Posted on 07/25/2018 9:36:45 AM PDT by libstripper
Markeis McGlockton and Michael Drejka both overreacted during their brief, fatal encounter in the parking lot of a Florida convenience store last week. McGlockton overreacted by pushing Drejka to the ground, and Drejka overreacted by drawing a pistol and shooting McGlockton in the chest.
Although it is hard to see how Drejka's use of lethal force could have been justified, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri declined to arrest him, claiming his hands were tied by Florida's Stand Your Ground law. But that is not true, and Gualtieri's misrepresentation of the law has renewed misguided criticism of Florida's approach to self-defense, which contrary to popular misconception does not give a free pass to armed hotheads who claim to have fired out of fear.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
my personal belief is the parking spot issue is a complete red herring as the entire incident is about a thug jumping a guy like a sucker puncher. the prior events are moot.
Thugs gonna thug. Adjust your behavior accordingly.
“Based on the interpretation of the law you and others are using? Then clearly she would be in the right.”
Did Drejka commit battery on the woman? Did he enter her car? No he did not so she never had the right to use deadly force.
Don’t paraphrase the law to your liking. If you reference it cite it because you’re just making things up to suit your own opinion. Like omitting the “reasonably believe” part from great bodily harm.
When Drejka was pushed down battery occurred fully displaying Markeis’s intent to harm. When Drejka was on the ground Markeis took another step towards him. THAT is the point Drejka had the right of self defense. At that point Markeis had established his intent to harm Drejka and by stepping towards Drejka when he was on the ground his intent to cause additional harm to Drejka. The self defense law was triggered.
Yeah, everyone else has it wrong but you got it right.
I asked you to read the law and get your answers from that. But you refuse to read or accept it. Why? Because you are biased. You are a bigot. Don’t respond to me anymore.
You could not care less about the law or the opinion of others. You respect neither.
This really is a disturbing thread, because seemingly rational people on both sides of the argument are making statements about the sequence of events that just are not true. Or they highly exaggerate or they minimize. For example, the "push" was not just a "push", it was a VIOLENT blindside push, sufficient to Drejka to the pavement in a tumble. (It sure did not look to me like a practiced sort of smooth defensive roll - he went down and over in a heap.
There are other disturbing statements and accusations too: One is that FReepers are racists. Yes, some FReepers are racists, but most are not. Some FReepers state that McGlockton "deserved" to die. That also is ridiculous -- what he "deserved", IMO, was a knee in the groin followed by a vicious right uppercut. But, Drejka was in no position to so defend himself. (That is aside from lacking the stature, physical capability, and youth, to engage in a brawl with McGlockton.) McGlockton not deserving to die, however, has NO bearing on whether Drejka had the right to fire at that moment.
I analyzed the vid at some length here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3672750/posts?page=193#193
here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3672750/posts?page=217#217
and here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3672750/posts?page=308#308
Eh, I should clean that up:
... the “push” was not just a “push”, it was a VIOLENT blindside push, sufficient to knock Drejka to the pavement in a tumble. (It sure did not look to me like a practiced sort of smooth defensive roll - he went down and over in a heap.)
Canard
That’s hardly what happened
My argument is you don’t kill folks unless they are trying to kill you
Most freepers think you can kill folks for pushing you down and scaring you
Which is very telling about posters here frankly
“That’s hardly what happened”
Yeah, most likely because he ended up taking a bullet before he could finish the job.
You didn’t see the video obviously
Do you kill everyone who pushes you down.
That’s a coward with a pistol for balls
Mark my words he’ll be charged
Have you read about the shooter....you should
Tks!
An angry man advancing on a woman in a threatening manner? Fear for life and safety - bang.
Don’t paraphrase the law to your liking. If you reference it cite it because you’re just making things up to suit your own opinion. Like omitting the “reasonably believe” part from great bodily harm.
You could not care less about the law or the opinion of others. You respect neither.
Half right. I respect the law. Your opinions? Not so much.
I have no idea what kind of record Mcglockton had my point is Drejka was looking to kill. It was none of his dam business who was parked in the spot.
Nope, but it goes to "character" and if we only have video, it certainly provides background and perhaps insight into this person's violent nature and as such that perhaps the shooter sensed this threat.
agree Paul. there are a lot of people that completely dismiss what mcglockton did and rant about what drejka ‘supposedly’ did/said. There’s no audio, there’s no proof of any previous history, etc. And yet, many here on FR are sure that drejka prowled the parking lot for weeks/months/years, with gun in hand, looking for someone to kill. He was attacking the girlfriend, etc. Really sad. Frightening, actually, that we’re on a conservative site and people are giving all the benefit to the thug and none to the VICTIM. There were quite a few during the Trayvon incident too; probably a lot of the same people. They believe thugs should have unbridled freedom to attack without any repercussions.
the thug was easily trying to kill drejka and you’re just willfully blind to it.
you’re completely full of it. make stuff up much? how long have you known Drejka? when did he tell you he was looking to kill? what evidence do you have of anything you just said?
correct, history of violence.
Bottom Line.
The shooter (murderer) placed himself in harms way.
He had absolutely NO business starting a confrontation.
I carry 99.9% of the time and Rule # 1 is to AVOID confrontations that may become ‘ugly’.
Apparently this guy came back and got in peoples faces, different situation if the guy walking by and the shover felt ‘dissed’ and shoved him, backing off or not, you just won the ‘booby prize’ AND got in the running for a ‘Darwin’ because you just happened to be ‘Macho’ with ‘Dirty Harry’, not ‘Casper Milquetoast’.
When frequenting my Buddy’s Bar, I will normally leave when the conversation starts getting ‘hostile’ especially amongst patrons as that type of situation can turn ugly if an ‘outsider’ attempts to step in. If the outsider armed, the odds of a problem rise.
I speak as a former fully functional ‘professional drunk’ and even when drinking I was (or could be) the ‘smooth talker’ and managed to stay out of fisticuffs. (I did not carry when drinking, normally had something in the truck but in ‘those times’ the ‘fight’ usually ended rather quickly and one may want to come back and kick some ass later, but the idea of coming back and shooting the place up was remote).
Now I figure if it is not my business, best I leave but certain circumstances could change my mind but it would have to be pretty outrageous behavior on the attackers part.
In other words, even if I know you and you know I am armed don’t run your mouth or let your hummingbird ass overrun your alligator mouth, I will NOT be ‘saving’ you unless a weapon pulled and the guy(gal) gonna shoot you BUT that is a judgement call and sitting here I don’t know exactly how far I will go to ‘save’ your sorry ass from yourself.
That’s a ridiculous assumption to anyone who watched the video
Carrying a firearm is a responsibility
Taking a life is a serious matter before God and legally
You don’t kill folks for pushing you down or hitting you
The fact so many freepers think it’s fine to do that is disturbing and demonstrative of many things about the average male who posts here in 2018
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.