The surface he was slammed down on was concrete so your question regarding tarmac is moot to this discussion.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Stand Your Ground / Murder / Other
- Thread starter Benjamin
- Start date
I think that is just according to the sheriff's office wherein the sheriff is throwing out some pretty poor interpretations of the law and making the case for the shooter while saying its not his call. I don't think the DA has made a decision yet.
That ain't justice, that's a sheriff throwing out his support for vigilantism. Like he said, it's not his call, so maybe he should shut the hell up. Good would be you don't get to kill someone as payback for pushing you while being the coward that he was lying about being in fear for your life as the the pusher is backing away.
The purpose of the stand your ground law was so that a person doesn’t have to try to escape first before they use deadly force to protect themselves if they are in fear of imminent danger – The purpose of the STG law was never meant to be used as an excuse not to let someone who has assaulted you to have no chance of escaping your retaliation.
That is what this double-talking sheriff who says it’s not his call while trying to impose his sorry interpretation on the law when he says – that you should have at least 4 seconds to decide to kill someone because you were violently pushed and like it or not you could get away with claiming you are in fear for your life because of that push, sorry, he says, but that’s the way the law reads – while – he totally ignores that fact that the man backed up and was starting to turn away when he was killed. Rather than SYG it seems the truth is more like that bullet to the chest was payback from an aggressive instigator who was angry that he got manhandled and who figured he had enough time to claim fear for his life but better hurry and take the shot before the guy gets too far away and then he found a sheriff to go out and validate his actions for him as within the law.
I believe justice would happen when it is determined that the SYG law no longer applied when the pusher backed away.
That is what this double-talking sheriff who says it’s not his call while trying to impose his sorry interpretation on the law when he says – that you should have at least 4 seconds to decide to kill someone because you were violently pushed and like it or not you could get away with claiming you are in fear for your life because of that push, sorry, he says, but that’s the way the law reads – while – he totally ignores that fact that the man backed up and was starting to turn away when he was killed. Rather than SYG it seems the truth is more like that bullet to the chest was payback from an aggressive instigator who was angry that he got manhandled and who figured he had enough time to claim fear for his life but better hurry and take the shot before the guy gets too far away and then he found a sheriff to go out and validate his actions for him as within the law.
I believe justice would happen when it is determined that the SYG law no longer applied when the pusher backed away.
you don't know everything that went on there Ben to draw those conclusions. Rather you are drawing on emotions and possibly slandering the guy who was thrown to the ground. I am not taking sides here ....I didn't see the whole thing up close & personal but I did speak to my wife about it. Her family resides there & tells me that its the wild wild west down there.....I'd stay out of Dodge.
No I don't know everything but I do know that this shooter made a habit of going around and berating people who parked in that spot. There was an instance at the same store with him doing the same thing a month before. He was instigating conflicts, taking the law into his own hands, this COWARD did this (habitually) while concealing a gun for his courage and trying to be a vigilante. The woman was being berated so bad that people went into the store to report it. The boyfriend upon hearing this came out and overreacted and the COWARD pulled his gun and killed him as he was backing away and then claims he was justified because of being in fear for his life while trying to play on technicalities within the law!
…and yet some people will say that it is “justice” that this killer is not brought to trial for his actions wherein hopefully the truth could brought out.
It was obviously a rough neighborhood which is all the more reason that the shooter going around starting conflicts could expect that sooner or later someone was going to give him an excuse to use his gun for his actions.
Yeah, you want to talk about wild wild west, I'm glad I wasn't there because seeing that I might have drawn down on the shooter to make sure he didn't shoot someone else and then I'd might of had to stand my ground.
that's not the issue - the prosecution would have prove there wasn't a reasonable belief that deadly force was necessary to stop and to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
"reasonable belief", slammed to the concrete with deadly force seconds beforehand, "necessary", there were possibly three people right there ready for the beatdown, "imminent", well, what do you think they would do if this guy hadn't have pulled the gun? Baby Momma got out of the car as soon as she saw her main squeeze leave the store, another guy followed him and was approaching the shooter before he saw the gun, then he had enough sense to run.
But, no matter, you know more about Florida SYG than this sheriff, who has a J.D. and is a member of the bar in that state.
