[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

The sheriff did release him on the available evidence at the time but has since been quoted as saying that he agrees with the decision to prosecute.

This is why we have courts. They determine if the law was obeyed. if you shoot someone you really have to expect there to be an investigation and that you are likely to be charged with a crime unless the evidence is overwhelmingly in your favor.

The laws are not very clear in many instances when it comes to using a firearm. For instance, you have the right to shoot someone who enters your home uninvited, no questions asked. But does that mean if the person who enters your home looks confused and doesn't appear to pose a threat you have a right to shoot them? Does the law apply if you shoot a three-year-old who accidentally goes into the wrong house? How much of the person has to be inside your home. If they put a foot over the threshold can they be shot? Is your garage or lanai considered part of your home?

These questions will only get answered if cases are brought to trial.

We have had neighbors with dementia who walk into the houses of other neighbors because they are quite mixed up.

The facts do matter a great deal with these cases.

Fortunately, I doubt if many of us have firearms easily available if someone comes through our front doors uninvited. Other things that could quickly become deadly weapons like a golf club, umbrella, or a knife, perhaps.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

The sheriff did release him on the available evidence at the time but has since been quoted as saying that he agrees with the decision to prosecute.

This is why we have courts. They determine if the law was obeyed. if you shoot someone you really have to expect there to be an investigation and that you are likely to be charged with a crime unless the evidence is overwhelmingly in your favor.

The laws are not very clear in many instances when it comes to using a firearm. For instance, you have the right to shoot someone who enters your home uninvited, no questions asked. But does that mean if the person who enters your home looks confused and doesn't appear to pose a threat you have a right to shoot them? Does the law apply if you shoot a three-year-old who accidentally goes into the wrong house? How much of the person has to be inside your home. If they put a foot over the threshold can they be shot? Is your garage or lanai considered part of your home?

These questions will only get answered if cases are brought to trial.

My problem with the system is that it doesn't cost the prosecutors anything to charge someone with a crime. In fact, they actually benefit because they are placating the political and racial groups who are demanding a trial. However, the guy being charged basically has his life totally disrupted, if not destroyed. He loses his reputation, his wealth, and his safety. It doesn't seem like a fair system, especially if he is acquitted, which many have been in similar cases.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

My problem with the system is that it doesn't cost the prosecutors anything to charge someone with a crime. In fact, they actually benefit because they are placating the political and racial groups who are demanding a trial. However, the guy being charged basically has his life totally disrupted, if not destroyed. He loses his reputation, his wealth, and his safety. It doesn't seem like a fair system, especially if he is acquitted, which many have been in similar cases.

You're worried about a trial that is more than justified based on video (imagine if there wasn't a video), yet no concern about the guy who shoved the jerk harassing his girlfriend...and is now dead?


One can't help but think there is another agenda going on here.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

My problem with the system is that it doesn't cost the prosecutors anything to charge someone with a crime. In fact, they actually benefit because they are placating the political and racial groups who are demanding a trial. However, the guy being charged basically has his life totally disrupted, if not destroyed. He loses his reputation, his wealth, and his safety. It doesn't seem like a fair system, especially if he is acquitted, which many have been in similar cases.

Lawyers and judge rarely bend to any kind of pressure from ordinary people nor if ever from political groups, etc., unless they are up for re-election.

They do change their minds due to influence from other judges and lawyers.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Wrong.

Zimmerman has been shown and proved...to be the real "thug."

Wrong! Zimmerman was the one blooded tray only had 9mm hole.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Lawyers and judge rarely bend to any kind of pressure from ordinary people nor if ever from political groups, etc., unless they are up for re-election.

They do change their minds due to influence from other judges and lawyers.

BS all about the money, the more money the more pleasant the outcome. No money quick case and locked up

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

We have had neighbors with dementia who walk into the houses of other neighbors because they are quite mixed up.

The facts do matter a great deal with these cases.

Fortunately, I doubt if many of us have firearms easily available if someone comes through our front doors uninvited. Other things that could quickly become deadly weapons like a golf club, umbrella, or a knife, perhaps.

Only in central Nevada where they keep they're doors unlocked and in this day an age I doubt even their doors are unlocked. Unlooked doors invites trouble now matter where you live.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Wrong.

Zimmerman has been shown and proved...to be the real "thug."

No, it was proven Travon Martin was assaulting and battering Zimmerman who shot the thug in self defense.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

My problem with the system is that it doesn't cost the prosecutors anything to charge someone with a crime. In fact, they actually benefit because they are placating the political and racial groups who are demanding a trial. However, the guy being charged basically has his life totally disrupted, if not destroyed. He loses his reputation, his wealth, and his safety. It doesn't seem like a fair system, especially if he is acquitted, which many have been in similar cases.

This sadly true. The shooter, if found not guilty, will have paid a heavy price in many ways.

[John_W]

Having grown up in the St. Pete/ Clearwater area, the jury will be picked from the local voter pool, which will be made up of mostly seniors like ourselves. People who are generally fed up with crime and thugs dominating our cities. The prosecutor will probably emphasize that the incident started over illegally parking in a handicap stop, that alone is enough to probably find this guy innocent in Pinellas County. Waste of taxpayer money, if not for Al Sharpton this trial would not be happening.

[jebartle]

It was none of his business. Call police let them handle parking violation, period!

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by John_W

Having grown up in the St. Pete/ Clearwater area, the jury will be picked from the local voter pool, which will be made up of mostly seniors like ourselves. People who are generally fed up with crime and thugs dominating our cities. The prosecutor will probably emphasize that the incident started over illegally parking in a handicap stop, that alone is enough to probably find this guy innocent in Pinellas County. Waste of taxpayer money, if not for Al Sharpton this trial would not be happening.

Say what?

That anyone would think that armed vigilante's looking for a reason to shoot/kill someone, should be able to use deadly force while playing 'handicap parking police'...is way beyond the pale.

Simply unbelievable.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by jebartle

It was none of his business. Call police let them handle parking violation, period!

It really IS...as simple as that.


Any other attempted justification, exposes the disgusting ugly underbelly...that currently infects this nation.

[WarrenWilliam]

Couple of things here: One comment described the pusher as "this young father." What possible connection can this have to the case? All being a father means s that you are capable of reproducing. The media often portrays people in terms of their reproductive status. The implication is that because they are a father, or a grandmother, or whatever, that means they are a good person. Inf act, they could be the worst father or grandmother ever. Irrelevant.

And as to the shooter "harassing his girlfriend" -- SHE pulled into the handicapped zone. The man who called her out for it didn't pull out his gun or threaten her. If she is old enough to be driving and making a decision to park illegally, she is old enough to verbally defend herself against verbal criticism. There was no call for her boyfriend to "protect" her here. This isn't the 1700s.

[ColdNoMore]

Michael Drejka, Florida ’stand your ground’ shooter, charged with manslaughter - The Washington Post

In court documents, prosecutors allege Drejka has brandished firearms or threatened to shoot other drivers during confrontations in at least three other incidents, including at the same store.

Here's hoping this armed, bully thug...gets what he deserves.