[l2ridehd]

Your still speculating and guessing.

The pusher could have been going back to the car and saying "quick, hand me my gun, I am going to kill this SOB" Shooter justified

The pusher could have been saying " I am so sorry, had me the first aid kit" Shooter should be arrested and tried.

The point is you are all guessing which ever side you take. You don't know all the facts. You may never know all the facts. Let the LEO and the DA who are handling this make that call based on what they know. It's what we pay them for.

If you are for or against SYG then rally support for your position based on your belief about the law as it is written, not looking at some video and guessing what happened.

[RedChariot]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

After the initial push, there was no forward aggressive move from the man who was shot. The man on floor had the opportunity to withdraw from the scene. Whatever verbals continued after the initial push, still does not justify the use of lethal force.
No way was that a life threatening stuation the shooter was in, when he fired that shot.
If he gets away with this, it practicly means any disagreement where a party gets a push, a smack round the ear, the victim can blow the other parties brains out with impunity!
JMO.

The shooter MURDERED the man that shoved him. No aggression from the man that was shot after the shove. This is not a situation that should have resulted in a death. The shooter should be criminally charged.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

Your still speculating and guessing.

The pusher could have been going back to the car and saying "quick, hand me my gun, I am going to kill this SOB" Shooter justified

The pusher could have been saying " I am so sorry, had me the first aid kit" Shooter should be arrested and tried.

The point is you are all guessing which ever side you take. You don't know all the facts. You may never know all the facts. Let the LEO and the DA who are handling this make that call based on what they know. It's what we pay them for.

If you are for or against SYG then rally support for your position based on your belief about the law as it is written, not looking at some video and guessing what happened.

Excellent post. AGAIN.
Your fan,
Grace Gantner

[Cedwards38]

Guntown - YouTube

[Marathon Man]

Those of you who believe that there was no aggression after the shove, please have another look at the video. After the shove, the pusher takes three steps forward directly toward the shooter. He stops and backs up as the shooter is pulling his weapon. Those three steps are enough to make the shooter believe that more action is coming. At that point SYG is in effect and it longer matters what actually could or would have happened next. SYG will be debated every time something like this happens.

As I have said before. I am not a fan of any of the three people involved in this. One simple change by any of them and nothing would have happened. Escalation led to an extreme outcome to a simple situation.

[l2ridehd]

Originally Posted by RedChariot

The shooter MURDERED the man that shoved him. No aggression from the man that was shot after the shove. This is not a situation that should have resulted in a death. The shooter should be criminally charged.

As stated above you're guessing. The pusher was aggressive. He pushed the man to the ground. Yes he was moving away. Do you know why? No you don't, nobody but the interviewing LEO has any idea.

Suppose as I suggested he was turning back to the car and asking his GF to hand him his gun? Was the shooter justified then?

I am at a total loss how folks can convict someone with so little information. You see a video and think you know exactly what happened. None of us do. Let the law take it's natural course. There has to be some reason why he was not charged immediately. I trust that the LEO knew what he was doing. And if not, I am sure the DA will correct the problem.

[trichard]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

I saw that on the news. Took place in Clearwater. Guy pushed a man down who was carrying a concealed weapon. Argument over a parking spot and the girlfriend's parking job or something like that.

Just do not get the result that this shooting was justified. Seems like a ridiculous slippery slope.

The aggressor was a physically abusive bully and suffered the consequences.

[RedChariot]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

As stated above you're guessing. The pusher was aggressive. He pushed the man to the ground. Yes he was moving away. Do you know why? No you don't, nobody but the interviewing LEO has any idea.

Suppose as I suggested he was turning back to the car and asking his GF to hand him his gun? Was the shooter justified then?

I am at a total loss how folks can convict someone with so little information. You see a video and think you know exactly what happened. None of us do. Let the law take it's natural course. There has to be some reason why he was not charged immediately. I trust that the LEO knew what he was doing. And if not, I am sure the DA will correct the problem.

Someone should not die because they push a busy body that should have minded his own business. Surely SYG was meant for a more extreme situation.

[Trayderjoe]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdNoMore View Post
I've seen a couple of yelling, shoving, incidents here in TV (mostly on/near the course) and yet in none of them was the person shoved...such a scared little pansy that they pulled a gun and killed the other guy. Those who are stretching so far as to try and make this minor/single shoving incident, into justifiable homicide..must be really insecure wussies."

Quote:
Name calling again? As NONE of us has all of the facts (don't "facts matter"?), WE can't determine if the shooting is justified or not. Again, it is the police and the prosecutors who will make that determination. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on whether the shooting is justified or not, however attempts to demean people for their opinion is juvenile at best.

By the by, this was by NO mean a "minor" shoving, albeit it was a single shoving incident. Yes, the victim did not appear to end up with severe head trauma from cracking their skull on the concrete, but any time someone is violently shoved to the ground, the risk of injury and sever trauma is high.
__________________
"Kindness is more important than wisdom, and the recognition of this is the beginning of wisdom."
-
Theodore Rubin

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Ohhh the hypocrisy.

As to the "facts," a known instigator got shoved to the ground after a boyfriend stuck up for his GF, who was being verbally confronted by a known instigator constantly looking for a fight and the insecure, wussie, 'hero wannabe'...killed him in cold blood for it.

The stretching being made to try and justify, what any reasonable and decent person can see with their own eyes was a homicide...is simply deplorable.

Dem's da facts.

I am willing to take the jab about hypocrisy, since it appears the difference between commenting about behavior versus blatant name calling of people is lost on some people.

I reiterate that it is the job of the police and the prosecutor to review these cases and determine if the shooting was justifiable or not, and they will do so based upon all of the evidence collected. No one on this board gets to make that determination, unless there is a trial and we are on the jury. Beyond that, we all get our opinion, however without assessing all of the facts, an absolute finding of guilt on this board is premature. The vitriol that accompanies opinions only demonstrates an emotional attachment to a position, not a decision based upon facts.

