Argument over handicap spot turns deadly

[Ghostpanther]

Anyone can be a deadly threat if they have a concealed gun or even a small knife or a small plastic container with acid. I'm not sure what you are going about. I'm not saying the guy broke the law, I'm saying the law is stupid. The "fear" for life is not well defined and can allow you to kill anyone who show aggressiveness, even verbal one. People might actually also kill you or assault you without any warning and you won't be able to react. Others can be crazy or on drugs. Should I kill anyone who comes too close to me because I'm genuinely afraid? By the time they brandish a gun or a knife I would be dead. What exactly constitutes a justifiable fear of life? You talked about physical appearance, but this is completely stupid as guns, knives, or other weapons can be easily used to cause harm or death; what matters is the intent and the reasoning behind recognizing such intent. In this case, it might be seen as justifiable, or not but it doesn't matter. What matters is every time we have to leave it to interpretation and the personal judgement of some official. The law doesn't have to be perfectly reasonable but it has to be very very clear which is not and that's why I called it stupid. With a clear law people would be much more aware of what can be seen as a life threat and everyone would win. We would have less assaults and less shootings.

Well, it was you who posted against a law which allows a person to shoot a unarmed person. That is what I am about. Not being armed does not necessarily negate your right to defend yourself if you feel threatened. And no, the law says what is considered to be a deadly threat. Just a verbal one does not qualify as one. Of course you can be against a stand your ground law if you want.

Ohio for one, does not have it. But even in Ohio this shooter would more than likely be justified by the law to shoot the aggressor as he would have reasonable grounds to feel his life was in danger or he was about to suffer serous bodily harm. Having just been violently shoved to the ground and the attacker is still there standing.

And off topic and as a tip, break up your paragraphs into easier to read, shorter sentences.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm disinclined to pick sides when both parties are obviously awful. Clearly you shouldn't shoot someone over a shove, but it's not like we're going to be missing out on much here.

That is what some are missing here. It was not just a simple shove. It was forceful enough for the shooter to fall hard on the ground. The police chief even pointed this fact out in his news briefing.

[Spectral]

Markeis McGlockton, a pillar of society:

https://florida.arrests.org/search.p...&fpartial=True

Coke dealer, domestic abuser, and thief. Pretty good trifecta.

- - - Updated - - -

That is what some are missing here. It was not just a simple shove. It was forceful enough for the shooter to fall hard on the ground. The police chief even pointed this fact out in his news briefing.

Right, I've watched it and seen that argument. I can see the angle, at least from a perspective of the attack being violent enough to have ratcheted straight up the escalation of force pathway in a hurry. Someone shoved to the pavement in that fashion could reasonably suspect that they're about to suffer a severe beating.

That said, it seems like an error in judgment. The vast majority of shoves, even pretty aggressive ones, are not actually a life threatening situation about to happen.

[Deathcries]

Idk, frankly I'd think the guy harassing some woman in a parking spot should get shot. Not the guy who defends the woman.

But we live in a pretty f'd up world.

- - - Updated - - -



Most people call it a childish over-reaction, and a pretty good case for your average imbecile not to have a gun.

Guess don't lay your hands on someone then, and you won't be shot. Pretty fucking simple if you ask me. Unless of coarse you want to be able to lay your hands on someone. I'm glad I live in a state that has stand your ground. I can tell you to go fuck yourself (1st amendment) and you can tell me to go fuck myself, but once you lay your hands on me then the 1st amendment goes out the window and the 2nd comes in to play. Don't like it, don't come to America, or just keep your hands to yourself just because someone talked some shit.

- - - Updated - - -

Coke dealer, domestic abuser, and thief. Pretty good trifecta.

- - - Updated - - -


Right, I've watched it and seen that argument. I can see the angle, at least from a perspective of the attack being violent enough to have ratcheted straight up the escalation of force pathway in a hurry. Someone shoved to the pavement in that fashion could reasonably suspect that they're about to suffer a severe beating.

