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.
Charging the shooter with murder will be prosecutorial misconduct, pure and simple. There is no way a Florida jury of 12 people will unanimously agree that the shooting was not justified self-defense under the SYG law. Prosecuting someone when there is no chance of conviction is stupid, counterproductive and appalling.
The chances are 0% for the prosecutor to be charged with misconduct if he decides to prosecute. Six jurors in Florida, not 12. Six jurors who end up believing the deceased was moving backward, hands visible, was not an immediate threat to the shooter's physical safety. Impossible for you and others to imagine, not for me.
Offhand, I don't know if the shooter's reputation for starting confrontation is admissible. If it is, I can picture 6 jurors agreeing that he's a guy who'd shoot even if he didn't feel threatened.
Watching it the 1st time, it seemed the shover was moving backward before the shooter pulled the gun.
If he was moving backward (which he wasn't) then clearly it wasn't fast enough. Funny how the bully didn't know what he was getting himself into. His kids learned a tragic lesson in that mommy and daddy aren't above the law after all.
Park illegally in as many handicap spots as you want. Assault as many 40+ year olds as a young man in front of your own kids as you want, sooner or later karma comes calling. It came early this time.
Let me ask you about that video you posted. That punk was clearly sizing up his victim and the surrounding people who might thwart his escape. If the guy had seen him doing so and was ready to pull his gun (assuming he had one), if the blow was attempted but not delivered and the guy shot him, people would be screaming it was excessive force to shoot him.
Yet now that we see what happened to him, he is lucky to be alive with that sucker punch. That guy also looked like he was at least in his 50-60's.
As to trying to denigrate "Florida men", I don't get it. This could have happened in the Bronx or in LA.
I wouldn't have shot the assailant, but that doesn't mean someone else would be wrong to. A 47 year old can be weak & feeble, and a guy in his 60's might still be a bad a$$. Heck I know guys in their 20's that are dough boys and wouldn't stand a chance against an athletic older guy.
Lastly, you never know what is in the heart or mind of an attacker. Had the gun not been pulled the assailant could have offered him a hand up, or stopped him into the ground, thereby killing him.
So no one should ever put their life in the hands of someone else, especially someone who has already proved to be violent and criminal.
`
No. I would say that he deserved to get shot. I can't speak for anyone else. That guy was a predator...but those are not the type of guys that get killed by you CCW cowboys. With those type of guys.....they will always use the element of surprise and they will not give you a chance to recover. Its the people who are not "really" a threat in that they are not willing to throw their lives away over some BS. I see people walking around with their gun holstered.....but it aint jack slit you are going to be able to do if I take you by surprise. The people mostly getting killed by the CCW, in situations like this, are people who are not looking to do great bodily harm......but are assumed to be guys like the one in the video I posted. People can pump your head up all they want in your gun classes.....you run into a REAL criminal and more likely you are going to come out on the losing end despite your gun and your gun is only going to make the end result worse once they know you have it.....because they know you are not going to just let them walk away.
With all that being said, I will rather take a life than risk my life and be wrong......but I fully expect to go to jail if I am wrong. That is why the old saying "It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by six". A law should not exonerate you without a trial.
No. I would say that he deserved to get shot. I can't speak for anyone else. That guy was a predator...but those are not the type of guys that get killed by you CCW cowboys. With those type of guys.....they will always use the element of surprise and they will not give you a chance to recover. Its the people who are not "really" a threat in that they are not willing to throw their lives away over some BS. I see people walking around with their gun holstered.....but it aint jack slit you are going to be able to do if I take you by surprise. The people mostly getting killed by the CCW, in situations like this, are people who are not looking to do great bodily harm......but are assumed to be guys like the one in the video I posted. People can pump your head up all they want in your gun classes.....you run into a REAL criminal and more likely you are going to come out on the losing end despite your gun and your gun is only going to make the end result worse once they know you have it.....because they know you are not going to just let them walk away.
Why do you constantly make things up? You have no proof of this.
Why do you constantly make things up? You have no proof of this.
