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

[beagle9]

He must not think so when going around starting crap, and especially with someone's girlfriend while her kids was in the car... I know, I know, but whose dead and whose still alive right, and in that lay the justification for it huh ?? Don't try to defend the indefensible, because if I were a bettin man, I'd be willing to lay money down on the fact that most in the country can see the wrong in this situation.

Remember it was a push, but the guy didn't advance him any further, otherwise to take advantage of the cat in his vulnerable state while on the ground. But the one on the ground had time to slowly collect himself draw his weapon, and then took the shot as the victim was in retreat when saw that weapon.

The "crap" started when the deadman parked in a handicap spot. He ignored the man with a gun and went into the store. Apparently he did not perceive any threat. You are stupid enough to think you wait until attacked a second time before you draw your weapon.

Huh ?? You draw your weapon, the attack (the push down),stopped prior to you drawing your weapon, and when the weapon is drawn no further advancement takes place. Then the shot takes place as the man takes a step backwards. What am I missing here ??

It has been explained several times, you are just not keeping up.

Is it me or is it you not keeping up ?? I've already gave my opinion way earlier in this case, and in this OP. My opinion is that he wasn't justified in taking the shot.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Crump was never the sharpest knife in the drawer. I have no idea how he passed the bar.

Under what circumstances an aggressor can claim self defense is first year criminal law stuff.

Stand your ground means might makes right

Once a fight starts, you can use your gun to resolve it

And..... Are you going to pull that "real men use their fist" bullshit.

So many simply are so blind due to their bias it is impossible for them to understand what happened. Their basic problem is that they do no agree with the law. What kind of defense is that? No defense at all. Now the trayvon families shyster lawyer is down here to see if there is any money to be made. How laughable. Like a 3 ring circus but no obama this time with his clown of an attorney general the infamous racist himself eric holder.

This case is over and done. Folks just keep repeanting the same stuff over and over. Let the dead horse lie.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Nonsense ....your comments are highly prejudicial. It is shown by statistics that blacks though a minority in this nation kill more white folks than whites kill black. Blacks are fortunate that most whites do not know that. But they are waking up.

Can you explain how and why it wasn't until the year 2017 that the first white person was executed in the state of Florida for the murder of a black person? How is that possible when hundreds of black people where lynched there?
Florida Lynched More Black People Per Capita Than Any Other State, According to Report

Well, no doubt the primary factor for lynching was that blacks committed so many horrendous crimes especially rapes. Say what you will about vigilante justice: the crime rate was much lower in those days and one could walk down any street in America day or night without fear.

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 ??

His life is as valuable as anyone’s!

He must not think so when going around starting crap, and especially with someone's girlfriend while her kids was in the car... I know, I know, but whose dead and whose still alive right, and in that lay the justification for it huh ?? Don't try to defend the indefensible, because if I were a bettin man, I'd be willing to lay money down on the fact that most in the country can see the wrong in this situation.

Remember it was a push, but the guy didn't advance him any further, otherwise to take advantage of the cat in his vulnerable state while on the ground. But the one on the ground had time to slowly collect himself draw his weapon, and then took the shot as the victim was in retreat when saw that weapon.

It was a violent assault you can tell by the way the man was sprawled on the ground. Thus the law of self defense kicks in and the perception of the one who has been assaulted is vital. Here he was merely talking to this lady asking her if they had a permit to park in the handicap spot and according to reports she went ballistic on him.

Anyhow the b/f comes charging out unbeknownst by the white guy and violently shoves the white guy who ends up on the ground and not only suprised but fearful now and perhaps even in a mild state of shock. Uppermost in his mind is not only to preserve his life but to prevent any grievious bodily harm. That is why he has a pistol in his pocket, that is a crime ridden black neighborhood to begin with. Anyone in that position would be more than a fool to think the black dude may not continue with the attack if not stopped. Thus in fear of his life he does the only thing he can do to absolutely insure his life and limb...shoot the one who assaulted him. It all happened very quickly and the exact moment of the shot is difficult to discern on the video. Despite what you saw it all happened very quickly....and the white guy had to act quickly to stop the attack. The police conducted a thorough investigation and came up with the right conclusion, as in justified use of deadly force because the white dude was in fear of his life.

Although the prosecutor is still looking at the information and can still press charges......it is likely he will take this to court.

No. The investigation is over. No way will it be taken to court. They do not want another replay of the trayvonista crap. The video proves there was an assault. The white guy was in reasonable fear of his life. It is over. Now of course you see all these biased reactions of an emotional nature on here and mistakenly believe it is some sort of complicated case. Not at all. Even if some sort of political pressure was brought to bear to re-open the case, no jury would convict. It would just be a waste of money.

 

[beagle9]

Nonsense ....your comments are highly prejudicial. It is shown by statistics that blacks though a minority in this nation kill more white folks than whites kill black. Blacks are fortunate that most whites do not know that. But they are waking up.

