Really? This Qualifies For "Stand Your Ground"

[_Snake_]

Isn’t that why people in here are saying using deadly force was justified?

So what exactly is the argument for shooting him then? Because the law allows it?


Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app

You’re authorized to use deadly force if you’re in fear of your life or serious bodily harm, but you know that. I’m sure the argument is for the latter, and I’m still not convinced the shooting was justified.

Personally, I think this is the case that should have gone to trial when compared to Zimmerman.

Edit - I was telling my wife how I felt about this shooting and she said it must be HIGHLY questionable if I’m on the fence. Most times I feel it’s pretty easy to see whether a SYG claim is legit.

 

[Serpent]

Disagree. The dead guy and his family started it by parking illegally. It wasn't the shooter's place to enforce the law. But he wouldn't have to if they didn't break it to begin with.

Shooter also broke the law by parking illegally too. Shooter definitely escalated the situation by confronting the woman and her child was in the car too.

 

[Klay]

What’s laughable is how you interpreted my post.

Where did I even imply that the shove was life threatening?

Like MH0h3 said, isn't that the whole argument? The person who was shot and killed pushed the shooter therefore causing him to fear for his life? If you don't believe being pushed is life threatening, then how can he have a reasonable belief his life was in jeopardy or he could be seriously harmed?

Remember, the key word is reasonable. Not a far fetched theory that he could have died from being pushed (as if that happens regularly).

I just can't wrap my head around what some people feel justifies shooting someone in self defense. The stand your ground law is supposed to give people legal grounds to protect themselves or property without having to run away when someone is intending to kill or severely harm them. Not to give someone a reason to enact their own justice based on their feelings.

I like the theory behind this type of law but this was a perversion of the law if it doesn't go to trial.

Isn’t that why people in here are saying using deadly force was justified?

So what exactly is the argument for shooting him then? Because the law allows it?


Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[Need 04 Wine]

Every person involved in the situation acted less then they could have...

/thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ohio Snake]

Disagree. The dead guy and his family started it by parking illegally. It wasn't the shooter's place to enforce the law. But he wouldn't have to if they didn't break it to begin with.

What if the the dead guy parked there by accident or if the the markings for handicapped are not clearly defined? Does that mean he started it?
The shooter could have called the police before his decision to confront the girlfriend and kill her boyfriend who may have been defending her. Just a thought!
Again, Just a different angle of what could have happened.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blown 89]

Like MH0h3 said, isn't that the whole argument? The person who was shot and killed pushed the shooter therefore causing him to fear for his life? If you don't believe being pushed is life threatening, then how can he have a reasonable belief his life was in jeopardy or he could be seriously harmed?

Remember, the key word is reasonable. Not a far fetched theory that he could have died from being pushed (as if that happens regularly).

I just can't wrap my head around what some people feel justifies shooting someone in self defense. The stand your ground law is supposed to give people legal grounds to protect themselves or property without having to run away when someone is intending to kill or severely harm them. Not to give someone a reason to enact their own justice based on their feelings.

I like the theory behind this type of law but this was a perversion of the law if it doesn't go to trial.

If someone came out of nowhere and sent you flying like that you'd stain your pants too. Let's not pretend otherwise. You don't go around sending people to the concrete out of love. It's also not reasonable to demonstrate a willingness to cause harm and be surprised that they retaliate by defending themselves.

 

[Need 04 Wine]

If someone came out of nowhere and sent you flying like that you'd stain your pants too. Let's not pretend otherwise. You don't go around sending people to the concrete out of love. It's also not reasonable to demonstrate a willingness to cause harm and be surprised that they retaliate by defending themselves.

Wouldn’t a been on the ground if didn’t think he was the parking police....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackfang]

part of the responsibility of carrying, is to quickly recognize a deadly threat. IE is the other person standing in front of carrying a deadly weapon. Is your life in eminent danger?? At that point IF YOU ARE NOT SURE, you shoot to DISABLE and not to KILL . Shoot them below the waste line to disable them. After all, you don't want a lawsuit. In this situation, he CLEARLY has no weapon. IMO this is murder.

