Convenient store stand-your-ground shooter charged

Zimmerman 2.0

No comparison. Zimmerman broke off his stalking. Martin caught up with him and attacked, at which point the responsibility became his.

This guy was pushed to the ground (provocation could be argued), and that was it. The attack stopped. He drew and killed the guy without cause.

Both were deemed justified by investigators only to have politically motivated prosecutors champion the case for political reasons only to have their ass handed to them at trail and putting an innocent man through that.

Zimmerman was justified.

This other guy was not. Keep in mind that there is no one more pro-gun and self-defense than I am.

Zimmerman was not justified.
Lol
Yes he was, A gang banger like Trevon Martin deserved what he got so shut the fuck up
 
Jones, I will listen to the DA and the sheriff for qualified legal points of view. You and Oodles can chime all you want, but the DA will easily pierce the self-justification and subjectivity of the defendant without any problem. Watch.

So the Sheriff already said he was lawful. You're batting .500 after one AB.
 
it didnt look that way to me....according to the story i read.....McGlockton leaving the store, walking toward Drejka and shoving him with both hands. Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him. Drejka sits up, pulls his gun and points it at McGlockton, who takes three steps back until he is about 12 feet away (3.6 meters). Drejka fires, hitting McGlockton, who runs back into the store clutching his chest....if i was on the jury the guy is guilty....

Three steps back is 12 feet?
how far was he away from the guy before he began stepping back?......

"Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him."

What would you have done being that you were in a stand your ground State?
And that’s the problem with this unwarranted indictment: it needlessly muddies the legal waters as to how Floridians might lawfully use deadly force in self-defense.

However much one might disagree with the Zimmerman verdict, it nonetheless set precedent in Florida self-defense case law this State attorney is failing to follow.
It rests solely on when you change from being the attacked to being the attacker
Not if the person using lethal self-defense perceives the attack to be imminent and ongoing.
 
Zimmerman was justified.

This other guy was not. Keep in mind that there is no one more pro-gun and self-defense than I am.

Investigators said this guy was justified.

Makes it hard in court. Bigley.

The video tape over rides what investigators said.

The self defense was the unarmed man defending the woman in the car.

Which the video tape more than justifies.

You don't get to pull your gun because you got punked.
The guy deserved a dirt nap... End of story
 
Zimmerman was justified.

This other guy was not. Keep in mind that there is no one more pro-gun and self-defense than I am.

Investigators said this guy was justified.

Makes it hard in court. Bigley.

The video tape over rides what investigators said.

The self defense was the unarmed man defending the woman in the car.

Which the video tape more than justifies.

You don't get to pull your gun because you got punked.
Self defense ended once he drew his gun and the unarmed man backed away
Na, you got to draw the line...
 
Three steps back is 12 feet?
how far was he away from the guy before he began stepping back?......

"Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him."

What would you have done being that you were in a stand your ground State?
And that’s the problem with this unwarranted indictment: it needlessly muddies the legal waters as to how Floridians might lawfully use deadly force in self-defense.

However much one might disagree with the Zimmerman verdict, it nonetheless set precedent in Florida self-defense case law this State attorney is failing to follow.
It rests solely on when you change from being the attacked to being the attacker
Not if the person using lethal self-defense perceives the attack to be imminent and ongoing.
Requires a suspension of belief

If your interpretation of Florida’s law is correct, anyone with a gun can fire based on a dirty look or someone following you
I felt threatened .....
Code for.....the guy was black
 
how far was he away from the guy before he began stepping back?......

"Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him."

What would you have done being that you were in a stand your ground State?
And that’s the problem with this unwarranted indictment: it needlessly muddies the legal waters as to how Floridians might lawfully use deadly force in self-defense.

However much one might disagree with the Zimmerman verdict, it nonetheless set precedent in Florida self-defense case law this State attorney is failing to follow.
It rests solely on when you change from being the attacked to being the attacker
Not if the person using lethal self-defense perceives the attack to be imminent and ongoing.
Requires a suspension of belief

If your interpretation of Florida’s law is correct, anyone with a gun can fire based on a dirty look or someone following you
I felt threatened .....
Code for.....the guy was black
Lol
You know your views on so-called racism makes that word racist meaningless?
 
Takeaway = Don't engage people on the street with heat you don't know.

You call out someone it better be for something damn worth it.