Can you explain how and why it wasn't until the year 2017 that the first white person was executed in the state of Florida for the murder of a black person? How is that possible when hundreds of black people where lynched there?
Florida Lynched More Black People Per Capita Than Any Other State, According to Report

Well, no doubt the primary factor for lynching was that blacks committed so many horrendous crimes especially rapes. Say what you will about vigilante justice: the crime rate was much lower in those days and one could walk down any street in America day or night without fear.

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 ??

His life is as valuable as anyone’s!

He must not think so when going around starting crap, and especially with someone's girlfriend while her kids was in the car... I know, I know, but whose dead and whose still alive right, and in that lay the justification for it huh ?? Don't try to defend the indefensible, because if I were a bettin man, I'd be willing to lay money down on the fact that most in the country can see the wrong in this situation.

Remember it was a push, but the guy didn't advance him any further, otherwise to take advantage of the cat in his vulnerable state while on the ground. But the one on the ground had time to slowly collect himself draw his weapon, and then took the shot as the victim was in retreat when saw that weapon.

It was a violent assault you can tell by the way the man was sprawled on the ground. Thus the law of self defense kicks in and the perception of the one who has been assaulted is vital. Here he was merely talking to this lady asking her if they had a permit to park in the handicap spot and according to reports she went ballistic on him.

Anyhow the b/f comes charging out unbeknownst by the white guy and violently shoves the white guy who ends up on the ground and not only suprised but fearful now and perhaps even in a mild state of shock. Uppermost in his mind is not only to preserve his life but to prevent any grievious bodily harm. That is why he has a pistol in his pocket, that is a crime ridden black neighborhood to begin with. Anyone in that position would be more than a fool to think the black dude may not continue with the attack if not stopped. Thus in fear of his life he does the only thing he can do to absolutely insure his life and limb...shoot the one who assaulted him. It all happened very quickly and the exact moment of the shot is difficult to discern on the video. Despite what you saw it all happened very quickly....and the white guy had to act quickly to stop the attack. The police conducted a thorough investigation and came up with the right conclusion, as in justified use of deadly force because the white dude was in fear of his life.

Watering things down maybe ??? Alot of projection on your part here, and do you think this post isn't biased in some way ??

 

[beagle9]

Readers split on whether Clearwater shooting was justified under Stand Your Ground law

It wasn't a STand Your Ground shooting...... you have to be able to retreat in a Stand Your Ground case...this is a simple, self defense case.

Self-defense only applies if you are threatened. The guy backed off Shooting him after that is cold-blooded.

You saw the guy back off from a video...the guy on the ground was in a completely different position and may not have realized the guy backed off. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Well the overwhelming opinion stats may end up saying different, where as the majority may have seen it otherwise, then it comes down to the minority view verses the majority view for the event. Dam those videos right ??

 

[MacTheKnife]

Nonsense ....your comments are highly prejudicial. It is shown by statistics that blacks though a minority in this nation kill more white folks than whites kill black. Blacks are fortunate that most whites do not know that. But they are waking up.

Can you explain how and why it wasn't until the year 2017 that the first white person was executed in the state of Florida for the murder of a black person? How is that possible when hundreds of black people where lynched there?
Florida Lynched More Black People Per Capita Than Any Other State, According to Report

Well, no doubt the primary factor for lynching was that blacks committed so many horrendous crimes especially rapes. Say what you will about vigilante justice: the crime rate was much lower in those days and one could walk down any street in America day or night without fear.

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 ??

His life is as valuable as anyone’s!

He must not think so when going around starting crap, and especially with someone's girlfriend while her kids was in the car... I know, I know, but whose dead and whose still alive right, and in that lay the justification for it huh ?? Don't try to defend the indefensible, because if I were a bettin man, I'd be willing to lay money down on the fact that most in the country can see the wrong in this situation.

Remember it was a push, but the guy didn't advance him any further, otherwise to take advantage of the cat in his vulnerable state while on the ground. But the one on the ground had time to slowly collect himself draw his weapon, and then took the shot as the victim was in retreat when saw that weapon.

It was a violent assault you can tell by the way the man was sprawled on the ground. Thus the law of self defense kicks in and the perception of the one who has been assaulted is vital. Here he was merely talking to this lady asking her if they had a permit to park in the handicap spot and according to reports she went ballistic on him.

