Amend Florida's 'stand your ground' law, says lawyer for Markeis McGlockton's family

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I did. You had one question, and I answered it. You don't get any more.

I'm not in favor of anything Willow. Except UNNECESSARY killing. I've been shoved and bullied, so I know all about it. I also know if a guy is BACKING away from a gun, he is no longer a threat. So why shoot him? Isn't that going too far? How FAR can it go where you will continue to defend it? Shooting him in the back as he is fleeing?

This might help

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

In some cases we have to react in certain ways while in other cases we might react in ways that a situation allows for or calls for. Death should be the last choice made, but if the choice is made then the consequences have to be dealt with

The bolded portion of your comment above is I think what bugs many of us about these rulings. While admittedly concealed carry holders have traditionally been some of the most law-abiding of citizens, all of the CCW holders I know of personally and from my association with various organizations are particularly so. I believe it's because no one wants to do anything that will cause the loss of their licenses or any of their rights to keep and bear arms. Whenever a CCW holder is in the news for a bad shoot, while it doesn't necessarily reflect poorly on other CCW holders some of us still feel the angst. For me it's probably due to being African American and female with the history of our country and with the origin of gun control laws in the U.S. being passed to prevent people of African descent from legally being able to take up arms in their defense against the Klan after the Civil War: The Racist Roots of Gun Control

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Generally chasing someone down means that they're pissed which not only is not a valid legal basis for killing somone but it also makes them "the aggressor" which invalidates any stand your ground or self defense claim.

i should have written this as "but it also makes them "the aggressor" which ***legally SHOULD*** invalidate any stand your ground or self defense claim" since we know this is not the case unfortunately.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No! The left hate stand your ground! They believe attackers should be able to beat the shit out of you and you should try and talk them out of it. Bullshit!

So you advocate killing unarmed people, backing away from your gun, without trying alternatives first?

Would this have happened had your hero not shoved the man? Yes or no?

Hmmm...now you are descending into “my hero”. He is not. He is just an unarmed guy who backed away from a guy he had shoved, who pulled a gun.

Did he deserve to die when he backed off? Who made the shooter judge, jury and executioner?

To answer your question, no.

But then...it should not have happened regardless.

Yeah, if only your hero had not shoved the other guy. Maybe he should have backed away before he shoved him or just tried de escalating the situation ya think? So yeah! It takes two to tango.

We know you are losing the discussion when you start lying. No one has claimed that he was their hero, so why not stick to reality for once?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

To be fair, only this dummy saw it that way maybe. Just deal with the idiot appropriately and then move on. It is probably my guess that most don't abuse the law, and that most use it wisely. It is when people start defending the indefensible under such a law, is when people see the slight crack in the law that could be exploited. Seal the crack and move on.

No, I wish that were the case but not even close. Zimmerman is also a case in point however their are several cases where the SYG laws were just flat out abused, like the case where this guy ran down a thief who broke into his vehicle and stabbed him to death
Five ‘Stand Your Ground’ Cases You Should Know About — ProPublica

​

I agree. If you have to chase them down it is flat out wrong. Stand your ground does not mean you can chase them down. It means if you are attacked you do not have to run.

SYG has absolutely no bearing on this case. It has been stated man, many times in this thread.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

To be fair, only this dummy saw it that way maybe. Just deal with the idiot appropriately and then move on. It is probably my guess that most don't abuse the law, and that most use it wisely. It is when people start defending the indefensible under such a law, is when people see the slight crack in the law that could be exploited. Seal the crack and move on.

No, I wish that were the case but not even close. Zimmerman is also a case in point however their are several cases where the SYG laws were just flat out abused, like the case where this guy ran down a thief who broke into his vehicle and stabbed him to death
Five ‘Stand Your Ground’ Cases You Should Know About — ProPublica

​

WTF....

In April, 22-year-old Cordell Jude shot and killed Daniel Adkins Jr., a pedestrian who walked in front of Jude’s car just as Jude was pulling up to the window of a Taco Bell drive-thru in Arizona. Jude claimed Adkins had waved his arms in the air, wielding what Judge thought was a metal pipe – it was actually a dog leash. Jude shot the 29-year-old Adkins, who was mentally disabled, once in the chest. As of May, an arrest had not been made in the April 3 shooting. Arizona passed a Stand Your Ground law in 2010.​

Stahp. I bet home invasions and robberies have gone down since that law was passed.

