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.
You watched again? Will you just quit it already? The older guy didn't get to watch the replay over and over and form an assessment at his leisure from the comfort of his desk. Unless you've been in his situation and been slammed to the ground without warning (that "shove" was more like an openhanded punch that likely left bruises) you should just shut your hole now on speculating about his emotions and intentions. For all he knew, if he had taken a few seconds he would have been pummeled or shot himself.
Per Florida Statute 776.012: "A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony." Note the word REASONABLY. I don't believe that being shoved to the ground reaches the level of believing you are at risk of imminent death or great bodily harm. At the most you might get a bruised behind and a fractured wrist, which I do not believe constitutes great bodily harm.
Nor would being verbally accosted by the shooter, constitute the right for the woman in the car to shoot the bully to death. Being verbally accosted may be unpleasant but it is not usually a threat to one's life unless I guess, someone is saying, "I'm going to kill you", or is reaching into the car trying to abduct or assault you."
This situation could indeed be viewed as one in which a father had the right to defend his wife and child from a crazy bully who was verbally accosting them in a threatening manner in a parking lot. He did not resort to deadly force but I believe he had a right to defend his wife and child from this crazy maniac.
The bully shouldn't have been verbally assaulting a helpless woman and children ages 3 and 4 months. Period.
The father was with his 5-year-old son, who saw his father shot and killed. You really think he was going to start fighting some guy with his 5-year-old son nearby. He was just shoving the bully away from his wife and children which is admirable.
Girlfriend, not wife.
It is a point of respect/reverence re the institution of marriage.
It is a point of respect/reverence re the institution of marriage.
You can take your reverence for marriage and stuff it. Marriage is a legal entity; that's all. This young man and women were together and had three children. They were a FAMILY.
This woman is just lucky that the lunatic's shot didn't go astray and kill the 5 month year newborn that was in the car feet from this hothead murderer.
What kind of guy fires into the air when there are three young children in the immediate vicinity. If those were your kids or relatives, would you think Drjkstrap was such a hero?
The post above already notes he'd waved a gun in an incident of road rage. Who gets into road rage incidents? Crazy lunatics, that's who.
I’m not a liberal. But don’t start a fight with a women and young kids in the car because of a stupid parking space. Why was it his business. And if my husband saw a guy harassing me in my car with the kids you better believe he would have confronted the guy and pushed him to back off. I saw the video. The father didn’t deserve to be killed. He pushed him and backed off but the guy shot him anyway. There are many who shouldn’t be allowed to carry guns outside of their home because they are reckless. And only a whimp starts a fight when he knows he can just shoot them, claim self defense and get off. So yeah. I’m dead serious.
You could have fooled a lot of P&OC posters over at least the last couple of years .
You can take your reverence for marriage and stuff it. Marriage is a legal entity; that's all. This young man and women were together and had three children. They were a FAMILY.
This woman is just lucky that the lunatic's shot didn't go astray and kill the 5 month year newborn that was in the car feet from this hothead murderer.
What kind of guy fires into the air when there are three young children in the immediate vicinity. If those were your kids or relatives, would you think Drjkstrap was such a hero?
The post above already notes he'd waved a gun in an incident of road rage. Who gets into road rage incidents? Crazy lunatics, that's who.
And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why you have the attitude exemplified in your first paragraph.
I’m not a liberal. But don’t start a fight with a women and young kids in the car because of a stupid parking space. Why was it his business. And if my husband saw a guy harassing me in my car with the kids you better believe he would have confronted the guy and pushed him to back off. I saw the video. The father didn’t deserve to be killed. He pushed him and backed off but the guy shot him anyway. There are many who shouldn’t be allowed to carry guns outside of their home because they are reckless. And only a whimp starts a fight when he knows he can just shoot them, claim self defense and get off. So yeah. I’m dead serious.
The victim didn't start the fight. The person who got shot did. Make something else up.
I'm not saying they should have parked in the handicapped spot or the guy should have shoved the other to the ground. Both were wrong and criminal.
But at the time the victim pulled the gun, assailant was at a distance from him and not advancing. Victim waited a few seconds before firing the bullets into the assailant at a distance.
He didn't have to do that for his safety. He could have held him at bay and retreated to safety. Or held the guy there until police appeared.
But he didn't because Stand your Ground laws don't require it. They can and should of course apply when there is credible threat to the victim, but they can also be used to disproportionately retaliate when unnecessary under the guise of self defense.
This was not true self defense; this was a revenge killing protected by law. Florida makes vigilantism legal.
I'm not saying they should have parked in the handicapped spot or the guy should have shoved the other to the ground. Both were wrong and criminal.
But at the time the victim pulled the gun, assailant was at a distance from him and not advancing. Victim waited a few seconds before firing the bullets into the assailant at a distance.
He didn't have to do that for his safety. He could have held him at bay and retreated to safety. Or held the guy there until police appeared.
But he didn't because Stand your Ground laws don't require it. They can and should of course apply when there is credible threat to the victim, but they can also be used to disproportionately retaliate when unnecessary under the guise of self defense.
This was not true self defense; this was a revenge killing protected by law. Florida makes vigilantism legal.
I don't know how much of the thread you have read, but people have been posting statutes and arguing over whether brandishing without firing in these particular circumstances would fall within Florida law or not.
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.
.