Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[kaz]

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

And yet you're arguing that a gun carrier can initiate a hostile situation while carrying and continue to repeat that scenario until they get to shoot someone

 

[Lewdog]

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.

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

You said what you said, and I showed it clear as day.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

Only because he was an idiot did he think that pointing his gun would not be a deterrent.

!

 

[OODA_Loop]

Guess what? None of that matters!

He'll be in jail soon enough.

Prior analogous cases do not support this. Lack of immediate arrest is a hugely indicator.

 

[kaz]

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 ones 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.

You said that shooting the shover was a violation of the eighth amendment

 

[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

Keep your hands to yourself.

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

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

The death penalty isn’t appropriate for a misdemeanor assault.
And you don’t get to shoot someone who isn’t a threat.

Paycho. Thanks for pricing my point

 

[Lewdog]

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 ones 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.

You said that shooting the shover was a violation of the eighth amendment. If you want to admit now you were wrong, that's fine. But don't pretend you didn't say that

No I did not.

Show me where I said that. I said they share the SAME PRINCIPLE.

 

[jon_berzerk]

So you are saying if a guy with a gun was standing outside the car your wife and kids are sitting in and yelling at them, you'd not do anything about it?

I sure as fuck wouldnt assault him!!!
Thats a good way to get shot.......oh wait.

that is the beauty of concealed carry

True. And people who initiate aggression to kill people if they respond is the downside of CC

still have not proved that yet have ya

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

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

 

[Lewdog]

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

The death penalty isn’t appropriate for an assault.
And you don’t get to shoot someone who isn’t a threat.

Paycho. Thanks for pricing my point

Could you imagine how many people would go out and shoot someone and then when the cops show up, they just say, "He said he was going to kill me and I felt threatened."

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Guess what? None of that matters!

He'll be in jail soon enough.

Prior analogous cases do not support this. Lack of immediate arrest is a hugely indicator.

Hugely is not a word, dumbass!

You probably have no idea what "analagous" means!

Was Zimmerman arrested immediately? No.

 

[OODA_Loop]

And you don’t get to shoot someone who isn’t a threat.

Paycho. Thanks for pricing my point

Treyvon attacked Zimmerman.

McGLocklin attacked this guy.

Mike Brown attacked the police officer in his car.

Absent the attacks all three would not have been shot.

 

[kaz]

Fact, blacks kill more whites than whites kill blacks. Stop diverting. How do you get out that the issue is ... whites being racist?

You're just a typical Democrat race whore. Blacks aren't racist because only whites are racist. You know that because you're not a racist ...

Statistics say that. Murder statistics especially when it comes to who committed them, are about the least reliable statistic there is. Now you've seemed to have some reasoning and common sense in this thread, so I'm sure you can figure out why murder statistics when it comes to who committed the murders are hard to figure out.

Statistics say that when blacks murder more whites than whites murder blacks, the issue is racist whites. And I called you a race whore. Nailed it!

Obviously you don't understand murder statistics along with sexual assault statistics will NEVER be correct. Do you have any idea how many murders go unsolved per year? And do you know who happens to make up the demographic of most of those unsolved murders?

Guess what? If you can't solve a murder, then you can't assign the demographic of the murderer. Even worse yet, do you know how many missing people go unfound every year?

Now those are REAL statistics.

What does it have to do with your Democrat party plan of only disarming honest citizens while doing nothing about the criminals?

I don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about. First, I'm not a Democrat. Secondly I'm not for disarming honest citizens.

I'm for common sense laws like not letting fucking people like those getting Federal disability for a mental condition being allowed to buy guns for one... which was the VERY first executive order Trump signed when he became President.

Lewdog: "I'm not a Democrat"

You gave up the right to that lie when you took up race whoring on their behalf. No one is so inanely stupid that you'd believe this country has become stereotypical Alabama in the fifties. You have to be a partisan sheep to believe that. Give up the lie now that you've clearly established what you are

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Big difference between yelling and assault.
And as I said earlier all involved are idiots.
From the chick on down to the shooter.

Actually, yelling (threatening someone) is assault – it can be either a misdemeanor or a felony; battery is physical contact, a felony.

And in Florida either warrant the use of deadly force as a means of self-defense when the person attacked has a reasonable fear of bodily injury or death from the attacker, even if that attack is verbal in nature only.

You have no idea what the guy was saying.
Battery,what the black guy did is assault

You have no idea what the law is: there is no difference between yelling and assault – ‘big’ or otherwise.

