Posted on 07/25/2018 9:36:45 AM PDT by libstripper
Firearm brandished
The rest would be speculation
At a mniimum the dead man’s momentum towards the shooter had ended and in my opinion reversed at time gun was drawn and killer was sitting on ground
That’s not really the point here
Freepers continually say he “felt” threatened
And it’s ok to kill someone who hits you or pushes you down and I think that’s crazy and I wonder where these guys grew up
Feels threatened is a matter of degree
Threatened cause he is staring at me
Threatened because he pushed me down
Or threatened cause he has an axe handle in his hand moving towards me
One justifies shooting him
I think to freepers at least two and possibly all do
Yes they sure do
“The police seem to do it all too often.”
—
How often?
.
Only to those like apparently most freepers who think it’s ok to kill someone who pushes you down
Y’all musta been great fun at kickball in grade school
I guess I’m just old..I am... and come from a fist fighting (formerly dueling) and slave owning culture where you don’t kill someone over a physical confrontation
Good thing
I woulda killed a lot of folks otherwise
Why post a hypothetical? Did Markeis McGlockton hypothetically commit battery? Was he hypothetically shot? Why not read the law and find the answer to your own question?
Plus, the guy definitely had arms.
I don’t know where this “can’t shoot an unarmed man” comes from. One of the big selling points of a gun is that it allows a small, unobrtusive person to defend themselves against a large, physically intimidating violent attacker.
People get killed all the time by men who do not have weapons. Or put another way, fists are weapons, the pavement is a weapon, hands around your neck are weapons.
If the guy who got pushed down was a 25-year-old body-builder, he might not have feared for his life, and might have been able to stand up without a gun and stopped the violent attacker.
But he wasn’t.
That's why he wouldn't be found guilty on any jury I was on. I'd be mummified in a corner of the room before I'd be bullied into that verdict.
I tend to avoid getting into violent attacks. If I shot everybody who had actually hit me in anger, I think 3 people would be dead.
Of course, I don’t have a gun. And I have, on more than one occasion, intervened in physical altercations, and managed to live to tell the tale, and not because I am in any way physically intimidating, as a short old fat guy.
On the other hand, if a guy twice your size has just blindsided you, and is now approaching you, and you have a gun, you have two choices — allow the big angry man to do whatever he wants to you, or brandish your gun, remembering the general rule “don’t pull your gun if you aren’t going to use it”.
Your argument appears to be that, even if you have a gun, unless the other guy has some weapon, his physical superiority is his license to do whatever he wants to you.
And yes, there are cultures where the physically superior get to rule the roost, this is a large part of how bullies operate, especially in places where weapons are prohibited so they know their victims have no recourse.
But what makes our society great is that we invented tools that equalize the battlefield between large physical violent people and the unathletic, puny law-abiding citizens who don’t want to be beat up.
Sooner, rather than later, in Florida.
You're right, witnesses can be inaccurate or false but videos are generally objective.
The fact that you have a criminal record does not change your civil rights when it comes to others shooting you. It's highly doubtful that Drejka knew McGlockton’s criminal record. What's telling is that McGlockton was unarmed and the video shows that he stopped and started backing up once the gun was presented. I can understand that being pushed to the ground can trigger (no pun intended) an emotional and adrenalin response. Police and military are trained to not overreact when adrenalin is pumping. When you carry, you have a great responsibility. As I’ve told family members, when that bullet leaves the barrel, there is no recall. Based on the video, I think Drejka should have been arrested followed by an investigation by FL AG. Unless I misunderstand FL Stand Your Ground rule, the sheriff misapplied the law.
I’m sure you’re reasonable people. Florida is no place to expect reasonable behavior, especially from thugs. Engage them at your peril.
Drejka looks like a mental case and should mind his own business.
he wasn’t unarmed because he already used an effective weapon against the man. Second, how do YOU know he didn’t have a gun? No one has released any details yet, inclusive of whether there was something in his waistband. could be the reason the sheriff declined to arrest him...
I would say too often, but how often is acceptable to you? Hostage in Los Angeles last week. Pittsburgh area last month. Chicago last month. Sacramento earlier this year. White woman in Minneapolis. Black child in Cleveland. People in cars. People in Walmarts. People just answering the door. They represent only a minute percentage of police shootings it's true, but they happen and they shouldn't. And police get off with it.
“You cannot kill an unarmed man because you feel threatened”
I am under no obligation to allow myself to be beaten to death by some thug twice my size just to save his life.
1. Vehicle should not have been parked in a handicapped spot. The video clearly shows open spots.
2. Drejka should have said nothing, or if he felt strongly about it, he should have noted the license plate and called the police.
3. McGlockton should NOT have shoved Drejka. He should have gotten into his vehicle and left.
4. Drejka could have held fire, but he didn't.
What’s the upside to even talking to the thuggette? The parking lot isn’t full... Dude lands in an empty space next to the handicapped spot. Do you think she doesn’t know she’s not handicapped? I’m reminded of an incident at s local lake. The city put up some assinine signs:”No fishing between signs; max fine $1000. “ in an effort to keep the beach area clear for sunbathers and swimmers. I was in a boat, and saw a 20-something guy walk 50 feet to tell some woman that she was inside...by 3 feet... the no fishing zone. She looked at him and yelled “You think I can’t f***ing read? I’ll bet I read gooder than you. “ Some things just aren ‘t worth getting involved in.
Why not. Would she have been justified in shooting Drejka in those circumstances?
Why not read the law and find the answer to your own question?
Based on the interpretation of the law you and others are using? Then clearly she would be in the right. Based on the law itself I would say no, but based on the law Drejka should not have gotten off either. The law states that deadly force can be used to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another person. Does being pushed down constitute "great bodily harm"? The law states that deadly force is not authorized to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. Like a push. So by the law, she shouldn't be able to shoot. But by popular opinion around here she could claim that she was in fear of imminent death and blaze away.
No. She would be prosecuted. Words are not an imminent physical threat. Feelings are not the legal standard for using lethal force.
you don’t think mcglockton looks like a mental case for his extensive record and pushing drejka violently down?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.