I bet so too! My husband and I were driving home late at night in NOLA and a car full of people looking for trouble pulled up and started threatening us. My husband did not try to de escalate them, he knew trouble when he saw it. Next thing I knew his arm was across my chest and in his hand was a loaded gun! The troublemakers rolled up their windows and moved right on down the street!

Did your husband shoot at the car as they were driving away? That would be the equivalent of what happened here.

 

[mgh80]

If the guy never pushed him first I'd agree 100% is was unjustified.

 

[beagle9]

In some cases we have to react in certain ways while in other cases we might react in ways that a situation allows for or calls for. Death should be the last choice made, but if the choice is made then the consequences have to be dealt with

The bolded portion of your comment above is I think what bugs many of us about these rulings. While admittedly concealed carry holders have traditionally been some of the most law-abiding of citizens, all of the CCW holders I know of personally and from my association with various organizations are particularly so. I believe it's because no one wants to do anything that will cause the loss of their licenses or any of their rights to keep and bear arms. Whenever a CCW holder is in the news for a bad shoot, while it doesn't necessarily reflect poorly on other CCW holders some of us still feel the angst. For me it's probably due to being African American and female with the history of our country and with the origin of gun control laws in the U.S. being passed to prevent people of African descent from legally being able to take up arms in their defense against the Klan after the Civil War: The Racist Roots of Gun Control

Well, we don't have to worry about American citizens from African ancestry not being armed these days, so the law works just as well in your case (if used properly), as it would in any other case correct ??

I think it was a bad shoot myself, and not a good representation of the law being applied correctly in the situation, and that is my take, and that is all.

 

[beagle9]

If the guy never pushed him first I'd agree 100% is was unjustified.

Yeah but the circumstances surrounding the push made the push understandable, and the push shouldn't have been a death warrant for the pusher in the case. I think the guy with the gun lost his cool, and he took the shot by what I observed in the video.

The push down was wrong, but so was the shot.

 

[Marion Morrison]

If the guy never pushed him first I'd agree 100% is was unjustified.

Yeah but the circumstances surrounding the push made the push understandable, and the push shouldn't have been a death warrant for the pusher in the case. I think the guy with the gun lost his cool, and he took the shot by what I observed in the video.

The push down was wrong, but so was the shot.

Only 1 of those caused permanent damage.

 

[beagle9]

If the guy never pushed him first I'd agree 100% is was unjustified.

Yeah but the circumstances surrounding the push made the push understandable, and the push shouldn't have been a death warrant for the pusher in the case. I think the guy with the gun lost his cool, and he took the shot by what I observed in the video.

The push down was wrong, but so was the shot.

Only 1 of those caused permanent damage.

The guy with the gun should have been investigated further after the video along with the testimony of others became known.

 

[hunarcy]

He resisted because he was being choked. I said that numerous times too. Let someone strangle you and see if your body doesn't automatically fight to breathe.

Gracie, I love your posts, but on this one you are DEAD wrong. The officers arrested him and were trying to handcuff him. He resisted by pulling away and refusing to be handcuffed, at which point they took him to the ground, along with the illegal choke hold. Had he cooperated, he would have probably died of a nice heart attack anyway, somewhere else in a short period of time.

Illegal choke hold -------- nuff said.

choke holds are not illegal. It was just against police department policy.

If results in a death, it becomes more than just a violation of department policy. It becomes an illegal act.

True, but the chokehold is not illegal, the result is. Carrying a baseball bat is not illegal, but bashing in a skull is.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If the guy never pushed him first I'd agree 100% is was unjustified.

Yeah but the circumstances surrounding the push made the push understandable, and the push shouldn't have been a death warrant for the pusher in the case. I think the guy with the gun lost his cool, and he took the shot by what I observed in the video.

The push down was wrong, but so was the shot.

Only 1 of those caused permanent damage.

The guy with the gun should have been investigated further after the video along with the testimony of others became known.

In your subjective, ignorant opinion – not as a fact of Florida law.

An investigation might have been warranted in another state where the law is different, but not in Florida.

 

[JimBowie1958]

This wouldn't be happening if Pam Bondi filed charges.

Personally, I don't think that was a righteous shooting.

The problem is no one has any idea how accurate, object ive and fair to the shooter these journalists are being with their coverage.

Where is the shooters side of the story?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Letting the shooter off the hook without even a full investigation or possible charges of manslaughter being brought, is what challenges our laws that are used inappropriately to justify such a thing.

Is this little parking lot stalker worth it in the end ??

You are damned right he is.

No one knows what actually happened, and yet so many are quick to take the press acount verbatim and pass judgement on a person they dont know regarding a situation that they have no real information about.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If this is the same parking lot shooting incident I'd call it a clean shoot.

