Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[Lewdog]

Disarming honest citizens? That's the funny thing, you don't know who is an honest responsible citizen until they either fuck up or don't. You just argued all these pages that this guy is a murderer and is an irresponsible gun owner... well by your logic there is nothing that could be done about it, because he had lived 50+ years without shooting and killing anyone to this point.

Here's a hint. The honest citizens are the ones who follow the law and disarm.

The psychos who don't disarm and shoot them aren't honest citizens.

I realize that was very subtle

And I told you that you don't know who the honest and dishonest ones until they do something dishonest. This isn't Minority Report where psychics tell you ahead of time who will commit crimes.

Asked and answered. They identify themselves. Your law identifies them as the honest ones follow the law and the dishonest ones don't. Then you've created a situation where the dishonest ones are the only ones armed. Good job

This idiot that murdered this man was a legal gun owner. You can't have it both ways.

WTF? What does that have to do with that he can't take his gun into a bar. You really can't follow a conversation, can you?

What the fuck are you still talking about that? I said that as an example of how easy it to find out who is actually a responsible gun owner or not.

 

[jillian]

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:

And therein lies the problem with gun loving bullies stand your ground Insanity

 

[kaz]

The constitution has nothing to do with it

The 8th amendment applies to bail and sentences passed by the government

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.

WTF? You don't even know what the Constitution is, Democrats never do. The Constitution is a limitation on government. Where the fuck do you get that the bill of rights are powers of government? That's completely moronic.

Murder is State law, not Federal law

What in the fuck are you talking about? I never said murder was a federal law. However the 8th Amendment gives citizens protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Again, you don't even know what the Constitution is. The Constitution is a LIMIT on Federal power. The GOVERNMENT cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment. That's what the eighth says. The Constitution is not a power of the Federal government to go out and control citizens behavior between each other.

How do you not know what the Constitution is? That's pathetic

Holy shit man. I NEVER SAID THAT. The 8th Amendment limits ALL COURTS, federal, state, and local from doling out cruel and unusual punishment. It is extended from the Federal government to the states through the 14th Amendment.

Right, but that isn't the point you made. You argued that it violated the Constitution because he was shot. The government did not shoot him. That's just stupid

 

[Skull Pilot]

If he was just yelling?

I would have ignored him

If he put his hands on them or tried to open the car doors that's a different story

You'd ignore some nutcase yelling at your family for where you parked, but if he touched you, you'd waste him. I'd say that's a good argument, but wow, it's not

Whats so hard to understand? Yelling you leave,manhandling they get shot.

How do you just leave when he's screaming at your wife with your kids there over where you parked?

I hope you're never in that situation because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I haven't either, and hope I never will be.

But the murderer staged a situation by being armed and initiating aggression and repeating it until he got what he wanted

You get in the car and drive away

Getting your family in the car while a psycho is screaming at you over where you parked is not as trivial a task as you present it.

So you advocate incredible discipline and completely ignoring the threat of a guy threatening you and your family.

On the other hand, you go from if you get touched, you can use lethal force.

You're just arguing like a moonbat.

And you don't give a shit at all that the guy staged the whole thing by repeatedly initiating confrontation with people while armed intending to aim to kill. You're fine with that he planned to kill someone and just didn't know who. And you're not worried this guy is screaming at your wife and your children are there.

You want time to come up with a better story or are you going to stick with this one no matter how stupid it is?

She was in the car all she had to do was stay in the car or leave

the guy was not in any way a threat to her life just because he was yelling

When I am carrying and I see something like that I remove myself from the situation. I don't care if some asshole swears at me or calls me names

I know that because I am armed I am held to a higher standard

 

[jillian]

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

What justified him pulling a gun on someone who wasn’t threatening him?

 

[Skull Pilot]

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:

And therein lies the problem with gun loving bullies stand your ground Insanity

you ignore that the victim of the assault didn't shoot until AFTER he was assaulted

This is not a stand your ground situation

 

[kaz]

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.

I can't believe you people keep arguing that a man pushing you to the ground is an adequate justification for killing him ...

... but ...

... a psychotic man who could physically beat the hell out of your wife screaming at her in a parking lot over where you're parked is no threat and not a justification to do anything at all about it.

Here's a dollar, buy some perspective

Oversimplification

If a guy much larger than you blind sided you and laid you out on the pavement would you think your life might be in danger?

If I was screaming at the guy's wife when he did it, I'd think if he leveled me then backed off like this guy did, he probably was just protecting his wife and wanted me to stop. If he wanted to kill me for screaming at his wife over where they parked, he'd be unlikely to back off.

