Justifiable use of deadly force or not?

[Skull Pilot]

The attacker walked up to the scene and there was no physical contact between the victim and the attackers girlfriend...all physical constact was initiated by the black guy, and he pulled up his shorts as he moved forward....and as the gun came up he didn't put up his hands...

Again.... you guys really, really need to understand self defense and what happens in those situations..... you are making judgements based on a video that flattens the distance between the 2 men, from an angle that hides what the victim actually sees, and you are not the one on the ground looking at the attacker....

You don't know what you are talking about.

Um, no.

I know this guy lived your dream of shooting a darkie, but this was murder.

The store owner even said the shooter was deranged and harrassed his customers frequently.

And yet he never called the cops to have him removed from the premises

 

[JoeB131]

And yet he never called the cops to have him removed from the premises

Yeah, because the cops would have gotten right on that.

 

[SavannahMann]

This is a bad case to hang your SYG hat on. First, the shooter was according to the news reports, notorious for causing problems at the store. Because you have a gun does not make you a cop, nor allow you to enforce the law as you see it. The gun is intended for self protection, but it is not a license to instigate situations where you are in danger.

I carry, and when I am, I do not shout at people over parking violations. I do not threaten people as this individual is purported to have done. If you are doing those things, threatening to shoot people over parking violations, then SYG goes out the window. It was at a minimum manslaughter. Again, I am a member of the NRA, and ACLU, and I do not believe this fool acted in anything approaching a defensible manner.

 

[OODA_Loop]

It was at a minimum manslaughter. Again, I am a member of the NRA, and ACLU, and I do not believe this fool acted in anything approaching a defensible manner.

The investigating detectives didn't arrest.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I know this guy lived your dream of shooting a darkie, but this was murder.

Not according to the police.

 

[kaz]

Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

At the one minute mark a reporter was talking to a store clerk.

And what does the store clerk say?

What does that matter?

Why does it matter that the store clerk answers your question?

Because he answers your question

 

[SavannahMann]

It was at a minimum manslaughter. Again, I am a member of the NRA, and ACLU, and I do not believe this fool acted in anything approaching a defensible manner.

The investigating detectives didn't arrest.

They should have. Too many witnesses all say that this guy causes problems at the store. If he threatened to shoot someone before, then he was looking for trouble. He found it. He should get it.

 

[kaz]

How do you just leave when he's screaming at your wife with your kids there over where you parked?

I hope you're never in that situation because you don't know what the **** you're talking about. I haven't either, and hope I never will be.

But the murderer staged a situation by being armed and initiating aggression and repeating it until he got what he wanted

So you would immediately attack someone who is yelling at your wife?

Strawman

I wouldnt. At the most I would place myself between the guy and my Wife and Kids and try and find out what the problem was.
But if he was standing five foot from the car I'd just get in and leave.
For all I know he's armed. And the most important thing is to get my family as far away as possible from a bad situation.
I mean I dont know about you but the last thing I want is gun play around my family.

Oh...and I have been in a situation like that.
Had three would be home invaders...and no I didnt shoot them.
All they needed to see was that sawed off 870 come into view around the door jam.
I couldnt bring myself to shoot em in the back as they ran away.

Maybe Markeis would be alive today had he ran away.
Of course he would have left his girl and kids in a bad situation....but then thats why you try to avoid conflict when you have loved ones in harms way.

And yet you completely didn't address my point that the shooter staged a scenario, initiated the aggression and repeated it until he got the shooting he wanted. Nothing you said addresses any part of my point

Funny...he's never shot someone before.

And?

So he just decided out of the blue to shoot someone?

Go to the one minute mark of the video. The store clerk explains it to you

 

[kaz]

You'd ignore some nutcase yelling at your family for where you parked, but if he touched you, you'd waste him. I'd say that's a good argument, but wow, it's not

Whats so hard to understand? Yelling you leave,manhandling they get shot.

How do you just leave when he's screaming at your wife with your kids there over where you parked?