Anyhow the b/f comes charging out unbeknownst by the white guy and violently shoves the white guy who ends up on the ground and not only suprised but fearful now and perhaps even in a mild state of shock. Uppermost in his mind is not only to preserve his life but to prevent any grievious bodily harm. That is why he has a pistol in his pocket, that is a crime ridden black neighborhood to begin with. Anyone in that position would be more than a fool to think the black dude may not continue with the attack if not stopped. Thus in fear of his life he does the only thing he can do to absolutely insure his life and limb...shoot the one who assaulted him. It all happened very quickly and the exact moment of the shot is difficult to discern on the video. Despite what you saw it all happened very quickly....and the white guy had to act quickly to stop the attack. The police conducted a thorough investigation and came up with the right conclusion, as in justified use of deadly force because the white dude was in fear of his life.

Watering things down maybe ??? Alot of projection on your part here, and do you think this post isn't biased in some way ??

Not at all it conforms to what the police found and believe me Florida police are far from being biased they get all kinds of training regarding racism. If anything they go in the other direction. Some people think since Florida is a southern state there has to be racism at play here. Those days are long gone. Most of the people down here now are from up north.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The White guy had a legal right to explain to the black lady they were in violation of the law. What on earth makes you think you are not allowed to talk to people? Get real dude!

Just because he has the ability to do something doesn't mean he has a lawful right to do it. If she had at any point told him to back off or go away and he persisted, then being told his conduct is unappreciated and unwanted is prima facie evidence that his behavior at that point was intentional, and can be considered harassment.

No one has to sit there and be berated by some asshole off the street.

 

[rightwinger]

That is ridiculous

If you have ever been in a fight you know when your opponent is stepping back to line you up and when they are fleeing.

If you haven't been in such situation you really can not comment from any frame of experience - just feelings.

He was backing up because a gun was drawn on him
Fight was over

Firing was murder at that point

 

[deanrd]

It's actually the "It's OK for White People to kill black people" law.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Readers split on whether Clearwater shooting was justified under Stand Your Ground law

It wasn't a STand Your Ground shooting...... you have to be able to retreat in a Stand Your Ground case...this is a simple, self defense case.

Self-defense only applies if you are threatened. The guy backed off Shooting him after that is cold-blooded.

You saw the guy back off from a video...the guy on the ground was in a completely different position and may not have realized the guy backed off. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Well the overwhelming opinion stats may end up saying different, where as the majority may have seen it otherwise, then it comes down to the minority view verses the majority view for the event. Dam those videos right ??

It is easy to see that most folks do not know the law and thus are incapable or rendering a good opinion. They just go with what they hear on the media. Have little experience in these matters and cannot think logically and above all cannot see this from the shooters viewpoint as in there life was not on the line like his was...a lone white guy in a black neighborhood who just been knocked flat on his back? Get real.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Other than the above, there are 3 criteria --

- does the perp have the opportunity to harm you or someone?

- does he/she have the means?

- has he/she manifest the intent?

Thank you - ability, jeopardy & opportunity:

Ability means that the attacker possessed a weapon capable of causing death or
grievous bodily harm. The object in question could be a makeshift weapon, like a
beer bottle, a baseball bat, pool cue or even folding chair, if used to inflict a blow.
Generally speaking, charges brought against someone for defending themselves or
another innocent person rarely center on whether or not the attacker possessed the
ability to cause death or serious injury, with a couple of glaring exceptions.
The first exception is when the attacker you shoot does not have a weapon or an
object capable of being used to inflict serious bodily injury, but you thought he did.
For example, in my home state of Washington a few years ago, a police friend of
mine shot and killed an assailant who was armed with a couple of spoons. That’s
right: spoons. The prosecutor did not press charges against my friend because
under the circumstances of the shooting he reasonably believed the spoons were
a knife. The critical issue is the reasonable perception that the attacker possesses
a weapon.
– 6 –
A related exception is found in the furtive movement shooting, in which an
individual is shot when he reaches for something that the defender honestly and
reasonably believes is a weapon. Under most circumstances, if the perception is
found to be a reasonable one, the defender’s response will be ruled justifiable.
The second exception, and the one that lands people in jail time and time again,
crops up when the defender uses deadly force against an unarmed attacker, or even
to fend off multiple unarmed attackers. This happens with surprising frequency,
and more often than not, the defender ends up paying a high price legally. The
issue involved is called “disparity of force,” and it is a critical one.

When a legitimate self-defense shooting ends up in court, many times the civil
litigation or criminal prosecution hinges on the question of disparity of force.
After all, if a prosecutor knows the attacker had a deadly weapon and was in fact
attacking, he is likely not going to prosecute the self-defense shooter. But what
happens when the defender is being stomped to death, choked to death, or otherwise
believes a deadly force attack is imminent or underway? And, what if that
defender shoots one or more of his assailants, but they claim that they were only
beating him up, not trying to severely injure or kill him?
Continued here​

 

[MacTheKnife]

It's actually the "It's OK for White People to kill black people" law.

Typical biased view. In which it is never ok for a white guy to kill a black guy no matter the circumstances.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

It's actually the "It's OK for White People to kill black people" law.

