Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[Lewdog]

Shooting in self-defense is only justified if it they are in grave imminent danger. This guy wasn't. You're a hack. Cool beans, you've shown your true colors.

In some states, yes – in Florida, not.

Even Florida Zimmerman had injuries to the back of his head, and there was no video of the actual confrontation so it was Zimmerman's word against that of a dead guy and a girl that was just on the cell phone. This whole confrontation was caught on video. This guy is fucking toast.

And the Zimmerman debacle is why the shooter in this case won’t become ‘toast.’

Why? I just explained to you the most important difference. Zimmerman's case was based on just Zimmerman's word. This case is all caught on video. They aren't even remotely the same case.

Of course they would be the same case – Zimmerman was charged with murder, and so would the shooter in the OP be charged with murder.

And the shooter in the OP would be likewise acquitted – which is why the State won’t charge him; the State doesn’t want the embarrassment of another failed prosecution as with the Zimmerman case, and the subsequent bad PR.

Moreover, the video in the OP clearly shows that the shooting was lawful, which is why the shooter wasn't charged at the scene and taken into custody.

Some might not agree with the law or think that the law is ‘wrong’, ‘bad,’ or ‘immoral’ – but it’s the law nonetheless.

It's not the same case.... because Zimmerman said he fear for his life because Martin was on top of him slamming his head into the concrete and then reaching for his gun. IF that's true, which we will never know for sure because Martin is dead, and there were no witnesses or video, THAT'S why he was acquitted based on the law.

This was ALL on video. When the killing shot was fired, the shooter was NOT in imminent danger as the unarmed victim was a good 7-10 feet away and backing up. They aren't the same case. They are using the same defense, but the evidence is not the same.

I'm really not sure what you are seeing and thinking.

 

[Vastator]

Here is a video that shows more clearly WHEN the shot was fired, and is in real time and so you can clearly determine theres a good 5 or so full seconds of BACKING UP and NO FURTHER CONTACT.

Anyone thinking this shooting is justified does not belong owning a gun, holy shit.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/amp/

Also notice that the guys wife was outside the car and the shooter stepped up into her face before he was pushed to the ground. That is flat out murder.

Pretty gross. The way the murderer just sits there and calculates the shot before pulling the trigger... as the guy is backing away.

It’s called aiming. Would you have preferred a blind mag dump?

We have nothing left to talk about. If he can see to aim, he can see a man clearly backing away, as can you.

Till you’re on your back, and possibly concussed, while fearing for your own life; that’s all speculation...

 

[cwise76]

Yeah, the punishment should fit the crime. You are fucking arguing that the guy deserved the death penalty for pushing the guy down. You fucking believe in the Constitution or not. It's based on the same principle.

Shooting in self defense is not a punishment.

Shooting in self-defense is only justified if it they are in grave imminent danger. This guy wasn't. You're a hack. Cool beans, you've shown your true colors.

In some states, yes – in Florida, not.

Come to Florida for the sun the beaches and if you’re luc

It was verbal, the guy made it physical therefore the guy who got shot was the aggressor. You never go from verbal to physical.

True, but the case is going to be looked at in the narrow time zone where the push was made, the gun was drawn, the reaction of the pusher after the gun was drawn, the shot being taken, and the history of the shooter.

I’m not so sure the history of the shooter is as strong a bit of evidence as some might think. Because he was still demonstrably assaulted, and the victim of a crime. It would be like holding a rape victims past against her, just because she was a prostitute. Even douchebags, and scumbags can be victims of crime.

Yes true, but the details of this case might force the issue of looking at the shooters past just to make sure that he wasn't looking for a fight or stalking this store parking lot for that fight.

Thats already been established. Fucking guy was looking to kill someone. Now it’s time for him to go to prison. May justice prevail

Come to Florida and don’t threaten or attack people and you’ll be fine.

What about defending your girlfriend

 

[SavannahMann]

No. It was not. Not even close.

 

[Vastator]

Here is a video that shows more clearly WHEN the shot was fired, and is in real time and so you can clearly determine theres a good 5 or so full seconds of BACKING UP and NO FURTHER CONTACT.