I hope you're never in that situation because you don't know what the **** you're talking about. I haven't either, and hope I never will be.

But the murderer staged a situation by being armed and initiating aggression and repeating it until he got what he wanted

So you would immediately attack someone who is yelling at your wife?

Strawman

I wouldnt. At the most I would place myself between the guy and my Wife and Kids and try and find out what the problem was.
But if he was standing five foot from the car I'd just get in and leave.
For all I know he's armed. And the most important thing is to get my family as far away as possible from a bad situation.
I mean I dont know about you but the last thing I want is gun play around my family.

Oh...and I have been in a situation like that.
Had three would be home invaders...and no I didnt shoot them.
All they needed to see was that sawed off 870 come into view around the door jam.
I couldnt bring myself to shoot em in the back as they ran away.

Maybe Markeis would be alive today had he ran away.
Of course he would have left his girl and kids in a bad situation....but then thats why you try to avoid conflict when you have loved ones in harms way.

And yet you completely didn't address my point that the shooter staged a scenario, initiated the aggression and repeated it until he got the shooting he wanted. Nothing you said addresses any part of my point

I find it interesting that you start shit with someone while your wife and kids were present.
Real fuken smart.

OK, we're done. Now you're just flat out lying

 

[kaz]

Right, but that isn't the point you made. You argued that it violated the Constitution because he was shot. The government did not shoot him. That's just stupid

No I didn't. I was arguing with Skull Pilot because he said he didn't care that the guy got shot and killed just for a simple assault.

I asked if he supported the Constitution... which has the 8th Amendment that protects citizens from Cruel and Unusual punishment. I said if he supports that, then he should care that the guy was shot and killed for simple assault. Not because the 8th Amendment protects him for that, but because they share the same principle. They aren't the same, nor does the 8th Amendment cover it, but they follow the same principle, so saying you agree with the rights the 8th Amendment gives, but then saying you don't think it is a fair principle in other parts of society is being a hypocrite.

Of course they don't share the same principle. No one ever said or meant that the Constitution should dictate interactions between citizens. It's about dictating to government how it will treat it's citizens. It's a limit on government power.

For example, government cannot restrict free speech. However, you can shit can your employees for what they say, break of with your wife, disavow your friends, criticize them on television. No one ever thought or meant that you have free speech from the consequences of other citizens. It's a horrible argument

What the **** do you mean they don't share the same principle? It's pretty simple. In a fair world, when someone does something wrong, the punishment they receive should be equal to the severity of the wrongdoing. The founders of this country knew that, that's why they wrote the 8th Amendment... however until the civil war the Federal government did not hold precedence over the way the states took care of things. Thus why AFTER the civil war they created the 13th, 14th, and the 15th Amendments that were referred to as the Reconstruction Amendments. The 13th outlawed slavery, the 14th created due process that extended the power of the Bill of Rights and Constitution to the state level, and the 15th Amendment which extended voting rights.

I said it has nothing to do with the Constitution. You shouldn't have pulled the Constitution into your point. The Constitution is not written to dictate actions between citizens, and it isn't a power for the Federal government to regulate interaction between citizens. The Constitution is a document that limits Federal power. You blew up your point by using the Constitution wrong

I brought it up for a specific reason and was VERY clear it had nothing to do with one citizen over another. Many Trump supporters brag about how important the rights given to people through the Constitution are. Well if you are against cruel and unusual punishment from the government, then it is hypocritical to say that when there is an incident between two citizens it is ok for one citizen to KILL the other over something as small as pushing them to the ground.

Yes, you brought it up for a specific reason. You're full of shit. The Constitution doesn't dictate interactions between citizens and it doesn't empower the Federal government to enforce it's own limits on citizens. It just doesn't. You brought up the Constitution in a way that demonstrated that you have zero grasp of what the Constitution even is. It limits the power of government. Period

 

[jon_berzerk]

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

At the one minute mark a reporter was talking to a store clerk.

And what does the store clerk say?

What does that matter?