Actually it's the "***STILL*** OK for White People tokill black people"

 

[rightwinger]

When I watched the video I thought the shove was unnecessary and excessive
When the guy on the ground drew a gun, I thought he was within his rights because he was in a vulnerable position

But once the gun was drawn, the confrontation should have been over. The black guy was backing away, in the absence of any further aggression no shot should have been fired

Looked like manslaughter to me

 

[2aguy]

It's actually the "It's OK for White People to kill black people" law.

And yet more whites are killed by blacks .....

 

[2aguy]

That is ridiculous

If you have ever been in a fight you know when your opponent is stepping back to line you up and when they are fleeing.

If you haven't been in such situation you really can not comment from any frame of experience - just feelings.

He was backing up because a gun was drawn on him
Fight was over

Firing was murder at that point

Only if the guy on the ground saw what the guy was doing...which is doubtful from his position and his visual perception when the adrenaline hit his system, not to forget the fear from the violent attack.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Other than the above, there are 3 criteria --

- does the perp have the opportunity to harm you or someone?

- does he/she have the means?

- has he/she manifest the intent?

Thank you - ability, jeopardy & opportunity:

Ability means that the attacker possessed a weapon capable of causing death or
grievous bodily harm. The object in question could be a makeshift weapon, like a
beer bottle, a baseball bat, pool cue or even folding chair, if used to inflict a blow.
Generally speaking, charges brought against someone for defending themselves or
another innocent person rarely center on whether or not the attacker possessed the
ability to cause death or serious injury, with a couple of glaring exceptions.
The first exception is when the attacker you shoot does not have a weapon or an
object capable of being used to inflict serious bodily injury, but you thought he did.
For example, in my home state of Washington a few years ago, a police friend of
mine shot and killed an assailant who was armed with a couple of spoons. That’s
right: spoons. The prosecutor did not press charges against my friend because
under the circumstances of the shooting he reasonably believed the spoons were
a knife. The critical issue is the reasonable perception that the attacker possesses
a weapon.
– 6 –
A related exception is found in the furtive movement shooting, in which an
individual is shot when he reaches for something that the defender honestly and
reasonably believes is a weapon. Under most circumstances, if the perception is
found to be a reasonable one, the defender’s response will be ruled justifiable.
The second exception, and the one that lands people in jail time and time again,
crops up when the defender uses deadly force against an unarmed attacker, or even
to fend off multiple unarmed attackers. This happens with surprising frequency,
and more often than not, the defender ends up paying a high price legally. The
issue involved is called “disparity of force,” and it is a critical one.

When a legitimate self-defense shooting ends up in court, many times the civil
litigation or criminal prosecution hinges on the question of disparity of force.
After all, if a prosecutor knows the attacker had a deadly weapon and was in fact
attacking, he is likely not going to prosecute the self-defense shooter. But what
happens when the defender is being stomped to death, choked to death, or otherwise
believes a deadly force attack is imminent or underway? And, what if that
defender shoots one or more of his assailants, but they claim that they were only
beating him up, not trying to severely injure or kill him?
Continued here​

Surely you jest. Please for the sake of the board read the florida law on self defense. You get off to a bad start with your first sentence. Trying to inject ability into your argument. One does not have to be armed to be a threat to your life. Many people are beaten to death. Kicked to death etc. Look at the trayvon case. Some people never learn. None so blind as he who will not see. All a bunch of irrelevant nonsense but it never stops on here.

 

[2aguy]

The White guy had a legal right to explain to the black lady they were in violation of the law. What on earth makes you think you are not allowed to talk to people? Get real dude!

Just because he has the ability to do something doesn't mean he has a lawful right to do it. If she had at any point told him to back off or go away and he persisted, then being told his conduct is unappreciated and unwanted is prima facie evidence that his behavior at that point was intentional, and can be considered harassment.

No one has to sit there and be berated by some asshole off the street.

At no point does it allow being violently attacked..... you can simply get in your car and move.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

It is easy to see that most folks do not know the law and thus are incapable or rendering a good opinion. They just go with what they hear on the media. Have little experience in these matters and cannot think logically and above all cannot see this from the shooters viewpoint as in there life was not on the line like his was...a lone white guy in a black neighborhood who just been knocked flat on his back? Get real.

That alledged point of view is due to an irrational fear of black people. And he wasn't flat on his back, he was sitting there looking like he was on a picnic blanket.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Surely you jest. Please for the sake of the board read the florida law on self defense. You get off to a bad start with your first sentence. Trying to inject ability into your argument. One does not have to be armed to be a threat to your life. Many people are beaten to death. Kicked to death etc. Look at the trayvon case. Some people never learn. None so blind as he who will not see. All a bunch of irrelevant nonsense but it never stops on here.

Wasn't talking to you, my comment was specific to a comment by the poster to whom I was responding.