It can be surprising how you measure your words and actions when you are carrying.
-
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
It can be surprising how you measure your words and actions when you are carrying.
OK. I didn't understand your first post since the killer started the incident.
Did you miss the part where the woman and man in the car parked in a handicapped zone without proper documentation?
Without reservation I can say he was either a coward of the worst kind and had no business being out instigating conflicts or a murderer.
I can hardly believe my ears considering your next claim:
Seriously?! Without provocation??? That shooter was out practicing provocation every chance he got!
prov·o·ca·tion
noun
1.
action or speech that makes someone annoyed or angry, especially deliberately.
Do you honestly believe the shooter wasn’t looking for violence in that neighborhood as he habitually went around inspecting people’s cars for handicap permits and berating people with a gun in his pocket for courage as his default position should physical violence arise??? You would try to justify the shooter's action with hypocrisy?! Nevermind, I guess that question has already been answered...
No, you cannot! So what do you suggest as a remedy:
To pay him back with killing! Your conclusion is baseless from within the argument you just presented. Unbelievably shallow, and frankly unexpected reasoning from you considering the arguments presented in this thread.
Give this man the prize for the understatement of the month.
Oh, he was out policing over the stupid parking space - I saw a longer video where the shooter pulled along side the store, jumped out and immediately went to that car and examined it.
Still, the owner should have got a RO against the guy if he had already gotten into trouble with the other customer. If it happened once (or more), it could happen again. So they were parking in a handicap spot, so? The police supposedly were called, where are the records? And NO video I've seen of this has any audio.
Is there nobody who can read lips? I don't buy the "looking for someone to shoot" argument, how would Dreja know HE wasn't encountering another nut carrying heat, legally or not, as well? There are people that will kill you soon as to look at you.
And the argument that this was retaliatory, no, he fired once and only once. It's SYG, and, no , it does NOT reflect at all over other CCW permit holders, the actions of one.
Still, the owner should have got a RO against the guy if he had already gotten into trouble with the other customer. If it happened once (or more), it could happen again. So they were parking in a handicap spot, so? The police supposedly were called, where are the records? And NO video I've seen of this has any audio.
Is there nobody who can read lips? I don't buy the "looking for someone to shoot" argument, how would Dreja know HE wasn't encountering another nut carrying heat, legally or not, as well? There are people that will kill you soon as to look at you.
And the argument that this was retaliatory, no, he fired once and only once. It's SYG, and, no , it does NOT reflect at all over other CCW permit holders, the actions of one.
Escalation of the use of force does NOT go "verbal only" = physical violence.
The dead guy committed an act of physical violence and the disparity of age, size, and health advanced the paradigm. "Aggravated Battery using Physical violence" = "deadly force."
The Use of Force Continuum works like this:
Physical presence
Verbal commands
Empty-handed submission techniques
Hard control techniques
Intermediate weapons
Lethal force/Deadly force
The dead guy committed an act of physical violence and the disparity of age, size, and health advanced the paradigm. "Aggravated Battery using Physical violence" = "deadly force."
The Use of Force Continuum works like this:
Physical presence
Verbal commands
Empty-handed submission techniques
Hard control techniques
Intermediate weapons
Lethal force/Deadly force
I used to deal with a citizen who "policed" the handicapped spots. I guess I responded to 75 or more of his calls through the years. He was a flat jerk. Seemed like it was his life goal to ruin peoples day. 99% of his reported violations were either people who had handicapped tag instead of hanger or handicapped people who forgot to hang up their hanger. I wrote one, maybe two tickets at the most. He wanted me to write handicapped people who forgot to display their hanger citations.
BUT, not one person ever hit him and knocked him to the ground. Guy who got shot was a violent thug. My opinion, world is better place without him.
Without reservation I can say he was either a coward of the worst kind and had no business being out instigating conflicts or a murderer.
I can hardly believe my ears considering your next claim:
Seriously?! Without provocation??? That shooter was out practicing provocation every chance he got!
prov·o·ca·tion
noun
1.
action or speech that makes someone annoyed or angry, especially deliberately.
Do you honestly believe the shooter wasn’t looking for violence in that neighborhood as he habitually went around inspecting people’s cars for handicap permits and berating people with a gun in his pocket for courage as his default position should physical violence arise??? You would try to justify the shooter's action with hypocrisy?! Nevermind, I guess that question has already been answered...
No, you cannot! So what do you suggest as a remedy:
To pay him back with killing! Your conclusion is baseless from within the argument you just presented. Unbelievably shallow, and frankly unexpected reasoning from you considering the arguments presented in this thread.
Give this man the prize for the understatement of the month.
I dont know where you get your ideas from except personal preference but as former military and law enforcment ypu dont know what you are talking about
If you know so much and are so dang smart, Why is Dr prosecutor and Sheriff in 100% disagreement with you?Without reservation I can say he was either a coward of the worst kind and had no business being out instigating conflicts or a murderer.