Why does it matter that the store clerk answers your question?

Because he answers your question

still he offered no evidence such as you that he "wanted to kill " someone

face it your opinion is clouded

and saying something like certainly isnt evidence

 

[2aguy]

The attacker walked up to the scene and there was no physical contact between the victim and the attackers girlfriend...all physical constact was initiated by the black guy, and he pulled up his shorts as he moved forward....and as the gun came up he didn't put up his hands...

Again.... you guys really, really need to understand self defense and what happens in those situations..... you are making judgements based on a video that flattens the distance between the 2 men, from an angle that hides what the victim actually sees, and you are not the one on the ground looking at the attacker....

You don't know what you are talking about.

Um, no.

I know this guy lived your dream of shooting a darkie, but this was murder.

The store owner even said the shooter was deranged and harrassed his customers frequently.

It doesn't matter what the victim did in the past, in this attack he was the one physically assaulted ......

 

[kaz]

Lewdog: "I'm not a Democrat"

You gave up the right to that lie when you took up race whoring on their behalf. No one is so inanely stupid that you'd believe this country has become stereotypical Alabama in the fifties. You have to be a partisan sheep to believe that. Give up the lie now that you've clearly established what you are

Race whoring? Sorry when I see the facts, it's not whoring. I'll send you several books proving it, but I no you wouldn't read them. I've shared stats with you that show 61% of murders in the U.S. in 2016 didn't even get solved, so they had no idea what the demographic of the killer was. Yet you refused to accept the stats you referenced could be wrong.

You want whites to be racist, it's a path to free government cheese. I don't have an agenda. I just realize this country is about as non-racist as there is in human history, and you see racism all around you. But only from whites. It's an obvious political agenda for you on behalf of the Democrat party. And you're such a partisan shill you don't see it's starting to work against you because you're so blinded by partisan hatred

I don't "want" anyone to be racist. The fact is, racism is still prevalent. If you think this country is as non-racist as it has ever been in human history, you need to start reading REAL educational books that rely on REAL statistics and REAL studies.

If you see the United States today all as Alabama in the 50s, and you only see racism coming from whites, then yeah, you want us to be racists.

It's ironic you're criticizing a few people in the gun thread for extreme overreaction, then when the situation goes to race you hysterically overreact. Sure, racism exists. But that it's gotten worse instead of better and whites are the problem is just stupid, which is what you and the Democrat party are

When did I say there is only racism coming from whites? Again, if you REALLY want to learn how wrong some of your views about racism being the best it has ever been, I'll loan you some top selling books from VERY respectable authors.

I asked you if blacks were racist in your race whoring campaign too or just whites and you declined to answer the question.

It's the Democrat party campaign to pull this country apart because if you can't rule it, you will destroy it. Your campaign to claim Trump and Republicans are racist is destroying the country and harming blacks by telling them to be bitter and angry and attacking most whites who aren't racist for being racist anyway.

But hey, again, if you can't rule the country, you'll ensure there's nothing left. One of the few Democrat programs that actually works as designed. Nice job on that.

But it's our fault, right? You gave us the choice of succumbing to your will or being destroyed and we picked being destroyed. We made the choice, right? Not you ...

 

[2aguy]

Well if you are against cruel and unusual punishment from the government, then it is hypocritical to say that when there is an incident between two citizens it is ok for one citizen to KILL the other over something as small as pushing them to the ground.

Except pushing someone violently to the paved ground can and has killed people.

Let's try to make this clear to you for umpteenth time. Stand your ground law only allows someone to shoot someone if they feel their life is in imminent danger. When the man shot him, the victim was 7-10 feet AWAY from the shooter and backing up. He was not within range to do anymore to him, and is unarmed.

He certainly was in range

You don't know shit about unarmed combat do you?

How fast do you think a person can close in from 7 feet away?

We don't even know what the actual distance was, we only have the video from the far corner of the store from a weird angle.....they don't understand that video compresses distance....