That said, it seems like an error in judgment. The vast majority of shoves, even pretty aggressive ones, are not actually a life threatening situation about to happen.

How about don't shove? Don't start no physical altercation shit, won't be none, and IF there is where the guy pulls the gun out without being touched prosecute the shooter to the fullest extent of the law.

[Ghostpanther]

Coke dealer, domestic abuser, and thief. Pretty good trifecta.

- - - Updated - - -


Right, I've watched it and seen that argument. I can see the angle, at least from a perspective of the attack being violent enough to have ratcheted straight up the escalation of force pathway in a hurry. Someone shoved to the pavement in that fashion could reasonably suspect that they're about to suffer a severe beating.

That said, it seems like an error in judgment. The vast majority of shoves, even pretty aggressive ones, are not actually a life threatening situation about to happen.

The vast majority of shoves do not throw a person hard to the ground. But I have said before in this thread, I do not think I would have shot the guy. I would like to think I would pull the firearm, point it at him and warn him he was going to get shot if he does not back away. But then again, I might feel different if I hit the ground that hard.

[Spectral]

How about don't shove? Don't start no physical altercation shit, won't be none, and IF there is where the guy pulls the gun out without being touched prosecute the shooter to the fullest extent of the law.

I'm pretty non-violent, you don't really have to sell me on the merits of not starting pointless fights with people. I don't have any sympathy for the thug that got killed. This still seems like an overescalation of force to me, but ultimately that's going to be at the discretion of the person that got attacked. So yeah, sometimes when you mess with the bull, you get the horns.

- - - Updated - - -

The vast majority of shoves do not throw a person hard to the ground. But I have said before in this thread, I do not think I would have shot the guy. I would like to think I would pull the firearm, point it at him and warn him he was going to get shot if he does not back away. But then again, I might feel different if I hit the ground that hard.

Right, this is my instinct as well. The best approach (I think) would have been what you described. Hard to make that judgment in the moment though and once you're engaged in a physical altercation, it can be very difficult to determine whether the other person's about to continue their attack. Given the failures of human reaction time, the outcome is understandable.

[Deathcries]

The vast majority of shoves do not throw a person hard to the ground. But I have said before in this thread, I do not think I would have shot the guy. I would like to think I would pull the firearm, point it at him and warn him he was going to get shot if he does not back away. But then again, I might feel different if I hit the ground that hard.

Myself, I've carried for over 15 years. I've never had to draw my weapon, and I avoid confrontation like the plague. I think the guy was being a douche (The guy who defended himself) but that's no right to lay your hands on someone. Call the cops. It really is that simple.

Being an adult is hard. Just remember here in America we can be some of the friendliest of people, but we can also be complete assholes.

[Deathcries]

I'm pretty non-violent, you don't really have to sell me on the merits of not starting pointless fights with people. I don't have any sympathy for the thug that got killed. This still seems like an overescalation of force to me, but ultimately that's going to be at the discretion of the person that got attacked. So yeah, sometimes when you mess with the bull, you get the horns.
.

I can agree to this. I always look at the prospective of the person I may be confronting may be armed. NEVER judge a book by it's cover. I go to the gym almost as a religion. I've seen some dudes who look like they can't fight their way out of a paper bag, but then bench/deadlift/squat 300lb+ like it's nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes I did mention he was unarmed so you have a point but that was not the main point of my argument. The point of my argument was that laws should be clear. We have very clear laws regarding the most stupid things so we should have much clearer laws when it comes to what constitute a life threat.

For instance, it could be "any physical assault", or it could be "physical assault the incurred bleeding or resulted in grounding the victim". It should be very very clear. It shouldn't be left for arbitrary interpretation. One might hesitate to defend himself if he's not sure whether he can or not. It should be clear for the sake of all.

I've seen people get beat retarded (literally) with fist. Twice in my life. Usually leads to the dude being knocked out, then they get their head kicked in. Once you lay your hands on someone where there is no consent, it becomes deadly. That's how it's defined in America. Most people have no honor when it comes to street fighting.