"reasonable belief", slammed to the concrete with deadly force seconds beforehand, "necessary", there were possibly three people right there ready for the beatdown, "imminent", well, what do you think they would do if this guy hadn't have pulled the gun? Baby Momma got out of the car as soon as she saw her main squeeze leave the store, another guy followed him and was approaching the shooter before he saw the gun, then he had enough sense to run.
But, no matter, you know more about Florida SYG than this sheriff, who has a J.D. and is a member of the bar in that state.
"Baby mamma" saw her "main squeeze" - that's the second time you've spoke like that in this thread. Gee, I wonder what's driving your opinion? 
I don't have a dog in this fight but I guarantee that if I did I'd see that sheriff and his "not his call" arguments as the main deterrent to justice and I'd be taking his personal opinion "not his call" doubletalk arguments to the mat!
I don't have a dog in this fight but I guarantee that if I did I'd see that sheriff and his "not his call" arguments as the main deterrent to justice and I'd be taking his personal opinion "not his call" doubletalk arguments to the mat!
It's a "good shoot." Hide and watch, wait and see. No way a jury will convict. Even if a prosecutor decided to charge him, Sheriff would be an impossible defense witness to overcome. The Sheriff saying its a good shoot definitely establishes reasonable doubt.
If you want to be called "wife" get married. Out of wedlock is "baby mama" in my book. White or Black makes no difference. A black man rents one of my houses and he calls his woman "my baby mamma.""Baby mamma" saw her "main squeeze" - that's the second time you've spoke like that in this thread. Gee, I wonder what's driving your opinion?
I don't have a dog in this fight but I guarantee that if I did I'd see that sheriff and his "not his call" arguments as the main deterrent to justice and I'd be taking his personal opinion "not his call" doubletalk arguments to the mat!
"Main squeeze" is more of a high school term, the whole point of that post was to insinuate that I'd think differently if the races were reversed. Nope, SYG is colorblind and no prosecutor would want to take this case, it's a nightmare for them:
http://www.tbo.com/news/publicsafet...w-hearing-in-Pasco-theater-shooting_168049984
and here there is a videotape and witnesses. The sheriff would have been wide-open to suits if he had recommended arresting the shooter here.
http://www.tbo.com/news/publicsafet...w-hearing-in-Pasco-theater-shooting_168049984
and here there is a videotape and witnesses. The sheriff would have been wide-open to suits if he had recommended arresting the shooter here.
How about calling the cops
Yeah, I agree, the situation should have been under control for any competent person and he should have called the cops for being pushed like that, but instead he started shooting – that is why I might have drawn down on him being it appears people lives were in imminent danger.
It is terrible though that people do not operate as Christians.....I guess I am referring to loving your enemy's, do good to those who want to hurt you.....etc.
The white attacker started this by getting into an argument over a parking place. Turn this around. If a black man were attacking your family and you came out of the store and pushed the attacker on the ground would he be justified in pulling a gun and killing you? Of course, according to your logic.
I reckon I spend a great deal more time carrying a loaded gun on my person than you do, but feel free to correct me on this point if I am incorrect.
So when you carry, you don’t need to be cussing people out in public. Laying on your horn because someone cut you off. Flipping someone the bird because they voice a contrary opinion.
When you have the means to permanently win any confrontation, you need to go about your day in a manner that helps you avoid confrontation.
I don't know why you would disagree with that, or think that switching races makes one bit of difference.
I'm simply asking would the black man have been justified in killing you in the same situation? it's a simple question.
How's about you go re-read my initial post (which you quoted), and then point to me where I said that my opinion was that this was a justified shooting.
Then re-read my response to you, and again, show me the part where you see me claiming the shooter was justified.
And don't try inserting me into this mess. I'm not walking a mile or a meter in any of their shoes, because both of them were complete idiots. The whole situation is a worst case scenario of "When Morons Collide." No, I am not knowingly going to park in a handicap space, and if I do so unknowingly then I will apologize and move on. If someone parks in my space and I'm carrying, I am not going to get into a verbal altercation over it.
No one can say whether or not the man who was assaulted feared for his life or not. That is a ridiculous claim. The shooter was in fact legally assaulted without provocation. When one's default position is violence (i.e. the man who pushed the other down) then one needs to expect violence. You cannot touch someone else in such a manner. The shooting was justified as well as unfortunate.