There is a certain subset unless i know you i avoid all contact. Period.
 
Jones, I will listen to the DA and the sheriff for qualified legal points of view. You and Oodles can chime all you want, but the DA will easily pierce the self-justification and subjectivity of the defendant without any problem. Watch.
Remember to not shoot the messenger.

I’m merely stating Florida law as it exists on the subject – having nothing to do with my personal opinion on the matter.

And the DA and the sheriff have now entered the realm of politics, not the law.
 
how far was he away from the guy before he began stepping back?......

"Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him."

What would you have done being that you were in a stand your ground State?
And that’s the problem with this unwarranted indictment: it needlessly muddies the legal waters as to how Floridians might lawfully use deadly force in self-defense.

However much one might disagree with the Zimmerman verdict, it nonetheless set precedent in Florida self-defense case law this State attorney is failing to follow.
It rests solely on when you change from being the attacked to being the attacker
Not if the person using lethal self-defense perceives the attack to be imminent and ongoing.
Requires a suspension of belief

If your interpretation of Florida’s law is correct, anyone with a gun can fire based on a dirty look or someone following you
I felt threatened .....
Code for.....the guy was black
It’s not my interpretation – again, don’t kill the messenger.

And no, Florida law doesn’t sanction the use of deadly force in self-defense because someone follows you or looks at you the wrong way.

It may be impossible to refine the law to the point where there are settled, accepted criteria as to when deadly force is justified in an act of self-defense and when it is not.

The outcome of this case will either provide some clarity on the subject or make the law that much more confusing and inconsistent.
 
According to the story, Drejka was shoved to the ground by McGlockton. McGlockton continued toward Drejka. Drejka sat up, pulled his weapon and fired. One has to expect this in a stand your ground state and a gun happy society such as the United States.
it didnt look that way to me....according to the story i read.....McGlockton leaving the store, walking toward Drejka and shoving him with both hands. Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him. Drejka sits up, pulls his gun and points it at McGlockton, who takes three steps back until he is about 12 feet away (3.6 meters). Drejka fires, hitting McGlockton, who runs back into the store clutching his chest....if i was on the jury the guy is guilty....

Three steps back is 12 feet?
how far was he away from the guy before he began stepping back?......

"Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him."

What would you have done being that you were in a stand your ground State?
i would have got up and pushed him back....unless the guy was on top of him beating the shit out of him or had a weapon himself there was no reason to shoot the guy....the guy was a paranoid pussy....

Says the future dead guy.
 
it didnt look that way to me....according to the story i read.....McGlockton leaving the store, walking toward Drejka and shoving him with both hands. Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him. Drejka sits up, pulls his gun and points it at McGlockton, who takes three steps back until he is about 12 feet away (3.6 meters). Drejka fires, hitting McGlockton, who runs back into the store clutching his chest....if i was on the jury the guy is guilty....

Three steps back is 12 feet?
how far was he away from the guy before he began stepping back?......

"Drejka lands on his back and McGlockton takes a step toward him."

What would you have done being that you were in a stand your ground State?
i would have got up and pushed him back....unless the guy was on top of him beating the shit out of him or had a weapon himself there was no reason to shoot the guy....the guy was a paranoid pussy....

Says the future dead guy.
yea we are all going to die one day.....so whats your point?...
 
Good. Asshole deserves to be punished for what he did over a fucking parking space.

Drejka was shoved to the ground by McGlockton. Isn't that battery?
Yeah. And he should have been pushed back. There was no need to shoot the guy. Period.
Push back? You want him to fight with the guy? That would make him as bad as the guy who shoved him. No, shooting him was the right thing to do.
 
No comparison. Zimmerman broke off his stalking. Martin caught up with him and attacked, at which point the responsibility became his.

This guy was pushed to the ground (provocation could be argued), and that was it. The attack stopped. He drew and killed the guy without cause.

Both were deemed justified by investigators only to have politically motivated prosecutors champion the case for political reasons only to have their ass handed to them at trail and putting an innocent man through that.

Zimmerman was justified.

This other guy was not. Keep in mind that there is no one more pro-gun and self-defense than I am.

Zimmerman was not justified.

The jury seemed to think so.
The jury found him guilty of Murder 2...the prosecution over charged.
I meant to say, like trump....they found him NOT guilty.
 

Forum List

Back
Top