Florida stand your ground. Dont play stupid games

[JettaKnight]

I think this whole story becomes incredibly relevant in a political atmosphere where people are being told to confront others that don't believe the way you do in public places.
Once that confrontation becomes physical do we move into a stand your ground situation? If a celeb shoves a paparazzi can they drop the camera and pull a gun? These are tricky nuances we need to think about.

Welcome to fray!


You're probably around 47... which I heard on INGO means you're an old man and the threshold for when to shoot is reduced for you.

 

[Pyro]

I'm 47...and I don't feel all that elderly or infirm.

I'm 48 and some days .... of course I also don't attack women who park where they shouldn't .. I just stare at them like they're mentally handicapped and forgot the tag.

 

[Alpo]

Welcome to fray!


You're probably around 47... which I heard on INGO means you're an old man and the threshold for when to shoot is reduced for you.

Which makes Churchmouse and me about the same age as Otzi. Please note, that if you push us:

1) we will not fall over

2) we will whack you with our quarterstaff

 

[Hatin Since 87]

I think this whole story becomes incredibly relevant in a political atmosphere where people are being told to confront others that don't believe the way you do in public places.
Once that confrontation becomes physical do we move into a stand your ground situation? If a celeb shoves a paparazzi can they drop the camera and pull a gun? These are tricky nuances we need to think about.

I hope the day never comes when I need to shoot somebody. That said, I, personally, refuse to take the life of another human being unless I without a doubt feel it is life or death. I’ve had my ass kicked before, and I’m sure I will again some day, I’m a big boy and I can take that. Some of my friends became my friends this way. I would not feel as if I’m in a deadly situation by a simple push. I will clear it up tho, if I’m with my family, and somebody verbally makes it known they want me dead, then assaults me or my loved ones and I feel there is no other option, I will not think twice about defending our lives. Each situation is different depending on the individual. I think it was rhino that said a shove to the ground could be potentially deadly for him, so what is life threatening to one individual may not be to another, and that individual should deal with a threat how they determine necessary to defend their own life. My opinion of course, this guy was looking for a reason to push peoples buttons and provoke a situation that should’ve been dealt with by calling someone with the responsibility, and authority to do so.

 

[engi-ninja]

I don't necessarily want to defend the shooter, because I think it was not necessary to shoot the guy. However, it's much easier to say that in hindsight; it may not have been so clear at the time.

However, I guess I've always thought that verbal and physical confrontations are on 2 totally separate planes. A person can scream and yell and say whatever they want to, but it never justifies physical violence. As soon as physical violence is introduced, it instantly escalates to another level, where retaliatory physical violence is justified.

Given that, the initiator of the physical violence is ultimately responsible for the end result of said violence. The older dude can yell and scream all he wants, and it doesn't hurt anyone; you can always just walk away. As long as no one touches him, he remains a dick, and everyone else remains annoyed, but in the right. As soon as you touch him, you're the aggressor, and now you're the bad guy, and he's justified in defending himself. Again, whether or not shooting him was necessary is debatable, but the younger dude was the one who escalated it to physical violence, so he's ultimately responsible for the end result.

Never, ever, ever start fights, but always finish them.

 

[Itchytriggerfinger]

Don't bring flat palms to a gunfight. Got it.

 

[HoughMade]

I don't necessarily want to defend the shooter, because I think it was not necessary to shoot the guy. However, it's much easier to say that in hindsight; it may not have been so clear at the time.

However, I guess I've always thought that verbal and physical confrontations are on 2 totally separate planes. A person can scream and yell and say whatever they want to, but it never justifies physical violence. As soon as physical violence is introduced, it instantly escalates to another level, where retaliatory physical violence is justified.

You are mixing concepts. No one said the yelling justified the pushing. However, the yelling caused the confrontation which led to the shooting. No debate. Non-lethal force that is no longer going on does not merit a lethal response.

And as an aside, for you guys who think 1.5 to 2 seconds is too short a time to make a shoot-don't shoot decision. Please stop carrying at least until you get better training. You're going to ruin it for all of us.

Given that, the initiator of the physical violence is ultimately responsible for the end result of said violence. The older dude can yell and scream all he wants, and it doesn't hurt anyone; you can always just walk away. As long as no one touches him, he remains a dick, and everyone else remains annoyed, but in the right. As soon as you touch him, you're the aggressor, and now you're the bad guy, and he's justified in defending himself.

With reasonable force to stop an attack. There was no attack when he fired.

Again, whether or not shooting him was necessary is debatable,

Nope. it's not. There is no evidence that it was "necessary". None whatsoever. Could it be legally justifiable? Perhaps (not in my eyes), but in no way was it "necessary".

...Never, ever, ever start fights, but always finish them.

That's TV/movie/school yard logic. Playground appropriate, but maybe not so much in real life where deadly force is at issue. Don't confuse defense and retaliation.

 

[JettaKnight]

Never, ever, ever start fights, but always finish them.

Sometime the best way to finish a fight is to walk away.