I can hardly believe my ears considering your next claim:
Seriously?! Without provocation??? That shooter was out practicing provocation every chance he got!
prov·o·ca·tion
noun
1.
action or speech that makes someone annoyed or angry, especially deliberately.
Do you honestly believe the shooter wasn’t looking for violence in that neighborhood as he habitually went around inspecting people’s cars for handicap permits and berating people with a gun in his pocket for courage as his default position should physical violence arise??? You would try to justify the shooter's action with hypocrisy?! Nevermind, I guess that question has already been answered...
No, you cannot! So what do you suggest as a remedy:
To pay him back with killing! Your conclusion is baseless from within the argument you just presented. Unbelievably shallow, and frankly unexpected reasoning from you considering the arguments presented in this thread.
Give this man the prize for the understatement of the month.
There is a lot of mind reading going on in this thread...
What reflects on CCW permits holders is their defense of this man’s actions under the pretext that the interpretations of this gun law rightfully justifies his behavior. Again, the SYG law was the right to use deadly force if your life was in imminent danger before having first tried to escape, it was never intended to be abused for an excuse to gun someone before they could not escape your retaliation after you got the drop on them.
For the umpteenth time no one here is disputing that McGlockton was wrong to physically escalate the confrontation, but rather the attempts to use it to justify killing him.
Well, by calling the cops it showed he wasn’t trying to take matters into his own hands, with a gun in his pocket for courage, wasn’t in a rough enough neighborhood and probably didn’t have enough attitude – so obviously he wasn’t up to Drejka’s ‘superior standards’.
From that about all I gather you like the idea of vigilantism by means of entrapment, judge, jury and executioner.
This doesn’t address anything I said in rebuttal or support anything you said so besides your claim of expertise I guess I’ll have to take your argument that “ypu dont know what you are talking about” as all you got.
Besides pointing out the matter hasn’t been decided yet by the AG, I’ve already addressed your attempt at the “Appeal to Authority Fallacy” concerning my disagreement with the “not his call double-talking sheriff” in this thread so try to keep up, eh.
A lot of play here toward justifying this killing on the “DEADLY PUSHING assault” by use of LETHAL ASPHALT as a weapon sounds mostly like drama queen acting out considering a 47 year old able bodied man (no sorry, not “severely disabled old man”) got pushed down and the truth is he probably received a little scrapping and bruising at worst and wasn’t helpless handling the fall.
I just turned 60, 13 years older than that 47 year old lump but I doubt that push would have even knocked me off my feet, in truth I don’t see it anymore life threatening than tripping over a curb for an able bodied person if it had, despite the desperation to justify the action of that coward. McGlockton was a bully and his actions were over the top, I despise bullies and it certainly would have ticked me off and I would have taken a defensive stance, to be honest angry enough to hope he advanced again wherein this old man would likely cause some profuse bleeding from the big black bogeyman’s face. At this point my biggest concern would be my endurance if I had to go a couple rounds BUT on the complete other side of the spectrum I wouldn’t have even pulled my gun at this point. When and if I did feel the need to pull my gun to protect my life I would have STILL had enough courage and control not to start killing people knowing I had just surprised him with deadly force that convincingly demanded respect.
I don’t expect everyone to be like me but I do expect someone carrying around deadly force with them not to be out instigating fights while being a complete angry coward and not even having the control, competence and courage to refrain from killing someone for a push from that someone who has clearly backed away from the conflict! He gives CCW holders a bad name…
I don’t go by the “expert rules” that seem to impose that IF you think you can justify using deadly force, you should, and that 3 shots center mass and 2 to the head to insure the threat is neutralized would then be the protocol. Nor, do look upon just 1 shot to the chest to be more civil in the type of situation we got here. Sorry, we’ll have to agree to disagree concerning the rightful origins of that "self-defense" judgment should the situation arise.
I might add, that I think the girlfriend’s claim that he “didn’t do nothing” is stupid and defeating to any argument she could make. Her only hope for justice is to start with the truth, point out the truth or lack of it in the sheriff’s stage setting arguments and to end with the truth.
I just turned 60, 13 years older than that 47 year old lump but I doubt that push would have even knocked me off my feet, in truth I don’t see it anymore life threatening than tripping over a curb for an able bodied person if it had, despite the desperation to justify the action of that coward. McGlockton was a bully and his actions were over the top, I despise bullies and it certainly would have ticked me off and I would have taken a defensive stance, to be honest angry enough to hope he advanced again wherein this old man would likely cause some profuse bleeding from the big black bogeyman’s face. At this point my biggest concern would be my endurance if I had to go a couple rounds BUT on the complete other side of the spectrum I wouldn’t have even pulled my gun at this point. When and if I did feel the need to pull my gun to protect my life I would have STILL had enough courage and control not to start killing people knowing I had just surprised him with deadly force that convincingly demanded respect.