Anyone thinking this shooting is justified does not belong owning a gun, holy shit.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/amp/

What kind of distance could you achieve by backing up for five continuous seconds? Try it. Time yourself, and report back with your distance. The fact is the assailant stayed in “the bubble”. He just didn’t know his victim was armed...

Im not sure anyone who sees that video and feels the shooting is justified belongs owning a gun, and I am sure that the man who pulled the trigger belongs off the streets permanently.

“Not being sure” is what is called reasonable doubt, in a court of law. And reasonable doubt is all that’s required to render a not guilty verdict. It’s a shitty case no doubt. But the man being assaulted first, makes this case a loser to bring to trial. The local DAs likely have more pressing; and less ambiguous cases to bring before the court.

Hmmmm that seems highly unlikely

Current reality defies your estimation of likelihood...

 

[G.T.]

Here is a video that shows more clearly WHEN the shot was fired, and is in real time and so you can clearly determine theres a good 5 or so full seconds of BACKING UP and NO FURTHER CONTACT.

Anyone thinking this shooting is justified does not belong owning a gun, holy shit.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/amp/

Also notice that the guys wife was outside the car and the shooter stepped up into her face before he was pushed to the ground. That is flat out murder.

Pretty gross. The way the murderer just sits there and calculates the shot before pulling the trigger... as the guy is backing away.

It’s called aiming. Would you have preferred a blind mag dump?

We have nothing left to talk about. If he can see to aim, he can see a man clearly backing away, as can you.

Till you’re on your back, and possibly concussed, while fearing for your own life; that’s all speculation...

If Im on my back and clear enough to go down into my waist, unsafety my piece, point and aim at a guy backing away..... and then pulling the trigger, I dont belong on the streets.

 

[cwise76]

Here is a video that shows more clearly WHEN the shot was fired, and is in real time and so you can clearly determine theres a good 5 or so full seconds of BACKING UP and NO FURTHER CONTACT.

Anyone thinking this shooting is justified does not belong owning a gun, holy shit.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/amp/

What kind of distance could you achieve by backing up for five continuous seconds? Try it. Time yourself, and report back with your distance. The fact is the assailant stayed in “the bubble”. He just didn’t know his victim was armed...

Im not sure anyone who sees that video and feels the shooting is justified belongs owning a gun, and I am sure that the man who pulled the trigger belongs off the streets permanently.

“Not being sure” is what is called reasonable doubt, in a court of law. And reasonable doubt is all that’s required to render a not guilty verdict. It’s a shitty case no doubt. But the man being assaulted first, makes this case a loser to bring to trial. The local DAs likely have more pressing; and less ambiguous cases to bring before the court.

Hmmmm that seems highly unlikely

Current reality defies your estimation of likelihood...

I guess we’ll see. I for one hope he gets put in prison where he belongs.

You can’t just kill people like that man. Sorry but it just isn’t right. End of story

 

[Vastator]

Also notice that the guys wife was outside the car and the shooter stepped up into her face before he was pushed to the ground. That is flat out murder.

Pretty gross. The way the murderer just sits there and calculates the shot before pulling the trigger... as the guy is backing away.

It’s called aiming. Would you have preferred a blind mag dump?

We have nothing left to talk about. If he can see to aim, he can see a man clearly backing away, as can you.

Till you’re on your back, and possibly concussed, while fearing for your own life; that’s all speculation...

If Im on my back and clear enough to go down into my waist, unsafety my piece, point and aim at a guy backing away..... and then pulling the trigger, I dont belong on the streets.

You just described countless individuals who have trained themselves to use their firearms in self defense...

 

[G.T.]

Pretty gross. The way the murderer just sits there and calculates the shot before pulling the trigger... as the guy is backing away.

It’s called aiming. Would you have preferred a blind mag dump?

We have nothing left to talk about. If he can see to aim, he can see a man clearly backing away, as can you.

Till you’re on your back, and possibly concussed, while fearing for your own life; that’s all speculation...