PS - that technique works in marriages, too. (well, you know, temporarily walk away and cool off)

 

[rhino]

And as an aside, for you guys who think 1.5 to 2 seconds is too short a time to make a shoot-don't shoot decision. Please stop carrying at least until you get better training. You're going to ruin it for all of us.

Do you have room in your safe for my stuff until I complete training that meets your standards?

 

[19112011]

Sometime the best way to finish a fight is to walk away.




PS - that technique works in marriages, too. (well, you know, temporarily walk away and cool off)

Most certainly.

By being legally able to carry a firearm concealed it puts an extra burden on me to stay away from altercations. Been a couple of situations where I believe I was in the right, but was it worth me dying or killing someone to be right? The shooter should have walked on by the illegally parked car. If he felt he needed to do something report it to the local PD.

 

[HoughMade]

Do you have room in your safe for my stuff until I complete training that meets your standards?

My standards? You don't want to be able to decide whether you should shoot before 2 Mississippi ?

 

[Alpo]

Do you have room in your safe for my stuff until I complete training that meets your standards?

https://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/a-z/balance-training

 

[Randy Harris]

My standards? You don't want to be able to decide whether you should shoot before 2 Mississippi ?

A good standard for anyone might be simply recognizing did they back away when you drew ? Did they react to your commands? Did they comply ?

There is an implied "if this then this" when you point a gun at someone. It is the ultimate ultimatum. You are telling them that they will comply or I'll use lethal force...I will not use it if you comply. So you cannot then use lethal force AFTER they comply!

This guy waited long enough to shoot that the guy was moving AWAY from him when he shot. That looks awful to a jury...especially a civil court jury. That guy may avoid jail but he's gonna be lucky to be peddling a bike around harassing people about handicap spots when the settlement is over.....

 

[Ruffnek]

FULL DISCLOSURE: I gave up on reading the entire thread somewhere around post #210.

What I see is a giant clusterf**k of stupidity. I don't see a good shoot here, but I also don't see one party or another anywhere near "in the right".

Where my sympathy kicked in was the end of the tape when I watched that boy, just about the same size and age as my own son, watch his father come in and collapse on the floor. To me, that's the biggest tragedy in all of this, and thinking about that makes it hard to see well enough to type this.

 

[19112011]

That looks awful to a jury...especially a civil court jury. That guy may avoid jail but he's gonna be lucky to be peddling a bike around harassing people about handicap spots when the settlement is over.....

I would have a difficult time convicting anything above an involuntary manslaughter, I think I could be convinced otherwise. In civil court, I think I could easily agree with the shooter paying for deceased's child's needs.

Bad situation all around...

 

[racegunz]

All I have to go on is the video and the accounts provided by the New York posts. So Man gets shot after assaulting a older man arguing with the younger man's wife, right? Next the video shows the older man on the ground and reaching for something. The older man pulls out a hand gun and points it at the
younger man that just assaulted him, next thing you know the older man shoots the assailant, right? So is that it? for all you guys that say, "IT WAS NOT" Stand your ground. Well I would have to disagree with you. The older man in question was obviously infirm in some way because he uses the handicap parking a lot. So he does have health issues. Next what about the other guy? The young man walking out with the assailant? Did the shooter also see that person walking towards him as well? Now, we have a infirm older man that has already been attacked by one younger man and now there appears to be a second man becoming part of the situation. Now, tell me how this doesn't change anything. Watch the video and then watch the second man from the door. As soon as the assault happens he exits the door and now goes towards the incident. When you only have a few seconds to make a decision you have to make one. It's easy for a "Tuesday Armchair Quarterback" to call the shots while the game is over, lets see how well you do when you're in that game at the moment. Sometimes you have to make the hard choices in what you do. Situation was bad at the beginning and to only show one side of the story, shame on you NEW YORK POST for not giving all the facts and just a liberal point of view that only shows one side and nothing more.

+1

 

[racegunz]

One thing that it seems is being glossed over is that the shooter was yelling at the woman AND two small children were in the car. It is one thing to have someone getting in your girlfriend's face, it is another to have that altercation taking place that close to your other two small children. Not justifying anything, but, for me, at least, that sort of nonsense taking place near my kids changes the response level.

perhaps you better make sure your significant others don’t break the law and increase the chances of problems then. It all really started with a self important woman using a reserved space that wasn’t for her. Next time someone breaks a law in front of you don’t say or do anything if there’s women or children involved? Whatever.

 

[HoughMade]

This topic has sure brought the long term plinkers.

 

[jkaetz]

This topic has sure brought the long term plinkers.

The whole thing is surprisingly polarizing. I expected everyone to see it as the firm shade of grey it is but a lot of people see it very black or white. No way would the shooter want this to go to a jury.

 

[Route 45]

Next time someone breaks a law in front of you don’t say or do anything if there’s women or children involved?

Yes. That exactly. You are not Johnny Law. You have a heightened responsibility to avoid confrontation if you choose to carry a gun.