bell

Yes but not to the point requiring hands on or lethal force action.

The goal is to unring the bell and survive.

Lethal force is a losing proposition. Dont look for it. Especially for words you dont like.

 

[kaz]

You've obviously never taken a gun safety course. I hope that means you don't have any guns

In keeping with a common thing amongst many on this thread, your post is pure speculation. Your "hopes" are of equally worthless value, as they pertain to this incident.

I like your lame repeated line that anything you think is fact and no one else can say what they think because that's just opinion. Keep on whining.

This is a discussion. We're discussing the evidence presented. Just like you're doing

Presenting what you believe others are thinking as fact, and sharing your feelings about other posters is in no way discussing the evidence presented. Its nothing more than unsubstantiated, and unproveable gossip.

Go to the one minute mark of the video

You keep repeating yourself. Quit spamming, and bring relevant content.

I keep giving you the same answer to the same question, that is correct.

My answer is obvious. If you or HereWeGoAgain want to discuss it, you would address my point. Neither of you are doing that. You just repeat the same question and ignore my answer