If Im on my back and clear enough to go down into my waist, unsafety my piece, point and aim at a guy backing away..... and then pulling the trigger, I dont belong on the streets.

You just described everyone who has trained themselves to use their firearms in self defense...

Its too bad theyre not trained in the level of severity it should take one to decide to end a life, and because of such poor judgment I hope he rots for eternity.

 

[Vastator]

It’s called aiming. Would you have preferred a blind mag dump?

We have nothing left to talk about. If he can see to aim, he can see a man clearly backing away, as can you.

Till you’re on your back, and possibly concussed, while fearing for your own life; that’s all speculation...

If Im on my back and clear enough to go down into my waist, unsafety my piece, point and aim at a guy backing away..... and then pulling the trigger, I dont belong on the streets.

You just described everyone who has trained themselves to use their firearms in self defense...

Its too bad theyre not trained in the level of severity it should take one to decide to end a life, and because of such poor judgment I hope he rots for eternity.

While I don’t think his actions rise to the level of legal wrong doing... I’ve always put more faith in Karma than the institutions of men.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Here is a video that shows more clearly WHEN the shot was fired, and is in real time and so you can clearly determine theres a good 5 or so full seconds of BACKING UP and NO FURTHER CONTACT.

Anyone thinking this shooting is justified does not belong owning a gun, holy shit.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/amp/

‘Backing up’ doesn’t mean the threat has ended, or that the person being attacked is ‘obligated’ to believe the threat no longer exists – the person attacked may continue to reasonably believe that the threat still exists.

Had the individual who pushed the shooter to the ground turned and ran from the incident, at that point shooting would likely not be justified.

Florida law maintains a very low standard as to what justifies self-defense, even a “scintilla” of evidence will satisfy that standard, regardless how improbable or extremely weak the self-defense theory might be.

And yet again, Florida law doesn’t require physical contact to warrant the use of deadly force as a means of self-defense.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What kind of distance could you achieve by backing up for five continuous seconds? Try it. Time yourself, and report back with your distance. The fact is the assailant stayed in “the bubble”. He just didn’t know his victim was armed...

Im not sure anyone who sees that video and feels the shooting is justified belongs owning a gun, and I am sure that the man who pulled the trigger belongs off the streets permanently.

“Not being sure” is what is called reasonable doubt, in a court of law. And reasonable doubt is all that’s required to render a not guilty verdict. It’s a shitty case no doubt. But the man being assaulted first, makes this case a loser to bring to trial. The local DAs likely have more pressing; and less ambiguous cases to bring before the court.

Hmmmm that seems highly unlikely

Current reality defies your estimation of likelihood...

I guess we’ll see. I for one hope he gets put in prison where he belongs.

You can’t just kill people like that man. Sorry but it just isn’t right. End of story

It might not be ‘right’ from a moral or ethical standpoint, which is subjective opinion; as an objective fact of law, however, the shooting was justified.

 

[2aguy]

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

He wasn't defending his woman when he walked up and shoved the man to the ground.... that was a level of violence that was completely over the top.......

The guy on the ground did not commit a physical act of aggression, and simply arguing with someone isn't cause for a violent physical assault.

 

[2aguy]

Has anyone found the background on the attacker yet... normal people do now just walk up and push someone that hard in the course of an argument they aren't even being targeted by......that level of aggression, that quickly shows a guy used to being violent. That wasn't his first physical assault against another person....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Shooting in self defense is not a punishment.

Shooting in self-defense is only justified if it they are in grave imminent danger. This guy wasn't. You're a hack. Cool beans, you've shown your true colors.

In some states, yes – in Florida, not.

Come to Florida for the sun the beaches and if you’re luc

True, but the case is going to be looked at in the narrow time zone where the push was made, the gun was drawn, the reaction of the pusher after the gun was drawn, the shot being taken, and the history of the shooter.

I’m not so sure the history of the shooter is as strong a bit of evidence as some might think. Because he was still demonstrably assaulted, and the victim of a crime. It would be like holding a rape victims past against her, just because she was a prostitute. Even douchebags, and scumbags can be victims of crime.

