Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesn't matter if he was offended or not. Was he acting within the law as stated? The rights and wrongs of it in our minds means nothing legally. All that matters whether the killer remains a free man is, were his actions within the SYG laws of Florida?
The guy who got shot was standing on HIS ground.
His car marked his ground.
What particular ground was the shooter standing on?
What particular ground was the shooter standing on?
The shooter at first was protecting the ground of the disabled. Or so he thinks. IMO he was protecting the rule of law more than the fate of the disabled.
What if the parker is disabled and has no permit for whatever reason?
That's for the victim and FL law to decide, not you. KatyGirl's post has to do with the law in general and her feelings about it - not how the law pertains to this incident.
And this wasn't a situation like say Zimmerman-Martin where it was a tussle. A man was pushed/"bodyslam" to the ground and then the gun was drawn, the pusher backed away but was shot regardless. Add in his history of flashing his gun and I would say it is pretty clear for a slam dunk Man-1 guilty, not murder-2.
What particular ground was the shooter standing on?
Hey, don't have a go at me........ I didn't invent SYG laws......... I'm not claiming the shooter was morally right, I am sadly agreeing he was acting within SYG laws voted for by American politicians.
Hey, don't have a go at me........ I didn't invent SYG laws......... I'm not claiming the shooter was morally right, I am sadly agreeing he was acting within SYG laws voted for by American politicians.
Don't shoot the messenger.......
Yes but does a push to the ground constitute a gun being drawn? That is the question. As I stated above, this wasn't a tussle between two people but rather a one punch fight resulting in gunfire. The use of stand your ground should be a last resort to a situation, not the first response to an assailant.
The more I hear about Stand Your Ground, the more I feel it has to go or be amended. It should not be about how the person feels. It needs to be clearer than that. This law is a right to kill. All one has to do is instigate a fight until the other person gets physical, then shoot them and say you felt your life was in danger.
There needs to be clear signs of danger, not just perception of danger, to make it legal to shoot someone. We have seen too many times now where a person “felt” in danger enough to kill someone when had they not had a gun it would have been nothing more than heated words or a fist fight. People have been doing that for millennia without needing to resort to killing someone.
No, it cannot be amended. The way you see harm to me, is different than how I feel. Just because something I dont perceive as a threat to myself doesnt mean you wouldn't be threatened by it. If I got shoved, I am a big guy I could just get up and sock him in face. If I was the same person as me, but I have bad bones, weak muscles, and just weak spirited. I will shoot him.
Who cares if the person shot dies, the issues leading up to that point are all that matters. Stop clinging to life and stick to the law.
Guy shoved 40 year old male, 40 year old male shot him.
40 year old male, did not just pull gun out and shoot him for no reason he was shoved. Good enough reason for me. I would vote against any bill to alter or weaken SYG laws in any state. We need to also make it so loved ones cannot sue someone who is shot while SWG.
To be honest, who likes fighting? You have a chance to lose. if someone wanted to fight me, I'd shoot them if I was within my right. No one likes getting beat up or getting hurt, and no one ought to be getting beaten up in fear that they cant defend themselves with a gun they legally own and purchase and have the right to use in THAT circumstance.
Yes but does a push to the ground constitute a gun being drawn? That is the question. As I stated above, this wasn't a tussle between two people but rather a one punch fight resulting in gunfire. The use of stand your ground should be a last resort to a situation, not the first response to an assailant.
That's the argument isn't it? It's about the slight closing in after the push, then the moving of the hand towards the gun, resulting in the assailant moving backwards. As he did so, revealing the female partner next to the car, and close to the shooter.
This is all happening in a few seconds. He is laid down, with his arm upwards, knowing the girl is very close. If he doesn't shoot, he has to raise himself, while continuing to point the gun. Would the female partner decide to try and kick him, or even dive on him? If she succeeded, what would happen next if the gun was removed from him?
I am only speculating of course. Who knew what the shooter was thinking in those few deadly seconds. But, I bet a good lawyer could explain exactly what was in his client's mind......... fear of further attack. I believe that is enough for SYG laws to come into play.
Last edited by English Dave; 07-31-2018 at 11:57 AM..
What if the parker is disabled and has no permit for whatever reason?
Then she should have done what I did and not park in a handicapped space in spite of the fact that I am disabled. (And kinda lazy for not applying for a placard.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not claiming the shooter was morally right, I am sadly agreeing he was acting within SYG laws voted for by American politicians.
