[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by rivaridger1

What is the next physical act following the shove to the ground ? A kick in the head ?? There have been a number of incidents over the years where the person shoved struck their heads and died. I must admit if I were shoved in the manner depicted in the video, fear for my life would enter the equation. I think the authorities made the right call in not charging the shooter but also understand that decision is subject to review. The answer is easy, keep your hands off of others even when angry.

1. The "pusher" backed up, physically, away from "ground guy" after shoving the guy.
2. Assuming the "ground guy" felt threatened (which would be understandable) there is still no reason to KILL the pusher. Ground guy was on the ground. Ground guy could've shot the pusher in the foot. Or leg. Or arm. Or hip, or shoulder. It was a big looking pusher, and they were close range. Not much chance to miss. Ground guy chose a death shot. Ground guy committed murder, not self-defense. Cops chose not to allow charges to be pressed.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by C4Boston

Bottom line, mind your own damn business.

Who in this case?

[billethkid]

As a card carrying proponent of concealed carry, the shooter did not abide for the very specific rules and guidelines regarding when to pull one's weapon....there is no distinction between pulling a concealed weapon and firing the concealed weapon....as one would only pull their weapon to fire it.....not negotiate.

But before getting to that point there were two other aspects also ignored.....flee....hide from a shooting scenario.

Also there was no immediate threat to anybody's life or others nearby. We may not like the idea of a shoving match and an elder being knocked down.....none of which come anywhere close to justifying pulling a weapon and shooting.

Too many people are uninformed regarding the rules of engagement when authorized to carry a concealed weapon. It is not the wild west version of carrying a weapon.....though some few would have us think that.
The first line of defense is to, if at all possible, avoid a situation requiring the need to draw a weapon.

A good lawyer will no doubt create a doubt in a jury's mind about the justification of the shooting.

Those permitted to carry know better!!!!

[BobnBev]

Originally Posted by billethkid

As a card carrying proponent of concealed carry, the shooter did not abide for the very specific rules and guidelines regarding when to pull one's weapon....there is no distinction between pulling a concealed weapon and firing the concealed weapon....as one would only pull their weapon to fire it.....not negotiate.

But before getting to that point there were two other aspects also ignored.....flee....hide from a shooting scenario.

Also there was no immediate threat to anybody's life or others nearby. We may not like the idea of a shoving match and an elder being knocked down.....none of which come anywhere close to justifying pulling a weapon and shooting.

Too many people are uninformed regarding the rules of engagement when authorized to carry a concealed weapon. It is not the wild west version of carrying a weapon.....though some few would have us think that.
The first line of defense is to, if at all possible, avoid a situation requiring the need to draw a weapon.

A good lawyer will no doubt create a doubt in a jury's mind about the justification of the shooting.

Those permitted to carry know better!!!!

Well, if he's not being charged, then there will be no jury. All he had to say was he feared for his life. It's his word---shooting justified under SYG law.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by BobnBev

Well, if he's not being charged, then there will be no jury. All he had to say was he feared for his life. It's his word---shooting justified under SYG law.

Is is up to the prosecutor if charges will be filed against this shooter.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Words are words but once someone puts their hands on another person, especially and older person, all bets are off.

If I got pushed to the ground by a young muscular guy, I'd be afraid for my life or at least my personal safety.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by Jazuela

1. The "pusher" backed up, physically, away from "ground guy" after shoving the guy.
2. Assuming the "ground guy" felt threatened (which would be understandable) there is still no reason to KILL the pusher. Ground guy was on the ground. Ground guy could've shot the pusher in the foot. Or leg. Or arm. Or hip, or shoulder. It was a big looking pusher, and they were close range. Not much chance to miss. Ground guy chose a death shot. Ground guy committed murder, not self-defense. Cops chose not to allow charges to be pressed.

This sounds like someone who knows very little about using a handgun for self defense. It is not like Person of Interest where they shoot people in the knee so they don't kill them. If you have to use a handgun for self defense you aim at the middle of the torso so you minimize the chance of missing. Handguns are very inaccurate. Even at close range missing the target is likely. In a life or death situation you usually don't have time to aim. It's point and shoot and hope you hit the target and stop the threat.

[Inexes@aol.com]

Information as it appeared in the Tampa Times....
The confrontation between Michael Drejka, 47, and Markeis McGlockton, 28, took place in a convenience store parking lot Thursday afternoon. According to deputies, Drejka confronted McGlockton’s girlfriend, Britany Jacobs, about parking in a handicap space without a permit.

McGlockton went up to Drejka and "slammed him to the ground," the sheriff said. Drejka, seconds later while still on the ground, pulled out his handgun and shot McGlockton in the chest. The father of three was pronounced dead soon after.

They stopped at the Circle A Food Store at 1201 Sunset Point Road on the way home from picking Jacobs up from her job as a certified nursing assistant to grab chips and drinks. Jacobs parked in the handicap spot, she said, because the parking lot was busy and they were just stopping for a minute.

Drejka went up to her.

"He’s getting out like he’s a police officer or something, and he’s approaching me," she said. "I minded my own business … I didn’t do anything wrong."

Records show Drejka does not have a criminal history in Florida, although the Sheriff’s Office had prior contact with him in 2012 when a driver accused him of pulling a gun during a road rage incident. Drejka denied he showed the gun, and the accuser declined to press charges.

Mustafa Hashen, a clerk and witness, said both men were regulars.

It wasn’t the first time he saw Drejka in a fight with another customer. A couple of months back, Rick Kelly stopped by the store, parking his tanker truck in the same handicap spot.