[Ghostpanther]

Myself, I've carried for over 15 years. I've never had to draw my weapon, and I avoid confrontation like the plague. I think the guy was being a douche (The guy who defended himself) but that's no right to lay your hands on someone. Call the cops. It really is that simple.

Being an adult is hard. Just remember here in America we can be some of the friendliest of people, but we can also be complete assholes.

I have never had to ether and I hope and pray I never do. And like you, I will avoid confrontations and the shooter in this case was dumb to argue with the guy's GF. Just plain stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes I did mention he was unarmed so you have a point but that was not the main point of my argument. The point of my argument was that laws should be clear. We have very clear laws regarding the most stupid things so we should have much clearer laws when it comes to what constitute a life threat.

For instance, it could be "any physical assault", or it could be "physical assault the incurred bleeding or resulted in grounding the victim". It should be very very clear. It shouldn't be left for arbitrary interpretation. One might hesitate to defend himself if he's not sure whether he can or not. It should be clear for the sake of all.

According to the police down there, it was clearly a right the shooter had under Florida's Stand your Ground law. But any shooting where you take a person's life, they are going to consider the circumstances to see if it was justified under the law. Personal opinion on the matter needs be avoided.

[Deathcries]

I have never had to ether and I hope and pray I never do. And like you, I will avoid confrontations and the shooter in this case was dumb to argue with the guy's GF. Just plain stupid.

We're in agreement.

[Myth]

I am pro-2nd amendment and I carry every single day praying that I never have to use my gun. The shooter did NOT have to fire in this situation. Once assault was committed he could have pulled his weapon and demanded the guy get on the ground and asked for any of the other citizens in the area to call 911. Even with the pistol pulled you can see the black guy take a small step away and then he was fired upon. This is a scenario that contained 2 hot-headed individuals and unfortunately the one with the gun had no self-control. I wonder if he would have made such a big deal about the parking if he wasn't carrying. Its people like that who carry with a chip on their shoulder thinking they are unstoppable with their pistol and a "stand your ground" law that make everyday carrying citizens look bad. Through the various training's I have taken, every single one had the same thing in common... pulling the trigger is your last choice, not your first.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Arguments l(handbags at dawn) happen many hundreds of thousands of times a day around the world.

Only in America would you have an actual debate as to whether or not it is morally acceptable to allow this sort of petty argument to escalate in to the use of lethal force.

Prize meh gunz from meh cold dead handz.

[Deathcries]

I am pro-2nd amendment and I carry every single day praying that I never have to use my gun. The shooter did NOT have to fire in this situation. Once assault was committed he could have pulled his weapon and demanded the guy get on the ground and asked for any of the other citizens in the area to call 911. Even with the pistol pulled you can see the black guy take a small step away and then he was fired upon. This is a scenario that contained 2 hot-headed individuals and unfortunately the one with the gun had no self-control. I wonder if he would have made such a big deal about the parking if he wasn't carrying. Its people like that who carry with a chip on their shoulder thinking they are unstoppable with their pistol and a "stand your ground" law that make everyday carrying citizens look bad. Through the various training's I have taken, every single one had the same thing in common... pulling the trigger is your last choice, not your first.

How about not laying your hands on someone? You do not have the right to get physical with someone unless you're defending yourself. Always assume someone is carrying, and once you get physical rules go out the window. People need to understand this shit. Some obviously don't understand this concept.

- - - Updated - - -

Arguments l(handbags at dawn) happen many hundreds of thousands of times a day around the world.

Only in America would you have an actual debate as to whether or not it is morally acceptable to allow this sort of petty argument to escalate in to the use of lethal force.

Prize meh gunz from meh cold dead handz.

I like it that way.

I remember at my place of employment I got into an argument with a Brit over guns in the country. He literally asked me that you're not able to get into a scrap after a good drink here in the states due to being shot.

"You're shitting me, right?" was my reply. lol

[Nigel Tufnel]

How about not laying your hands on someone? You do not have the right to get physical with someone. Always assume someone is carrying, and once you get physical rules go out the window. People need to understand this shit. Some obviously don't understand this concept.