But hey, if I'm this guy, it's what I designed. I can kill him now. Particularly since he backed off giving me the chance to get my gun

Don't pretend to know what other people are thinking

Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds

 

[OODA_Loop]

He didn't die and he didn't strike his head. Your argument falls apart after you recognize that fact.

The on-scene investigators didn't think so evidenced by lack of arrest.

 

[OODA_Loop]

And therein lies the problem with gun loving bullies stand your ground Insanity

Kindergartens golden rules will keep you happy and hole free.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

What justified him pulling a gun on someone who wasn’t threatening him?

He was assaulted by the guy already

Would you maybe think your life was in danger if a guy blindsided you and knocked you to the ground?

 

[Skull Pilot]

What in the fuck are you talking about? I never said murder was a federal law. However the 8th Amendment gives citizens protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Yeah protection from the government not other citizens

It sailed over Lewdog's head, but that's what the Constitution says, the Federal government cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment.

Lewdog thinks the eighth is a power of government that government can use the eighth as justification for passing laws to control citizens. That is NOT what the Constitution is

I never said that.

I know exactly what the 8th Amendment is. I've said to people in this thread probably 20 times now that the punishment must fit the severity of the crime.

And shooting is self defense is not a punishment for a crime you moron

Yes it is... it's called taking it into your own hands.

No it's not.

 

[jillian]

And therein lies the problem with gun loving bullies stand your ground Insanity

Kindergartens golden rules will keep you happy and hole free.

That isn’t responsive

 

[OODA_Loop]

What justified him pulling a gun on someone who wasn’t threatening him?

He was just attacked and was not convinced the threat had ceased.

 

[kaz]

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.

WTF? You don't even know what the Constitution is, Democrats never do. The Constitution is a limitation on government. Where the fuck do you get that the bill of rights are powers of government? That's completely moronic.

Murder is State law, not Federal law

What in the fuck are you talking about? I never said murder was a federal law. However the 8th Amendment gives citizens protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Yeah protection from the government not other citizens

It sailed over Lewdog's head, but that's what the Constitution says, the Federal government cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment.

Lewdog thinks the eighth is a power of government that government can use the eighth as justification for passing laws to control citizens. That is NOT what the Constitution is

I never said that.

I know exactly what the 8th Amendment is. I've said to people in this thread probably 20 times now that the punishment must fit the severity of the crime.

Lewdog: "I've said to people in this thread probably 20 times now that the punishment must fit the severity of the crime"

BY THE GOVERNMENT.

You said it was a violation of his Constitutional rights that he was shot by another citizen. That has nothing to do with Constitutional rights.

Damn you're stupid

 

[Lewdog]

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.

WTF? You don't even know what the Constitution is, Democrats never do. The Constitution is a limitation on government. Where the fuck do you get that the bill of rights are powers of government? That's completely moronic.

Murder is State law, not Federal law

What in the fuck are you talking about? I never said murder was a federal law. However the 8th Amendment gives citizens protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Again, you don't even know what the Constitution is. The Constitution is a LIMIT on Federal power. The GOVERNMENT cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment. That's what the eighth says. The Constitution is not a power of the Federal government to go out and control citizens behavior between each other.

How do you not know what the Constitution is? That's pathetic

Holy shit man. I NEVER SAID THAT. The 8th Amendment limits ALL COURTS, federal, state, and local from doling out cruel and unusual punishment. It is extended from the Federal government to the states through the 14th Amendment.

Right, but that isn't the point you made. You argued that it violated the Constitution because he was shot. The government did not shoot him. That's just stupid

No I didn't. I was arguing with Skull Pilot because he said he didn't care that the guy got shot and killed just for a simple assault.

I asked if he supported the Constitution... which has the 8th Amendment that protects citizens from Cruel and Unusual punishment. I said if he supports that, then he should care that the guy was shot and killed for simple assault. Not because the 8th Amendment protects him for that, but because they share the same principle. They aren't the same, nor does the 8th Amendment cover it, but they follow the same principle, so saying you agree with the rights the 8th Amendment gives, but then saying you don't think it is a fair principle in other parts of society is being a hypocrite.

 

[OODA_Loop]

And therein lies the problem with gun loving bullies stand your ground Insanity

Kindergartens golden rules will keep you happy and hole free.

That isn’t responsive

Keep your hands to yourself.

Dont assault - don't get shot - don't get dead.

Ask Treyvon .....ask McGLocklin,...... Mike Brown, etc

 

[kaz]

Here's a hint. The honest citizens are the ones who follow the law and disarm.