Please nobody listen to this bad advice unless you want a lawsuit. Shoot to disable?! Are you kidding me?! If you do not feel your life was in imminent danger, you do NOT shoot period!

Good luck finding a lawyer that has balls big enough to defend why you APPLIED deadly force, in a situation where your life was NOT threatened. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. That dog doesn't hunt. How many BG's have been shot and the threat still was not eliminated and they continued until they were permanently incapacitated?

 

[ssj4sadie]

@DaleM I understand your particular circumstance and thought that one shouldn’t lay their hands on another. Can we at least agree that this is a “what came first, chicken or the egg” argument?

But you have freely admitted that you wouldn’t find yourself in a similar situation because you carry and your back issue. So isn’t it at least somewhat reasonable that putting yourself in a situation where your life might be threatened by a push is unreasonable on your part?

I’m not going to lie, I would have probably done the same as the deceased. I say this because there was a homeless guy harassing my wife (verbally) as we were getting into our car, I viewed him as a threat to her and came around the vehicle to beat his ass. Once he saw me advance he backed off. Granted that is not a direct comparison, but I won’t stand for someone harassing my wife.

 

[Equalbracket]

Please nobody listen to this bad advice unless you want a lawsuit. Shoot to disable?! Are you kidding me?! If you do not feel your life was in imminent danger, you do NOT shoot period!

Good luck finding a lawyer that has balls big enough to defend why you APPLIED deadly force, in a situation where your life was NOT threatened. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. That dog doesn't hunt. How many BG's have been shot and the threat still was not eliminated and they continued until they were permanently incapacitated?

Surely he's being sarcastic, if not I hope he doesn't actually carry a weapon or even own one. That advice is absolutely terrible and completely wrong, if you aim to wound a lawsuit will be the least of your worries.

 

[ssj4sadie]

I’ll also say this, brandishing laws are stupid. This thought that a civilian can only pull a weapon if they intend to use it is stupid. I bet the shooter was drilled with that concept during his CCW class. If he was trained to present a superior force to an overwhelming threat and if it is effective at stopping the threat, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion (probably).

 

[MG0h3]

I’ll also say this, brandishing laws are stupid. This thought that a civilian can only pull a weapon if they intend to use it is stupid. I bet the shooter was drilled with that concept during his CCW class. If he was trained to present a superior force to an overwhelming threat and if it is effective at stopping the threat, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion (probably).

I'd think given the circumstances he wouldn't be charged for simply brandishing in that situation. Or I'm confident he would beat it.

 

[Equalbracket]

After reading and watching other new sites videos, and learning the dead guy is the father of 3 and boyfriend of 9 years, ya ****ing total piece of shit, justified.

The OP's article is pretty biased, from the totality of the event shown on camera it was completely justified, the guys much older and smaller, he wasn't acting aggressive, shoving him with all his strength was not necessary, good kill.

 

[Ohio Snake]

After reading and watching other new sites videos, and learning the dead guy is the father of 3 and boyfriend of 9 years, ya ****ing total piece of shit, justified.

The OP's article is pretty biased, from the totality of the event shown on camera it was completely justified, the guys much older and smaller, he wasn't acting aggressive, shoving him with all his strength was not necessary, good kill.

Can you give the links to the other “new sites” videos of the shooting. I’m only aware of one video. Would like to see the others.
I’m not sure him being a father of three and a boyfriend of 9 years makes this justified as a good kill?? Or did I miss something here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Need 04 Wine]

After reading and watching other new sites videos, and learning the dead guy is the father of 3 and boyfriend of 9 years, ya ****ing total piece of shit, justified.

The OP's article is pretty biased, from the totality of the event shown on camera it was completely justified, the guys much older and smaller, he wasn't acting aggressive, shoving him with all his strength was not necessary, good kill.

Wouldn’t a got shoved if he shut his ****in mouth and walked in past.

Mind ur business has been a theme in here. He didn’t. So he got shoved. And then he shot.