I don’t expect everyone to be like me but I do expect someone carrying around deadly force with them not to be out instigating fights while being a complete angry coward and not even having the control, competence and courage to refrain from killing someone for a push from that someone who has clearly backed away from the conflict! He gives CCW holders a bad name…
I don’t go by the “expert rules” that seem to impose that IF you think you can justify using deadly force, you should, and that 3 shots center mass and 2 to the head to insure the threat is neutralized would then be the protocol. Nor, do look upon just 1 shot to the chest to be more civil in the type of situation we got here. Sorry, we’ll have to agree to disagree concerning the rightful origins of that "self-defense" judgment should the situation arise.
I might add, that I think the girlfriend’s claim that he “didn’t do nothing” is stupid and defeating to any argument she could make. Her only hope for justice is to start with the truth, point out the truth or lack of it in the sheriff’s stage setting arguments and to end with the truth.
For an amateur in fear of their life, once they make the decision to draw their gun, it's usually going to be fired. Two seconds may seem like a long time if you're not afraid someone is going to hurt or kill you. To him, it was most likely all a blur.
Just because you dont see it life threatening doesnt mean he didnt nor does it mean he shouldnt have.
I would agree in that he was an incompetent out of control coward and that in being an incompetent out of control coward he could and possibly would see it as his as his life in danger, therefore I’d give him the benefit of doubt that it wasn’t cold blooded murder and rather could have been manslaughter CAUSED from him being an incompetent out of control gun carrying coward who was contentiously trying to take the law into his own hands and ended up recklessly gunning down a another human being in front of his little boy for being pushed after what any competent person would see that the man had backed away.
You don't get it. Legally, once that fella pushed him down and legally assaulted him he was within legal rights to do what he did. You can call him all the names you want, but you are projecting your own perceptions on him and then judging him by that. Secondly, any judgments made by you are purely hind sight perspective and not from the middle of the situation. Therefore you have failed to put yourself in his shoes. Even so, you might even would have still done exactly as you say he should have. however, within the law you do not just get to assault someone that way. Assault is assault he might as well have punched him, its all the same thing legally.
Calling him childish names does not support your position or make you more right.
Apparently you don’t get it because I have addressed this legal interpretation for what it is and that is an attempt to abuse the law and to give an incompetent person a license to kill. So go ahead and stick your head in the sand on that issue and make the claim of it being justified with out any other considerations. That maybe who you are but not me. Compound that with the habitual actions of the man who instigated this situation and his extremely poor and cowardly judgment and you have a moral dilemma to which it appears your and some other experts here only answer is to justify this killing on the grounds of a push. I could give a rat’s behind about any wannabe cowboys trying to justify this man’s actions. In truth, I believe most of this effort is politically based to support gun rights, I don’t play that game. I call right, right, and wrong, wrong regardless of what side of the rights to bear arms I am on.
No, I have put myself into his shoes and it is beyond any rational reasoning besides extreme paranoia or cold blooded vengeance that a person would respond that way and giving him the benefit of the doubt that it was extreme paranoia due to his obviously proven cowardly, incompetent and angry disposition and I still emphasize with his situation BUT he should not have placed himself that position, period! Therefore, he should be held liable for his irresponsible actions.
Furthermore, it is a dangerous precedence and the total, one-sided (right to bear arms advocacy), unscrupulous defense of his actions not only appears to be irrational to our liberal opponents, but is.
Prior assault does not justify murdering nor does trying to end the discussion on assault = legally justified murder as it does not answer the question of the truth of why a man would put himself into the position of having to make such judgments and fail so miserably in handling it and it especially doesn’t DEAL with the moral dilemma. You can try to overinflate the assault, ignore the fact the attacker had backed off, completely disregard the shooter’s incompetence, and overlook that between the shooter’s disposition and perhaps calculating maneuvers in a rough neighborhood to get himself into such a position, possibly a well-known mental case like some of his neighbors have claimed out looking for trouble and a 5 year old boy who no longer has father and just chalk it up to “being within the law, as written” but I would find that a pretty biased and immaturely shallow thinking.
As long as we're mind reading, I'll say the shooter would go to this gas station.
Not necessarily. The assault is a factor that weighs into the totality of circumstance. The question legally is whether or not the shooter thought he was in imminent danger death or great bodily harm when he fired the shot. In my opinion, he was still in danger. Say the assailant had turned his back and walked away. In that case the shooting would not be justified.
LowOiL
Active Member
Shooting was justified in my opinion, but Darwin awards due to both the driver who parked illegally in the handicap parking spot and the shooter for confronting her in an unprofessional manner.
I am also a daily carrier of a weapon. I agree that I have greatly changed my habits ( being non-confrontational and more cautious). I smile, do my business, get gone and limit my interactions.
I am also a daily carrier of a weapon. I agree that I have greatly changed my habits ( being non-confrontational and more cautious). I smile, do my business, get gone and limit my interactions.