The psychos who don't disarm and shoot them aren't honest citizens.

I realize that was very subtle

And I told you that you don't know who the honest and dishonest ones until they do something dishonest. This isn't Minority Report where psychics tell you ahead of time who will commit crimes.

Asked and answered. They identify themselves. Your law identifies them as the honest ones follow the law and the dishonest ones don't. Then you've created a situation where the dishonest ones are the only ones armed. Good job

This idiot that murdered this man was a legal gun owner. You can't have it both ways.

WTF? What does that have to do with that he can't take his gun into a bar. You really can't follow a conversation, can you?

What the fuck are you still talking about that? I said that as an example of how easy it to find out who is actually a responsible gun owner or not.

Yes, and it does that as I keep pointing out. We find out. The responsible gun owners are the ones you disarmed. The irresponsible gun owners are the ones who are still armed.

The problem with that situation still isn't dawning on you? Seriously?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah protection from the government not other citizens

It sailed over Lewdog's head, but that's what the Constitution says, the Federal government cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment.

Lewdog thinks the eighth is a power of government that government can use the eighth as justification for passing laws to control citizens. That is NOT what the Constitution is

I never said that.

I know exactly what the 8th Amendment is. I've said to people in this thread probably 20 times now that the punishment must fit the severity of the crime.

And shooting is self defense is not a punishment for a crime you moron

Yes it is... it's called taking it into your own hands.

No it's not.

WTF? You don't even know what the Constitution is, Democrats never do. The Constitution is a limitation on government. Where the fuck do you get that the bill of rights are powers of government? That's completely moronic.

Murder is State law, not Federal law

What in the fuck are you talking about? I never said murder was a federal law. However the 8th Amendment gives citizens protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Again, you don't even know what the Constitution is. The Constitution is a LIMIT on Federal power. The GOVERNMENT cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment. That's what the eighth says. The Constitution is not a power of the Federal government to go out and control citizens behavior between each other.

How do you not know what the Constitution is? That's pathetic

Holy shit man. I NEVER SAID THAT. The 8th Amendment limits ALL COURTS, federal, state, and local from doling out cruel and unusual punishment. It is extended from the Federal government to the states through the 14th Amendment.

Right, but that isn't the point you made. You argued that it violated the Constitution because he was shot. The government did not shoot him. That's just stupid

No I didn't. I was arguing with Skull Pilot because he said he didn't care that the guy got shot and killed just for a simple assault.

I asked if he supported the Constitution... which has the 8th Amendment that protects citizens from Cruel and Unusual punishment. I said if he supports that, then he should care that the guy was shot and killed for simple assault. Not because the 8th Amendment protects him for that, but because they share the same principle. They aren't the same, nor does the 8th Amendment cover it, but they follow the same principle, so saying you agree with the rights the 8th Amendment gives, but then saying you don't think it is a fair principle in other parts of society is being a hypocrite.

You mean you lied your ass off claiming I said he deserved to be shot

And self defense is not a violation of the 8th amendment
If a person believes his life to be in danger he can shoot

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He didn't die and he didn't strike his head. Your argument falls apart after you recognize that fact.

The on-scene investigators didn't think so evidenced by lack of arrest.

Guess what? None of that matters!

He'll be in jail soon enough.

 

[Lewdog]

WTF? You don't even know what the Constitution is, Democrats never do. The Constitution is a limitation on government. Where the fuck do you get that the bill of rights are powers of government? That's completely moronic.

Murder is State law, not Federal law

What in the fuck are you talking about? I never said murder was a federal law. However the 8th Amendment gives citizens protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Yeah protection from the government not other citizens

It sailed over Lewdog's head, but that's what the Constitution says, the Federal government cannot give you cruel and unusual punishment.

Lewdog thinks the eighth is a power of government that government can use the eighth as justification for passing laws to control citizens. That is NOT what the Constitution is

I never said that.

I know exactly what the 8th Amendment is. I've said to people in this thread probably 20 times now that the punishment must fit the severity of the crime.

Lewdog: "I've said to people in this thread probably 20 times now that the punishment must fit the severity of the crime"

BY THE GOVERNMENT.

You said it was a violation of his Constitutional rights that he was shot by another citizen. That has nothing to do with Constitutional rights.

Damn you're stupid

You dumbass, I've said this to you several times now as well. No the 8th Amendment does not protect one person from another person, but they share the SAME PRINCIPLE. If you think the 8th Amendment is justified and makes sense, you should think the same should take place in other parts of life.