The shooter confronted someone for illegally parking.

He was assaulted.

He defended himself from further aggression.

Would I have confronted a man for parking in a HC spot w/o a tag?

**** no. You won't even see me confront or interfere in a serious crime unless I know that failing to act will result in serious injury or death to someone I know to be an innocent victim. Otherwise my role as a citizen is to observe and report the incident to authorities. The liability involved is far too great of a risk to be a "hero".

It is the responsibility of every citizen to keep their hands to themselves. If you don't want to get shot, do not push, slap, shove or even "get in the face of" another citizen who is merely irritating you.



.

Is this the old man that confronted the driver of an illegally parked vehicle and the drivers boyfriend charged out and knocked the old fart down to the ground?

CLEAN KILL.

 

[beagle9]

If the guy never pushed him first I'd agree 100% is was unjustified.

Yeah but the circumstances surrounding the push made the push understandable, and the push shouldn't have been a death warrant for the pusher in the case. I think the guy with the gun lost his cool, and he took the shot by what I observed in the video.

The push down was wrong, but so was the shot.

Only 1 of those caused permanent damage.

The guy with the gun should have been investigated further after the video along with the testimony of others became known.

In your subjective, ignorant opinion – not as a fact of Florida law.

An investigation might have been warranted in another state where the law is different, but not in Florida.

So your ignorant opinion of Florida not being fair in justice is duly noted. Discovery evidence can spark a second look see at any time, but your low opinion of Florida law doesn't figure that it will ever or could ever happen in Florida right ?? Ok then...

Good grief you are such a political hack don't you know that ???? lol

 

[beagle9]

If this is the same parking lot shooting incident I'd call it a clean shoot.

The shooter confronted someone for illegally parking.

He was assaulted.

He defended himself from further aggression.

Would I have confronted a man for parking in a HC spot w/o a tag?

**** no. You won't even see me confront or interfere in a serious crime unless I know that failing to act will result in serious injury or death to someone I know to be an innocent victim. Otherwise my role as a citizen is to observe and report the incident to authorities. The liability involved is far too great of a risk to be a "hero".

It is the responsibility of every citizen to keep their hands to themselves. If you don't want to get shot, do not push, slap, shove or even "get in the face of" another citizen who is merely irritating you.



.

Is this the old man that confronted the driver of an illegally parked vehicle and the drivers boyfriend charged out and knocked the old fart down to the ground?

CLEAN KILL.

Yeah it was clean alright, but not when he took the shot as according to most.

 

[JimBowie1958]

[
Yeah it was clean alright, but not when he took the shot as according to most.

So how many seconds does a victim have to shoot once some thug knocks him to the ground for it to be legit self defense?

Ten?

Twenty?

 

[MacTheKnife]

[
Yeah it was clean alright, but not when he took the shot as according to most.

So how many seconds does a victim have to shoot once some thug knocks him to the ground for it to be legit self defense?

Ten?

Twenty?

Good question, but it would depend a lot on what the guy who knocked him down does and remember this is all on video.

For instance, if this black guy in the Clearwater case had immediately (and I am mean damn quick) raised his hands and thus clearly indicated he was done then the guy on the ground might have a lot of trouble claiming self defense.

Still yet, the guy on the ground could claim he was in fear of his life and even though the guy who had knocked him to the ground had his hands up-- he shot without realizing the guy had his hands up.

I do think in that case if that was the fact the shooter would have been arrested and it would be up to a jury then of course to analyze the situation and come to a decision.

In the case in Clearwater though if you watch the video it is seen that the black guy takes a small step backward or maybe to the right but not enough of one to clearly indicate the assault was over--or enough of a retreat that it can be claimed with much credibility that the shooter even saw him do that.

Remember we have hindsight(and even with hindsight it is difficult to determine if the guy was really ceasing with the assault)---and thus the shooter who did not have the benefit of hindsight had to make a very fast decision on whether to shoot or not with the probability his life might be on the line and he said he was in fear of his life and he had reasonable cause to be in fear of his life.
The black guy could have still lunged forward to knock the gun away as the two were very close or to further assault the guy.

It is not clear at exactly what moment the shooter fired...forensics might have been able to determine that but we do not know in terms of seconds or micro-seconds exactly how long it took the guy on the ground to shoot. But, it was fast enough to prevent his arrest at least.as it cannot be clearly seen he was not acting in legal self defense in fear of his life and or grievious bodily harm.