Shoot out in the Wal Mart parking lot

[Luddly Neddite]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

In early July, 20-year-old Colt Thriemer shot dead a one-time friend in a Wal-Mart parking lot, saying he feared for his life. Witnesses gathered for a truck meet that night say victim Thomas James Brown, 21, was walking away toward his car when Thriemer fired ten shots. Some say Brown had threatened to kill Thriemer over the course of several weeks. The story as told by prosecutors in a detailed legal memo suggests drug transactions, addiction, and monetary debts all played a role in the scenario leading up to Brown’s death.

But these facts will never play out in a trial, because prosecutors have decided not to charge Thriemer citing Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

The legal memo tells a sympathetic and morally complex story. As Assistant State Attorney Amy Berndt tells it, “According to many who knew him, Thomas ‘TJ’ Brown (Brown) was not the same person he was six months ago. An addiction to crack cocaine as well as a drug debt apparently caused him to become increasingly violent, aggressive and threatening and ultimately led to his death.” She details how Brown became involved in drug sales and later recruited Thriemer. That Thriemer and Brown were once friends, but that Brown threatened to kill Thriemer when he could not repay his debts. That Brown initiated a fist fight with Thriemer on the day of his death. And that Thriemer reportedly once talked to a deputy police officer who lived near his brother about his fears.

But it also notes that Thriemer would have had a duty to first attempt retreat in a public place “rather than using deadly force” before the law changed “substantially” in 2005 with Stand Your Ground. Brown’s family told Local News 6 they do not believe this is a self-defense case and that they are hurt by the decision.

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

 

[Mr. H.]

Tell that to the truly evil criminal element who have absolutely zero respect for any law whatsoever. These kind of people will never ever be disarmed. And you want to disarm the rest of us?

 

[hjmick]

Could these two jackholes really be considered "gun nutters?" What I mean is, based on my understanding of what many folks mean by the term "gun nutter," these two wouldn't fit that description as much as they would fit the description of drug dealing thugs with guns. In my mind there is a difference.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I consider those who want more and more guns to be crazy. Nuts. Nutters.

And they are endangering the rest of us.

 

[hjmick]

I consider those who want more and more guns to be crazy. Nuts. Nutters.

And they are endangering the rest of us.

And don't your nutters have enough problems without lumping these two underachieving thugs in with them?


Now, here's a question for you...


I have four guns, one is an antique handed down from my grandfather. I would like to buy two or three more. Why? Because I enjoy shooting and would like a little variety to hone different skills. Does that make me a nutter based on your definition?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I consider those who want more and more guns to be crazy. Nuts. Nutters.

And they are endangering the rest of us.

And don't your nutters have enough problems without lumping these two underachieving thugs in with them?


Now, here's a question for you...


I have four guns, one is an antique handed down from my grandfather. I would like to buy two or three more. Why? Because I enjoy shooting and would like a little variety to hone different skills. Does that make me a nutter based on your definition?

[MENTION=4791]hjmick[/MENTION]

You know better than that.

Earlier today or maybe yesterday, I talked about a couple of my guns that I've thought about selling. Its down in the guns forum.

A .38 S&W M&P Victory model for one. Except, I was looking at it earlier this evening and its just too pretty to give up.

But, the other, a Glock - ugly and I don't care about it. So, I'll put it on consignment at a local gun store who takes guns.

You know very well that I have never even hinted that people should not own guns.

BUT

And I have often said I prefer open carry

BUT

G'night.







.

 

[Nutz]

Tell that to the truly evil criminal element who have absolutely zero respect for any law whatsoever. These kind of people will never ever be disarmed. And you want to disarm the rest of us?

Like the teaper faction at the Bundy ranch? Or are you just talking about people of a darker hue?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

This is an interesting current state of the law.

One seeking to defend himself with deadly force needs to remember that if a would-be attacker has disengaged and is leaving the scene of the incident, that the person defending himself must have a reasonable belief that the would-be attacker will return armed or to otherwise seek to inflict injury.

Someone shooting at a fleeing would-be attacker absent that reasonable belief that he is about to become a victim of a violent crime will likely not be able to invoke SYG.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

In early July, 20-year-old Colt Thriemer shot dead a one-time friend in a Wal-Mart parking lot, saying he feared for his life. Witnesses gathered for a truck meet that night say victim Thomas James Brown, 21, was walking away toward his car when Thriemer fired ten shots. Some say Brown had threatened to kill Thriemer over the course of several weeks. The story as told by prosecutors in a detailed legal memo suggests drug transactions, addiction, and monetary debts all played a role in the scenario leading up to Brown’s death.