He woulda minded. No gun needed....I suppose we can just skip to the end at this point. Shoot ery mofo in a hc parking stall without tags. No questions asked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RedRocketMike]

Shooter is ****ing idiot and gives us concealed carriers a bad name. But

Parking in a handicap spot: illegal, and shitty
Bitching at someone parked in a handicap spot illegally: Legal
Shoving someone hard who is bitching at your girl: illegal
Shooting the person who shoved you: ?????

I saw it from one angle, but not the shooters. Audio would help. Body language shows one thing but the verbal might not have changed so quickly. Whatever the attacker was saying to this older guy he knocked down might have made the shot seem more necessary, or less.

 

[MastaAce03]

To anyone thinking this was a justified shooting is out of their damn minds. Guy was backing away and continued to back away until he got shot. I bet you this prick shooter would have never confronted anyone in that parking lot without that gun on his hip, that should tell you everything you need to know. Guy was looking for a problem and found one.

If this was a police officer involved shooting, he’d be going to trial for an unjust shooting. There’s a bunch of snowflakes in here that think just because you get pushed, you get to kill someone. Obviously some of you have been picked on a little to much in your child hood and can’t wait to get a little revenge. Hope none of you thinking this was just shooting are LEOs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GT Premi]

... The stand your ground law is supposed to give people legal grounds to protect themselves or property without having to run away when someone is intending to kill or severely harm them. Not to give someone a reason to enact their own justice based on their feelings.

I like the theory behind this type of law but this was a perversion of the law if it doesn't go to trial.

The Stand Your Ground law has been perverted ever since it was enacted in swamp-ass Florida. It's just a bunch of homicidal maniacs itching for the most minimal reason to kill some people.

Shooter is ****ing idiot and gives us concealed carriers a bad name. But

Parking in a handicap spot: illegal, and shitty
Bitching at someone parked in a handicap spot illegally: Legal
Shoving someone hard who is bitching at your girl: illegal
Shooting the person who shoved you: ?????

I saw it from one angle, but not the shooters. Audio would help. Body language shows one thing but the verbal might not have changed so quickly. Whatever the attacker was saying to this older guy he knocked down might have made the shot seem more necessary, or less.

Parking in a handicap spot: Illegal
Bitching at someone parked in a handicap spot: Illegal - It's called verbal assault.
Shoving someone hard who is verbally assaulting your girl: Self defense
Shooting the person who shoved you: UNJUSTIFIED when you're the one who started the altercation.

That was an unjustified killing, and the sheriff knows it, too. But with this being Florida, we know why he's not bringing charges.

... Obviously some of you have been picked on a little to much in your child hood and can’t wait to get a little revenge. ...

Just based on those posters' past attitudes in these kind of situations, there is a reason why they're pretending like they think this was a justified killing, but that ain't it.

 

[MG0h3]

The Stand Your Ground law has been perverted ever since it was enacted in swamp-ass Florida. It's just a bunch of homicidal maniacs itching for the most minimal reason to kill some people.



Parking in a handicap spot: Illegal
Bitching at someone parked in a handicap spot: Illegal - It's called verbal assault.
Shoving someone hard who is verbally assaulting your girl: Self defense
Shooting the person who shoved you: UNJUSTIFIED when you're the one who started the altercation.

That was an unjustified killing, and the sheriff knows it, too. But with this being Florida, we know why he's not bringing charges.



Just based on those posters' past attitudes in these kind of situations, there is a reason why they're pretending like they think this was a justified killing, but that ain't it.

Verbal assault? Never heard of it.

Sorry, dead guy assaulted first so don’t throw some BS defense in here and muddy the waters. If he was alive, he would’ve been charged with assault. Maybe he’d beat it due to the other guy harassing a female.

Ya, some of us would’ve done the same if we walked out and saw what shooter was doing. It’s still wrong.

Had the dead guy called the cops, MAYBE the shooter would’ve gotten a disturbing the peace or something but not likely.

Regardless, bad shoot.


Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[Snake Pliskin]

WTF....jammed to the ground? That's the biggest pussy shove I have seen in my life. I was pushed like that when I was 4 years old. This is NOT grounds to fire a weapon in defense. MAYBE if he was being beaten with a bat or some other weapon. You can't just kill someone for pushing you on the ground. What a pussy.

**Certified bad ass LOL