- - - Updated - - -



I like it that way.

I remember at my place of employment I got into an argument with a Brit over guns in the country. He literally asked me that you're not able to get into a scrap after a good drink here in the states due to being shot.

"You're shitting me, right?" was my reply. lol

Guns make you safer. Yes. That's right.

Seriously, carry on shooting each other. I really don't give a fuck.

[Ghostpanther]

It shouldn't be according to the police, it should be according to the law. The law should state "any physical assault can be regarded as life threatening". Or it should state exactly what can be seen as life threatening. I read pages and pages of terms of usage when using a software but when it comes to people's life we leave it to 'according to the police' or 'what constitutes a reasonable life threat'. No it shouldn't be according to the police or vague terms, we should have every detail and every possible circumstance listed in the law. The U.S. has a very bad history when it comes to unwritten laws and vague interpretations. Laws should not be left like that. Everything should be down to the very last detail and we should only have further examinations when it's a super rare situation that was not accounted for by the law.

But it is up to them to arrest a person or not. In conjunction with the Prosecuting attorney for that district. Which I would assume they consulted. Then if charges are made, it will be up the judge or jury to decide. They naturally will avoid going to trial over a charge they are not likely to win. And I think the law is a more defined what is a deadly threat than you think.

[Deathcries]

Guns make you safer. Yes. That's right.

Seriously, carry on shooting each other. I really don't give a fuck.

Some people like being sheep. Some don't.

Been in America for 38 years. Been around guns all my life. Live in a populated city. Never seen a shooting, or seen someone draw their gun on someone else.

Keep being ignorant, and saying ignorant shit. I really don't give a fuck.

- - - Updated - - -

I would also say this. Most likely if you're not in a gang, doing gang related things, or in LE you're more likely win the million dollar lottery then see a gun being drawn on you or used in a violent act. People who never been around guns are fucking retarded to this fact.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Been in America for 38 years. Been around guns all my life. Live in a populated city. Never seen a shooting, or seen someone draw their gun on someone else.

Keep being ignorant, and saying ignorant shit. I really don't give a fuck.

Yep, I know you don't give a shit. And I'm glad. Keep wielding dem guns, cowboy.

[Deathcries]

Right. Tell the black guy with a record to call the cops on a white dude. I'm sure he's just chalked full of trust in the police.

Did he get a record by just being black, or are you using that as a strawman?

[Deathcries]

He asked you a statement?

I think I just lost 5 IQ points reading that.

I made a statement too. Helping people understand that putting your hands on another human being could get you killed. I just don't think you want to understand because you're ignorant on the subject, since the already low IQ.

- - - Updated - - -

He asked you a statement?

I think I just lost 5 IQ points reading that.

- - - Updated - - -



How he got the record is irrelevant. You're embarrassing yourself if you truly think calling the cops in this situation would have done anything useful.

But keep defending the dude who goes around threatening to kill people.

If he was heard threatening to kill people (and there is enough proof/evidence) then that's no longer a 1st amendment right. That's a call to action. Do you have any proof of this or are you just pulling out of your ass or someone who "heard"'s ass?

[Nigel Tufnel]

I made a statement too. Helping people understand that putting your hands on another human being could get you killed. I just don't think you want to understand because you're ignorant on the subject, since the already low IQ.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll state this again:

Only in America would you have an actual debate as to whether or not it is morally acceptable to allow this sort of petty argument to escalate in to the use of lethal force.

[Deathcries]

I'll state this again:

Only in America would you have an actual debate as to whether or not it is morally acceptable to allow this sort of petty argument to escalate in to the use of lethal force.

I'm sure people kill people with objects or fists in your country. You think you're superior just because the government tells you you're not allowed to own guns doesn't make you superior. In my eyes it makes you a subject to the whims of your .gov. Something you're obviously okay with, but it obviously irritates the shit out of you that we Americans have the freedom to own firearms, because you keep responding.