But these facts will never play out in a trial, because prosecutors have decided not to charge Thriemer citing Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

The legal memo tells a sympathetic and morally complex story. As Assistant State Attorney Amy Berndt tells it, “According to many who knew him, Thomas ‘TJ’ Brown (Brown) was not the same person he was six months ago. An addiction to crack cocaine as well as a drug debt apparently caused him to become increasingly violent, aggressive and threatening and ultimately led to his death.” She details how Brown became involved in drug sales and later recruited Thriemer. That Thriemer and Brown were once friends, but that Brown threatened to kill Thriemer when he could not repay his debts. That Brown initiated a fist fight with Thriemer on the day of his death. And that Thriemer reportedly once talked to a deputy police officer who lived near his brother about his fears.

But it also notes that Thriemer would have had a duty to first attempt retreat in a public place “rather than using deadly force” before the law changed “substantially” in 2005 with Stand Your Ground. Brown’s family told Local News 6 they do not believe this is a self-defense case and that they are hurt by the decision.

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

The law did say that in Chicago and DC, the court said that was incredibly stupid.

In other words, you lost, get over it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I consider those who want more and more guns to be crazy. Nuts. Nutters.

And they are endangering the rest of us.

Because Washington DC was a peaceful place when it was illegal to even own a gun in the city, right?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

In early July, 20-year-old Colt Thriemer shot dead a one-time friend in a Wal-Mart parking lot, saying he feared for his life. Witnesses gathered for a truck meet that night say victim Thomas James Brown, 21, was walking away toward his car when Thriemer fired ten shots. Some say Brown had threatened to kill Thriemer over the course of several weeks. The story as told by prosecutors in a detailed legal memo suggests drug transactions, addiction, and monetary debts all played a role in the scenario leading up to Brown’s death.

But these facts will never play out in a trial, because prosecutors have decided not to charge Thriemer citing Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

The legal memo tells a sympathetic and morally complex story. As Assistant State Attorney Amy Berndt tells it, “According to many who knew him, Thomas ‘TJ’ Brown (Brown) was not the same person he was six months ago. An addiction to crack cocaine as well as a drug debt apparently caused him to become increasingly violent, aggressive and threatening and ultimately led to his death.” She details how Brown became involved in drug sales and later recruited Thriemer. That Thriemer and Brown were once friends, but that Brown threatened to kill Thriemer when he could not repay his debts. That Brown initiated a fist fight with Thriemer on the day of his death. And that Thriemer reportedly once talked to a deputy police officer who lived near his brother about his fears.

But it also notes that Thriemer would have had a duty to first attempt retreat in a public place “rather than using deadly force” before the law changed “substantially” in 2005 with Stand Your Ground. Brown’s family told Local News 6 they do not believe this is a self-defense case and that they are hurt by the decision.

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

The law did say that in Chicago and DC, the court said that was incredibly stupid.

In other words, you lost, get over it.

No, I didn't "lose".

Its the more than 30 people who die from gun violence every day in the US - they lost.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

In early July, 20-year-old Colt Thriemer shot dead a one-time friend in a Wal-Mart parking lot, saying he feared for his life. Witnesses gathered for a truck meet that night say victim Thomas James Brown, 21, was walking away toward his car when Thriemer fired ten shots. Some say Brown had threatened to kill Thriemer over the course of several weeks. The story as told by prosecutors in a detailed legal memo suggests drug transactions, addiction, and monetary debts all played a role in the scenario leading up to Brown’s death.

But these facts will never play out in a trial, because prosecutors have decided not to charge Thriemer citing Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

The legal memo tells a sympathetic and morally complex story. As Assistant State Attorney Amy Berndt tells it, “According to many who knew him, Thomas ‘TJ’ Brown (Brown) was not the same person he was six months ago. An addiction to crack cocaine as well as a drug debt apparently caused him to become increasingly violent, aggressive and threatening and ultimately led to his death.” She details how Brown became involved in drug sales and later recruited Thriemer. That Thriemer and Brown were once friends, but that Brown threatened to kill Thriemer when he could not repay his debts. That Brown initiated a fist fight with Thriemer on the day of his death. And that Thriemer reportedly once talked to a deputy police officer who lived near his brother about his fears.