Every opinion is MADE UP....genius. If you think your opinion is not, then you are a plagiarizer or parrot.
No...I have no proof and you have no proof to dispute it. What I KNOW, is that criminals in the hood deal with armed people all the time. Real thugs have plenty of REAL life experience.....not class room.
The chances are 0% for the prosecutor to be charged with misconduct if he decides to prosecute. Six jurors in Florida, not 12. Six jurors who end up believing the deceased was moving backward, hands visible, was not an immediate threat to the shooter's physical safety. Impossible for you and others to imagine, not for me.
Why don't you talk to people who are in situations like this often enough that they have the knowledge on the subject? It happened rather quick. The shooter was on the ground in a defenseless position. I wasn't too sure before but he was completely in the right to shoot. If he was standing up after being shoved, that's a different story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama
Offhand, I don't know if the shooter's reputation for starting confrontation is admissible. If it is, I can picture 6 jurors agreeing that he's a guy who'd shoot even if he didn't feel threatened.
Telling someone they shouldn't park in a handicapped spot isn't a confrontation. That you think it's about someone who is perceived to be mean vs basing it on the actual assault is unfounded.
I know 3 people that dove off a boat and are the same. I know another who cut down a tree - same or worse.
Many people who took airliners never made it to their destinations...
We are given brains in order to develop them...so that we can separate anecdote and "this happened one out of 10 millions times" from actual threats. But many people seem unable to do this.
Scientists speculate on the reason for this - good reasons! Our ancestors (monkey types, pre-humans) lived in the tall grasses of Africa. If they heard or sensed something they would stand on their hind legs to look over the grass for a Tiger or other predator. Since they had little else to do, they might stand up 1200 or more times before they actually were in danger....but, still, it paid off.
Today we live in a different world. Your odds of being killed going to the store to get a cup of coffee or candy bar vastly exceed the situation you are giving. And there would be little you can do about it (Truck crosses into your land instantly head-on). Yeah, I know quite a few people killed or horribly maimed in such fashion.
I suppose I could get someone to rig up an ejection seat in my car with a parachute and a bunch of air bags - to spring me from the car at the instant that crash occurs.
Would you consider that overkill? You'll take the very high chances of death or maiming instead, right?
Chit happens. Everyone knows that. The Human Body is frail and you can trip on something and buy the Farm. But odds matter. Statistics matter. A lot.
I've been attacked by a racist gang, mugged at gunpoint twice (fired at both times), mugged at "screwdriver point" once.
My daughter has been chased at night by a group of men.
Also ambushed by Communist rebels in the jungle once, but I count that as an outlier.
I don't know about your stats, but mine dictate not burying my head in the sand. I want an option besides "please don't kill me." I may or may not use that option...but I want to have it.
T
Offhand, I don't know if the shooter's reputation for starting confrontation is admissible. If it is, I can picture 6 jurors agreeing that he's a guy who'd shoot even if he didn't feel threatened.
Too bad juries don't convict on "ifs," they convict on facts.
And the fact is you don't get to decide how injured or fearful someone is after a blind side assault that puts them on their back by someone 20 years younger than them in Florida.
The woman in the car even lied to police by saying the parking lot was full when she arrived, obviously embarrassed that she argued with a bystander who was clearly in the right.
But that's not right. If you can't determine with confidence from just viewing it one time without any pauses or replays, how can you hold this guy accountable for his decision making? He didn't get to see a video over and over. It is "unreasonable" to expect him that guy to come to the same conclusion in real time action (with fear and pain) as you viewing it repeatedly while completely safe and secure.
Just as in the case with police, the defense will make the point that there wasn't nearly as much time and space for contemplation as a lot of people think.
Another point not raised is that the woman exited the car at the moment her boyfriend began to approach. At that moment, the entire viewpoint of the situation changed. It would have riveted the attention of the shooter, making him more susceptible to being caught by surprise--and when he was caught by surprise more convinced that he was under a critical attack.
And because of that, it makes sense to allow a law to kill anyone you are in a confrontation with.
If you insist on taking my point in that inane way, that's on you.
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.