The details to Thursday’s incident are similar: Drejka walking around the truck checking for decals, then confronting Kelly, 31, about why he parked there. The fight escalated, and Drejka threatened to shoot him, Kelly said.

"It’s a repeat. It happened to me the first time. The second time it’s happening, someone’s life got taken," Kelly said. "He provoked that."

[rivaridger1]

Originally Posted by Jazuela

1. The "pusher" backed up, physically, away from "ground guy" after shoving the guy.
2. Assuming the "ground guy" felt threatened (which would be understandable) there is still no reason to KILL the pusher. Ground guy was on the ground. Ground guy could've shot the pusher in the foot. Or leg. Or arm. Or hip, or shoulder. It was a big looking pusher, and they were close range. Not much chance to miss. Ground guy chose a death shot. Ground guy committed murder, not self-defense. Cops chose not to allow charges to be pressed.

You do not shoot to wound ( no one is that good in a life and death situation to do that ). The shot is center body mass and is intended to kill. When you make a decision to fire, you have made the decision to end a life unfortunately and must live with the aftermath.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by Inexes@aol.com

Information as it appeared in the Tampa Times....
The confrontation between Michael Drejka, 47, and Markeis McGlockton, 28, took place in a convenience store parking lot Thursday afternoon. According to deputies, Drejka confronted McGlockton’s girlfriend, Britany Jacobs, about parking in a handicap space without a permit.

McGlockton went up to Drejka and "slammed him to the ground," the sheriff said. Drejka, seconds later while still on the ground, pulled out his handgun and shot McGlockton in the chest. The father of three was pronounced dead soon after.

They stopped at the Circle A Food Store at 1201 Sunset Point Road on the way home from picking Jacobs up from her job as a certified nursing assistant to grab chips and drinks. Jacobs parked in the handicap spot, she said, because the parking lot was busy and they were just stopping for a minute.

Drejka went up to her.

"He’s getting out like he’s a police officer or something, and he’s approaching me," she said. "I minded my own business … I didn’t do anything wrong."

Records show Drejka does not have a criminal history in Florida, although the Sheriff’s Office had prior contact with him in 2012 when a driver accused him of pulling a gun during a road rage incident. Drejka denied he showed the gun, and the accuser declined to press charges.

Mustafa Hashen, a clerk and witness, said both men were regulars.

It wasn’t the first time he saw Drejka in a fight with another customer. A couple of months back, Rick Kelly stopped by the store, parking his tanker truck in the same handicap spot.

The details to Thursday’s incident are similar: Drejka walking around the truck checking for decals, then confronting Kelly, 31, about why he parked there. The fight escalated, and Drejka threatened to shoot him, Kelly said.

"It’s a repeat. It happened to me the first time. The second time it’s happening, someone’s life got taken," Kelly said. "He provoked that."

Sounds like a person looking for trouble and an excuse to shoot someone. This is different from the story as I first understood it.

But I still say once you put your hands on someone you run the risk of whatever happens.

In this case, both parties were wrong. If Drejka wants to confront people about parking in a handicap spot that his right. But if he's looking to shoot someone, which would be hard to prove, that's a problem. The fact that he has threatened to shoot people in the past is very problematic.

On the other hand, once McGlockton pushed him to the ground he was in the wrong as well. Like I said, words are words but once it becomes physical, everything changes.

[retiredguy123]

The pusher committed a violent crime and paid the consequences. Self defense. I hope the case is closed, and politics does not play a role. The sheriff made the correct decision by not making an arrest.

[Chi-Town]

Originally Posted by billethkid

As a card carrying proponent of concealed carry, the shooter did not abide for the very specific rules and guidelines regarding when to pull one's weapon....there is no distinction between pulling a concealed weapon and firing the concealed weapon....as one would only pull their weapon to fire it.....not negotiate.

But before getting to that point there were two other aspects also ignored.....flee....hide from a shooting scenario.

Also there was no immediate threat to anybody's life or others nearby. We may not like the idea of a shoving match and an elder being knocked down.....none of which come anywhere close to justifying pulling a weapon and shooting.

Too many people are uninformed regarding the rules of engagement when authorized to carry a concealed weapon. It is not the wild west version of carrying a weapon.....though some few would have us think that.
The first line of defense is to, if at all possible, avoid a situation requiring the need to draw a weapon.

A good lawyer will no doubt create a doubt in a jury's mind about the justification of the shooting.

Those permitted to carry know better!!!!

Nice job of stating the rule of engagement.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[tagjr1]

Originally Posted by Jazuela

1. The "pusher" backed up, physically, away from "ground guy" after shoving the guy.
2. Assuming the "ground guy" felt threatened (which would be understandable) there is still no reason to KILL the pusher. Ground guy was on the ground. Ground guy could've shot the pusher in the foot. Or leg. Or arm. Or hip, or shoulder. It was a big looking pusher, and they were close range. Not much chance to miss. Ground guy chose a death shot. Ground guy committed murder, not self-defense. Cops chose not to allow charges to be pressed.

Cops did the right thing, turned it over to the DA! Let them review the tape and eyewitness accounts and then charge accordingly.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by tagjr1

Cops did the right thing, turned it over to the DA! Let them review the tape and eyewitness accounts and then charge accordingly.

Looking more and more like someone who wants to play vigilante and should never have been given a concealed gun permit with that kind of mindset.

[graciegirl]

I am glad we have the second amendment. I am glad we don't have guns. If we ever need them we can get educated on how to use them and get some.