But it also notes that Thriemer would have had a duty to first attempt retreat in a public place “rather than using deadly force” before the law changed “substantially” in 2005 with Stand Your Ground. Brown’s family told Local News 6 they do not believe this is a self-defense case and that they are hurt by the decision.

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

We disagree on this one. Reading only what you posted here, my impression was this was a perfect use both of deadly force, and the stand your ground law.

 

[auditor0007]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

In early July, 20-year-old Colt Thriemer shot dead a one-time friend in a Wal-Mart parking lot, saying he feared for his life. Witnesses gathered for a truck meet that night say victim Thomas James Brown, 21, was walking away toward his car when Thriemer fired ten shots. Some say Brown had threatened to kill Thriemer over the course of several weeks. The story as told by prosecutors in a detailed legal memo suggests drug transactions, addiction, and monetary debts all played a role in the scenario leading up to Brown’s death.

But these facts will never play out in a trial, because prosecutors have decided not to charge Thriemer citing Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

The legal memo tells a sympathetic and morally complex story. As Assistant State Attorney Amy Berndt tells it, “According to many who knew him, Thomas ‘TJ’ Brown (Brown) was not the same person he was six months ago. An addiction to crack cocaine as well as a drug debt apparently caused him to become increasingly violent, aggressive and threatening and ultimately led to his death.” She details how Brown became involved in drug sales and later recruited Thriemer. That Thriemer and Brown were once friends, but that Brown threatened to kill Thriemer when he could not repay his debts. That Brown initiated a fist fight with Thriemer on the day of his death. And that Thriemer reportedly once talked to a deputy police officer who lived near his brother about his fears.

But it also notes that Thriemer would have had a duty to first attempt retreat in a public place “rather than using deadly force” before the law changed “substantially” in 2005 with Stand Your Ground. Brown’s family told Local News 6 they do not believe this is a self-defense case and that they are hurt by the decision.

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

It doesn't work that way, and you know it. As much as I would be happy having all guns removed completely from everyone, that will never happen. Saying you should not be able to carry a gun in city limits works great for all those who will listen, like maybe 10%.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

This is an interesting current state of the law.

One seeking to defend himself with deadly force needs to remember that if a would-be attacker has disengaged and is leaving the scene of the incident, that the person defending himself must have a reasonable belief that the would-be attacker will return armed or to otherwise seek to inflict injury.

Someone shooting at a fleeing would-be attacker absent that reasonable belief that he is about to become a victim of a violent crime will likely not be able to invoke SYG.

The article implied or at least suggested the walking-away was in order to retrieve a weapon. Since the particular Florida law specificly mentions not having to wait for the actual retrieval of such a weapon, he was within his rights to fire as defined by Florida law.

 

[auditor0007]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

In early July, 20-year-old Colt Thriemer shot dead a one-time friend in a Wal-Mart parking lot, saying he feared for his life. Witnesses gathered for a truck meet that night say victim Thomas James Brown, 21, was walking away toward his car when Thriemer fired ten shots. Some say Brown had threatened to kill Thriemer over the course of several weeks. The story as told by prosecutors in a detailed legal memo suggests drug transactions, addiction, and monetary debts all played a role in the scenario leading up to Brown’s death.

But these facts will never play out in a trial, because prosecutors have decided not to charge Thriemer citing Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

The legal memo tells a sympathetic and morally complex story. As Assistant State Attorney Amy Berndt tells it, “According to many who knew him, Thomas ‘TJ’ Brown (Brown) was not the same person he was six months ago. An addiction to crack cocaine as well as a drug debt apparently caused him to become increasingly violent, aggressive and threatening and ultimately led to his death.” She details how Brown became involved in drug sales and later recruited Thriemer. That Thriemer and Brown were once friends, but that Brown threatened to kill Thriemer when he could not repay his debts. That Brown initiated a fist fight with Thriemer on the day of his death. And that Thriemer reportedly once talked to a deputy police officer who lived near his brother about his fears.

But it also notes that Thriemer would have had a duty to first attempt retreat in a public place “rather than using deadly force” before the law changed “substantially” in 2005 with Stand Your Ground. Brown’s family told Local News 6 they do not believe this is a self-defense case and that they are hurt by the decision.

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

We disagree on this one. Reading only what you posted here, my impression was this was a perfect use both of deadly force, and the stand your ground law.

SYG is a terrible law, plain and simple, especially this version of it. Basically, if you don't like someone is to tell a few people you feel threatened by such and such and then kill them. You felt fear, so you have the right to execute them. Sorry, but that is simply bad law. If you kill someone, you should have to prove that you were defending yourself. If it is truly self defense, then you should have little to worry about.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress

I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

The law did say that in Chicago and DC, the court said that was incredibly stupid.