Yelling can be perceived as a threat, justifying the use of deadly force as self-defense; physical contact (battery) is not required to justify the use of deadly force in Florida.

Yelling at someone is not assault.

Not unless you're threatening them, which he was. It was a full grown man and a woman who was yelling at her over where she parked. Her boyfriend had every right and responsibility to protect her

So you were there?

 

[OODA_Loop]

Could you imagine how many people would go out and shoot someone and then when the cops show up, they just say, "He said he was going to kill me and I felt threatened."

That is an insult to law enforcement.

 

[Lewdog]

And you don’t get to shoot someone who isn’t a threat.

Paycho. Thanks for pricing my point

Treyvon attacked Zimmerman.

McGLocklin attacked this guy.

Mike Brown attacked the police officer in his car.

Absent the attacks all three would not have been shot.

You have no idea if Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. Only two people know what happened between the two, and one is dead and can't say anything. The other, Zimmerman has gotten arrested how many times since then for losing his cool and making threats?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I agree. But only one decided to raise the stakes to violence. And it cost him his life...

So you are saying if a guy with a gun was standing outside the car your wife and kids are sitting in and yelling at them, you'd not do anything about it?

I sure as fuck wouldnt assault him!!!
Thats a good way to get shot.......oh wait.

It's also a good way to get shot standing outside someone's wife's car yelling at her for where she parked. Or in this case, it's a good way to get to shoot someone, which was his goal

No...that would be murder.

Yes, it was murder. That's my point. I carry, and I badly want to avoid ever using my gun. I don't view life as a video game where the goal is to kill someone and have it legally justified so you don't get in trouble. The guilt that I staged the shooting would haunt me forever. That's what awaits this guy if he has a soul.

When he carried and repeatedly initiated aggression, a shooting was going to happen. Yes, it was murder

Thats not what I said.
Had the guy came out of the store and shot the guy arguing with his wife that would have been murder.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

And yet you're arguing that a gun carrier can initiate a hostile situation while carrying and continue to repeat that scenario until they get to shoot someone

I don't know what he did or didn't do yet.

I do know he didn't pull his gun until AFTER he was assaulted

 

[Lewdog]

Statistics say that. Murder statistics especially when it comes to who committed them, are about the least reliable statistic there is. Now you've seemed to have some reasoning and common sense in this thread, so I'm sure you can figure out why murder statistics when it comes to who committed the murders are hard to figure out.

Statistics say that when blacks murder more whites than whites murder blacks, the issue is racist whites. And I called you a race whore. Nailed it!

Obviously you don't understand murder statistics along with sexual assault statistics will NEVER be correct. Do you have any idea how many murders go unsolved per year? And do you know who happens to make up the demographic of most of those unsolved murders?

Guess what? If you can't solve a murder, then you can't assign the demographic of the murderer. Even worse yet, do you know how many missing people go unfound every year?

Now those are REAL statistics.

What does it have to do with your Democrat party plan of only disarming honest citizens while doing nothing about the criminals?

I don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about. First, I'm not a Democrat. Secondly I'm not for disarming honest citizens.

I'm for common sense laws like not letting fucking people like those getting Federal disability for a mental condition being allowed to buy guns for one... which was the VERY first executive order Trump signed when he became President.

Lewdog: "I'm not a Democrat"

You gave up the right to that lie when you took up race whoring on their behalf. No one is so inanely stupid that you'd believe this country has become stereotypical Alabama in the fifties. You have to be a partisan sheep to believe that. Give up the lie now that you've clearly established what you are

Race whoring? Sorry when I see the facts, it's not whoring. I'll send you several books proving it, but I no you wouldn't read them. I've shared stats with you that show 61% of murders in the U.S. in 2016 didn't even get solved, so they had no idea what the demographic of the killer was. Yet you refused to accept the stats you referenced could be wrong.

 

[kaz]

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.

Of course they don't share the same principle. No one ever said or meant that the Constitution should dictate interactions between citizens. It's about dictating to government how it will treat it's citizens. It's a limit on government power.

For example, government cannot restrict free speech. However, you can shit can your employees for what they say, break of with your wife, disavow your friends, criticize them on television. No one ever thought or meant that you have free speech from the consequences of other citizens. It's a horrible argument

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

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

You said what you said, and I showed it clear as day.

And you continually lied about what I said until you posted the quote and then actually proved that you are a lying sack of shit