Yes true, but the details of this case might force the issue of looking at the shooters past just to make sure that he wasn't looking for a fight or stalking this store parking lot for that fight.

Thats already been established. Fucking guy was looking to kill someone. Now it’s time for him to go to prison. May justice prevail

Come to Florida and don’t threaten or attack people and you’ll be fine.

What about defending your girlfriend

Florida law with regard to the use of deadly force as a means of self-defense applies to defending friends and family members as well as the individual.

 

[Circe]

The moral of the story....dont park in handicap zones if you're able bodied.
It might set off a crazy dude.

Yeah, he got triggered.

 

[2aguy]

Here is a video that shows more clearly WHEN the shot was fired, and is in real time and so you can clearly determine theres a good 5 or so full seconds of BACKING UP and NO FURTHER CONTACT.

Anyone thinking this shooting is justified does not belong owning a gun, holy shit.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/amp/

‘Backing up’ doesn’t mean the threat has ended, or that the person being attacked is ‘obligated’ to believe the threat no longer exists – the person attacked may continue to reasonably believe that the threat still exists.

Had the individual who pushed the shooter to the ground turned and ran from the incident, at that point shooting would likely not be justified.

Florida law maintains a very low standard as to what justifies self-defense, even a “scintilla” of evidence will satisfy that standard, regardless how improbable or extremely weak the self-defense theory might be.

And yet again, Florida law doesn’t require physical contact to warrant the use of deadly force as a means of self-defense.

Yes..... Disparate Force is one of the measures...

 

[Circe]

So you are saying that emotional basket cases are being legally allowed to conceal and carry ??

Plainly...……...

 

[Circe]

[the details of this case might force the issue of looking at the shooters past just to make sure that he wasn't looking for a fight or stalking this store parking lot for that fight.

Which he was: we know for sure of two other such incidents and I bet a bunch of people come out and tell other tales of a guy looking desperately for someone to kill.

What about that? It's a problem with the Florida law. It is clear this guy was hunting for fights, repeatedly at this unlucky convenience store and there was the road rage gun-pulling too. Is there some way to stop this with adjustment to the law, or what? We've seen this before: middle-aged or even elderly guys furiously looking for someone to fight and kill. This is getting close to that (Florida! What is it about Florida??) incident where Nikolas Cruz was reported and reported and reported but nobody ever stopped him till he killed a bunch of high school students. This guy also has a lot of red flags and that road rage case --- if he hadn't pulled a gun on the other driver, why would the driver have reported that to the police? It was one person's word against the crazy guy's categorical denial, but now we have every reason to suppose he dunnit.

We watched Tombstone the other night. Alcohol and pride issues and general cussedness and grumpiness were why people shot each other --- it wasn't really about self-defense. I'd like the whole country not to go that way.

 

[Vastator]

[the details of this case might force the issue of looking at the shooters past just to make sure that he wasn't looking for a fight or stalking this store parking lot for that fight.

Which he was: we know for sure of two other such incidents and I bet a bunch of people come out and tell other tales of a guy looking desperately for someone to kill.

What about that? It's a problem with the Florida law. It is clear this guy was hunting for fights, repeatedly at this unlucky convenience store and there was the road rage gun-pulling too. Is there some way to stop this with adjustment to the law, or what? We've seen this before: middle-aged or even elderly guys furiously looking for someone to fight and kill. This is getting close to that (Florida! What is it about Florida??) incident where Nikolas Cruz was reported and reported and reported but nobody ever stopped him till he killed a bunch of high school students. This guy also has a lot of red flags and that road rage case --- if he hadn't pulled a gun on the other driver, why would the driver have reported that to the police? It was one person's word against the crazy guy's categorical denial, but now we have every reason to suppose he dunnit.

We watched Tombstone the other night. Alcohol and pride issues and general cussedness and grumpiness were why people shot each other --- it wasn't really about self-defense. I'd like the whole country not to go that way.

No. That isn’t clear, and again... is conjecture. Even if it were true; there is no way to prove it. The defense can however prove that the victims being assaulted,was the first criminal act shown in the video. The self defense claim will begin there. It’s a loser in court for the prosecution.