In other words, you lost, get over it.

No, I didn't "lose".

Its the more than 30 people who die from gun violence every day in the US - they lost.

Only if you use their deaths to gain political points.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Prosecutors Won't Charge Florida Man For Fatal Gunfire Outside Wal-Mart, Citing Stand Your Ground | ThinkProgress



I can't get too upset over a couple of knuckle draggers shooting at each other but this really shows just how dangerous these gun nutters are getting.

When innocent people are caught in the cross fire, it really doesn't matter who was "right" and who was "wrong".

The law needs to be that you can't carry a gun inside city limits. If you're in a town, use your fists. If you want to shoot at each other, take it out in the country someplace.

We disagree on this one. Reading only what you posted here, my impression was this was a perfect use both of deadly force, and the stand your ground law.

SYG is a terrible law, plain and simple, especially this version of it. Basically, if you don't like someone is to tell a few people you feel threatened by such and such and then kill them. You felt fear, so you have the right to execute them. Sorry, but that is simply bad law. If you kill someone, you should have to prove that you were defending yourself. If it is truly self defense, then you should have little to worry about.

It doesn't actually work that way.

That said, given the limited facts presented in the OP, I think the guy should be charged. Then again, I don't know all the facts, unlike the prosecutor, so I will accept his judgement unless someone can prove he is wrong.

 

[2aguy]

Hmmm...over 100,000 lives each year are saved by good people using guns to stop violent criminals...11,000 are murdered by violent criminals with guns who did not register their guns, did not under go background checks, and did not get a permit to carry concealed a gun...so...11,000 murder victims vs. over 100,000 lives saved each year...

Sooo...what you are saying is that you would prefer that those 100,000 people not be saved...that they should also be brutally raped, robbed or murdered...because their are some people who misuse guns...as there are people who misuse cars, and pools, and power tools...

that is your position right? that those 100,000 people should be raped, robbed or murdered...as opposed to using a gun to stop it...right?

If you had a chance to allow the victims of these attacks to have a gun...you would say no...sorry...you can't have it...so please endure the rape, robbery, murder or brutal beating quietly...we will try to help you after word but you still can't use a gun to stop it...and if You had the choice to have a gun to save these people...You would say no...I don't want that gun to stop the attack either..

that is your position...Right?

 

[2aguy]

soooo...the story of the college student, who had a concealed,carry permit who was forced to leave her gun at home because the campus was a gun free zone,who was brutally raped by a criminal...who brought a gun into the gun free zone to commit the rape....the same rapist who later went on to rape 3 more women and killed the third victim...

first, you would say the woman shouldn't have that concealed,carry permit..right...?
then, since you believe that...this story ended the exact way you believe it should have...she didn't have her gun...so that was a good thing...Right?

she stated that had she had her own gun...which she left off campus because she obeyed the law..she could have used it to stop the rape...and possibly shot, captured or killed the attacker...saving the other three women...to you that would have been the least desirable outcome because she would have been carrying a gun and used a gun...Right?

 

[Politico]

“The Stand Your Ground statute makes no exception from the immunity because Brown may have been walking away from Thriemer at the time the deadly force was used,” the memo from the State Attorney’s office states. “The Stand Your Ground law does not require Thriemer to wait until Brown in fact retrieved a gun before he fired. Under the current state of the law and the facts of this case, Thriemer was legally allowed to use deadly force based on a reasonable belief that his life was in danger and that he was about to become the victim of an armed robbery.”

This is an interesting current state of the law.

One seeking to defend himself with deadly force needs to remember that if a would-be attacker has disengaged and is leaving the scene of the incident, that the person defending himself must have a reasonable belief that the would-be attacker will return armed or to otherwise seek to inflict injury.

Someone shooting at a fleeing would-be attacker absent that reasonable belief that he is about to become a victim of a violent crime will likely not be able to invoke SYG.

The article implied or at least suggested the walking-away was in order to retrieve a weapon. Since the particular Florida law specificly mentions not having to wait for the actual retrieval of such a weapon, he was within his rights to fire as defined by Florida law.

Sigh. Yeah I knew if I checked the facts it would be a waste of bandwidth. The guy had threatened him multiple times. The police had been informed about this guy before. He had assaulted him earlier that day. And he was going to get a gun which he did have in the vehicle.