So what do you letsrunners think about that recent "stand your ground" shooting in Florida?????

If this happens in any other state the shooter goes to prison right?

I know if it happened in the country where I live then he sure as hell does.

Why not just get up and run away?

Or better yet, if they were parked illegally just take a photo/license plate and report it to the proper authorities. No confrontation required.

You cant just go around shooting people every time you feel threatened can you?

...especially if you're someone that scares easily.

If a cop was shoved to the ground and then shot and killed the guy, it would not be murder, right?

Not even a day off.

I don't agree with your ultimate conclusion, but I'm surprised to find myself agreeing with your basic orientation towards the event, which is a marvelous example of karma in action.

--The couple shouldn't have parked in that spot if there wasn't a handicapped person in the car

--The white guy with the gun should have posted himself, vigilante-style, in the parking lot and insisted that he was the patrolman with the right to hector the scofflaws who parked illegally (and it is illegal) in handicapped spots

--The (black) husband, seeing the white vigilante adjacent to his car and speaking in agitated tones to his wife, shouldn't have come up and knocked the white vigilante down. That is felony assault.

--The black husband only backed away when the white vigilante pulled out his gun and aimed it at him. That's not "backing away," regardless of what the wife (and later black crowds) insists.

--Yes, the stand-your-ground statute was very likely in effect. But the white vigilante certainly didn't need to shoot the black guy. The black guy was backing away. On the other hand, the black guy might well have had a gun himself--and given the extremely aggressive way in which he knocked the white guy down, you can't blame the white guy for not wanting to find out whether the black guy had a gun.

I should have proofread my post. I meant to write, "The white guy with the gun SHOULDN'T have posted himself, vigilante-style, in the parking lot and insisted that he was the patrolman with the right to hector the scofflaws who parked illegally (and it is illegal) in handicapped spots."

The basic point here is: be peaceable. In public, be civil and act with restraint. Here we have one man dead and another man (the white vigilante) whose life will never be the same, in a bad way. Men! Please behave.

You better go surf the internet some more and see exactly how severe some "bare hand beatings" are and let me know if you should just suffer that instead of defending yourself with a gun. I'm in my 40s now and do not have the illusion that I can defend myself hand-to-hand against someone bigger, stronger, faster, and younger than I.

Oh Please wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

The shooter was white. As far as being home for dinner, it's unlikely the victim was going to kill him with his bare hands.

You better go surf the internet some more and see exactly how severe some "bare hand beatings" are and let me know if you should just suffer that instead of defending yourself with a gun. I'm in my 40s now and do not have the illusion that I can defend myself hand-to-hand against someone bigger, stronger, faster, and younger than I.

Maybe, but he didn't wait to access the situation and it looked like the victim was backing away.

I thought Zimmerman had reasonable cause to shoot Martin given, if true, his head was being pounded into the pavement. However, he was not a policeman and had no right to act like one.

I thought Zimmerman had reasonable cause to shoot Martin given, if true, his head was being pounded into the pavement. However, he was not a policeman and had no right to act like one.

Correct that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin. Also correct that Zimmerman is a huge doucher for playing out his neighborhood Watch/Bat-man fantasy. Also correct that Martin was a huge doucher for pounding Zimmerman's head into the ground.

Avoid violence unless you absolutely must. Not only is it unethical, but it turns out it is also dangerous.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

I thought Zimmerman had reasonable cause to shoot Martin given, if true, his head was being pounded into the pavement. However, he was not a policeman and had no right to act like one.

Only in America you can start a fight for no reason and, when turns out that the little black fella is beating the crap out of you, you can shoot him and get away with it. I love it.

Pookie Washington wrote:

HI POOKIE. Remember that time you got your a$$ trolled your handle stolen? Looks like you haven't learned your lesson.

What kind of fool physically attacks someone when they know about the stand your ground law?

CNN is trolling here to try to make this about Florida's gun laws. It's not. I'm not an expert on Florida law, but this doesn't appear to be a "stand your ground" case. This is a physical assault with the determinate factor being whether the guy on the ground had a reasonable fear of serious bodily harm. And this opinion is clearly stated by the Sheriff as well.

"Sheriff Gualtieri said the only relevant issue is whether Drejka was in fear of further bodily harm from McGlockton."

fisky wrote:

CNN is trolling here to try to make this about Florida's gun laws. It's not.

I'm not an expert on Florida law, but this doesn't appear to be a "stand your ground" case. This is a physical assault with the determinate factor being whether the guy on the ground had a reasonable fear of serious bodily harm.

And this opinion is clearly stated by the Sheriff as well.

"Sheriff Gualtieri said the only relevant issue is whether Drejka was in fear of further bodily harm from McGlockton."

This is why everybody should have a gun in this country (or at least in Florida). If there is confrontation, the only testimony that counts towards pressing charges is that of the guy that is still alive, so you better be that guy.

(not sure if that would also work if the shooter is black and the dead is white, but let's not digress on these irrelevant details)

Don't park in handicaps & attack a handicap person.

Meanwhile re: Trump:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/politics/wp/2018/06/01/the-black-unemployment-rate-has-never-been-closer-to-the-white-unemployment-rate/

Pookie Washington wrote:

You have to understand that the vast majority of these gun nuts are weak cowards. They used to get beat up in school everyday. That gun gives them power. Most likely the sista in the car could have beat his azz. That sissy boy needs to go to prison for LIFE!

He attacked a handicap man. FL law is clear.

Pookie Washington wrote:

...We are living in Trumps AmeriKKKa.

I've tried to find the actual footage of the shooting, but I'm loosing patience and giving up. It's annoying that all the internet search results are news organizations that heavily editorialize the video, and don't show the part where the actual shooting happens. They just show right before and right after the shots are fired. The entire case would rest on whether the man who was shot was moving toward, or away, from the shooter at the moment of shooting. Since the news outlets seem dead set on not letting it be easy to answer this question, I'm skeptical.

This is what is mean by "fake news." It's not that the news story isn't real, its just that the so called news outlets obstruct access to the very information that would help the viewer form their own opinion.

celery wrote:

I've tried to find the actual footage of the shooting, but I'm loosing patience and giving up. It's annoying that all the internet search results are news organizations that heavily editorialize the video, and don't show the part where the actual shooting happens. They just show right before and right after the shots are fired. The entire case would rest on whether the man who was shot was moving toward, or away, from the shooter at the moment of shooting. Since the news outlets seem dead set on not letting it be easy to answer this question, I'm skeptical.

This is what is mean by "fake news." It's not that the news story isn't real, its just that the so called news outlets obstruct access to the very information that would help the viewer form their own opinion.

Took about 20 seconds to find the video on youtube. It shows also the moment of the shooting. It is pretty clear that there was no imminent danger of bodily harm, just wounded pride.

Thanks for posting that. The 3 news stories I watched before that one always paused the video right before the shooting, and then cut to the point when the victim was walking back to the store. From that video, it seems pretty clear that the shooter didn't need to fire.

One could argue that even though the victim was not moving toward the shooter, he still feared for his life. But on the other hand, if you are concealed carry, I think you have a responsibility to try to de-escalate a situation since you are armed. I don't know the details of Florida law, but it seems the shooter should not walk away unpunished for this incident.