 

[kaz]

True. And people who initiate aggression to kill people if they respond is the downside of CC

still have not proved that yet have ya

Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

obviously it is not clear

it is only "clear" in your clouded mind

you have offered no evidence none what so ever

that he wanted to kill someone ya jerk

No evidence? You're full of shit. Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds or so. The store clerk explains it to you

 

[jon_berzerk]

still have not proved that yet have ya

Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

obviously it is not clear

it is only "clear" in your clouded mind

you have offered no evidence none what so ever

that he wanted to kill someone ya jerk

No evidence? You're full of shit. Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds or so. The store clerk explains it to you

you still have not offered any evidence of such

 

[kaz]

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

At the one minute mark a reporter was talking to a store clerk.

And what does the store clerk say?

What does that matter?

Why does it matter that the store clerk answers your question?

Because he answers your question

still he offered no evidence such as you that he "wanted to kill " someone

face it your opinion is clouded

and saying something like certainly isnt evidence

Look dude, my argument is clear. If you want to progress the argument, then respond to my point. It's clear if you have an IQ of at least 80 or so. But you like the other moonbats who think screaming at women in parking lots over where they parked isn't even a threat while you can waste someone who pushes you for screaming at their women in parking lots over where they parked aren't the most logical people anyway, are you?

But either address my point or stop whining that I keep repeating the same answer to your same question because you keep ignoring it. You're arguing like a leftist. You don't like a point? Ignore it and it doesn't exist, right?

 

[kaz]

Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

obviously it is not clear

it is only "clear" in your clouded mind

you have offered no evidence none what so ever

that he wanted to kill someone ya jerk

No evidence? You're full of shit. Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds or so. The store clerk explains it to you

you still have not offered any evidence of such

Go to the one minute mark of the video ... listen to the next 20 seconds or so. Again, if your IQ is at least 80, you're capable of grasping my argument. You don't have to agree with it, make the case if you don't. But stop being a moron. Duh, dar, I don't get it kaz. What does that the guy kept staging the same situation have to do with his intentions? Sure guy.

Ignore my response because it answers your question and it doesn't exist, right Obama?

 

[jon_berzerk]

At the one minute mark a reporter was talking to a store clerk.

And what does the store clerk say?

What does that matter?

Why does it matter that the store clerk answers your question?

Because he answers your question

still he offered no evidence such as you that he "wanted to kill " someone

face it your opinion is clouded

and saying something like certainly isnt evidence

Look dude, my argument is clear. If you want to progress the argument, then respond to my point. It's clear if you have an IQ of at least 80 or so. But you like the other moonbats who think screaming at women in parking lots over where they parked isn't even a threat while you can waste someone who pushes you for screaming at their women in parking lots over where they parked aren't the most logical people anyway, are you?

But either address my point or stop whining that I keep repeating the same answer to your same question because you keep ignoring it. You're arguing like a leftist. You don't like a point? Ignore it and it doesn't exist, right?

he cant read the guys mind any more then you can with your clouded opinion

and that is all it is is opinion certainly not evidence

get back to me when you can offer real evidence that he "wanted to kill someone"

 

[jon_berzerk]

so you are saying you still can not offer any real proof and resort to that same lame response

Tell me what happens at the one minute mark of the video. What I said is clear and you're full of shit.

And BTW, it's moronic to go on message boards and tell people to STFU unless they can provide "proof."

I provided a damned good argument though. I just got tired of repeating it. So if you want to be intentionally dumb, work for it.

What happens at the one minute mark of the video, then I'll help you see the direct relevance of it to my argument

obviously it is not clear

it is only "clear" in your clouded mind

you have offered no evidence none what so ever

that he wanted to kill someone ya jerk

No evidence? You're full of shit. Go to the one minute mark of the video and watch the next 20 seconds or so. The store clerk explains it to you

you still have not offered any evidence of such

Go to the one minute mark of the video ... listen to the next 20 seconds or so.

Ignore my response because it answers your question and it doesn't exist, right Obama?

been there dummy an opinion is not evidence