[rivaridger1]

Originally Posted by Trayderjoe

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdNoMore View Post
I've seen a couple of yelling, shoving, incidents here in TV (mostly on/near the course) and yet in none of them was the person shoved...such a scared little pansy that they pulled a gun and killed the other guy. Those who are stretching so far as to try and make this minor/single shoving incident, into justifiable homicide..must be really insecure wussies."

Quote:
Name calling again? As NONE of us has all of the facts (don't "facts matter"?), WE can't determine if the shooting is justified or not. Again, it is the police and the prosecutors who will make that determination. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on whether the shooting is justified or not, however attempts to demean people for their opinion is juvenile at best.

By the by, this was by NO mean a "minor" shoving, albeit it was a single shoving incident. Yes, the victim did not appear to end up with severe head trauma from cracking their skull on the concrete, but any time someone is violently shoved to the ground, the risk of injury and sever trauma is high.
__________________
"Kindness is more important than wisdom, and the recognition of this is the beginning of wisdom."
-
Theodore Rubin



I am willing to take the jab about hypocrisy, since it appears the difference between commenting about behavior versus blatant name calling of people is lost on some people.

I reiterate that it is the job of the police and the prosecutor to review these cases and determine if the shooting was justifiable or not, and they will do so based upon all of the evidence collected. No one on this board gets to make that determination, unless there is a trial and we are on the jury. Beyond that, we all get our opinion, however without assessing all of the facts, an absolute finding of guilt on this board is premature. The vitriol that accompanies opinions only demonstrates an emotional attachment to a position, not a decision based upon facts.

Well said.

[Trayderjoe]

Quote:
Originally Posted by John_W View Post
The person who was shot would still be alive if he had done two things. First, if he had not parked in a handicap spot and second, he had not laid his hands on another person. Both actions were against the law.

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Are you frigging serious?

Parking in a handicap spot, is in any way some kind of justification...for the guy verbally assaulting the driver?

I find it interesting that the girl friend was verbally "assaulted", but the victim received a "minor/single push". The common definition of the verb for assault is the physical attack of someone, such as to hit, strike, physically attack.

Why didn't the killer, who has obviously been looking for a fight...just call the cops instead? The VICTIM should have let the police handle it, I haven't seen a post that suggests his actions were the best way to handle the situation.

Does this also mean that you wouldn't stand up for your wife/GF...if some stranger was verbally assaulting her?

Yelling, cursing and verbal abuse does NOT automatically give anyone the right to put their hands on someone. The best response is ensure her safety (roll up the windows, lock the car door) and walk/drive away and let the police handle it.


Like I said previously, I would bet big money that if the woman had shot the bully because she felt her life was threatened from his confrontation...a whole lot of people would be singing a different tune.

Same scenario as an earlier post and the same response. Had the woman shot the victim claiming she was in fear of her life, she could potentially be charged with murder since the boyfriend was standing right there next to the victim, AND the victim did not pull his handgun until AFTER he was assaulted.

Whereas at least I would be consistent in saying...THAT would have been unjustified also.

[Trayderjoe]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

After the initial push, there was no forward aggressive move from the man who was shot. The man on floor had the opportunity to withdraw from the scene. Whatever verbals continued after the initial push, still does not justify the use of lethal force.
No way was that a life threatening stuation the shooter was in, when he fired that shot.
If he gets away with this, it practicly means any disagreement where a party gets a push, a smack round the ear, the victim can blow the other parties brains out with impunity!
JMO.

I disagree. The victim was unexpectedly assaulted and violently pushed to the ground. Since none of us know his physical condition (does he have bad knees, was he "woozy" from hitting his head on the ground, etc.), we don't know how long it would take him to stand up in order to flee the scene, and if in the act of standing up, he would be exposed to a further assault. Add in the Tueller Drill which proved that a person could move 21 feet in 1.5 seconds, the victim could easily have been attacked again. The victim had a legal right to be where he was and the Stand Your Ground Law removes the responsibility from him to escape. Even if we were in a Duty to Retreat state, that requirement is predicated on the victim being able to safely escape the situation before he would be required to retreat.

Once again, LAW ENFORCEMENT has the job to determine if the shooting was an act of self defense. The shooter will ALWAYS face the potential for criminal charges to be brought unless self defense is determined (by LAW ENFORCEMENT) to be justified.

Should he have taken it upon himself to yell at the people? No, not at all. His doing so was a stupid decision, the boyfriend, after violently shoving him to the ground, became a criminal once he assaulted the victim.

[Trayderjoe]

Originally Posted by RedChariot

Someone should not die because they push a busy body that should have minded his own business. Surely SYG was meant for a more extreme situation.

SYG only removes the requirement that if a person is somewhere he/she is legally allowed to be, he/she does not HAVE to escape even if it is safe to do so. It does NOT automatically give someone a "free pass" to shoot as the shooter will still have to meet the self defense requirements. I hate "what ifs", but for the purposes of this distinction only, had the "loudmouth" (my words) physically assaulted the girlfriend, then the "loudmouth" would have committed a crime. The boyfriend, immediately pushing away the "loudmouth" would be justified in protecting her. Had the "loudmouth" then pulled a gun and shot the boyfriend, the "loudmouth" would not be able to claim self defense and would be charged with murder since his criminal act initiated the sequence of events

[BobnBev]

Boy, what wouldn't I give for a cold beer to go with my

[manaboutown]

I got curious about Florida's self defense statute (stand your ground), looked it up and discovered it to be a very necessary, reasonable, proper and good law.

776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.—
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) 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. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.