That is very true.Once you choose to assault another person, all bets are off in terms of their response
Fu*k you. I'm crying for him and I do not support violence.Good shoot? Well, legal shoot at least. While Florida needs to set a higher standard for the use of deadly force in the future, this is in bounds as the law is written now.
That being said, absolutely no tears will I shed for the dead thug. Don't assault people, don't get shot. Words to live by.
Yeah but those who legally carry weapons should be very careful not to get into arguments.Good shoot? Well, legal shoot at least. While Florida needs to set a higher standard for the use of deadly force in the future, this is in bounds as the law is written now.
That being said, absolutely no tears will I shed for the dead thug. Don't assault people, don't get shot. Words to live by.
Fu*k you. I'm crying for him and I do not support violence.
If you thought someone you loved was being harassed or threatened you'd act 100% appropriately? You had better or make your peace with "God". Is that it?
And yet too many of them feel emboldened by their detached dicks. They get their guns and fantasize about the occasions in which they can whip it out and rape the life out of people with them.Yeah but those who legally carry weapons should be very careful not to get into arguments.
That’s why the woman’s husband should have been armed and shot the guy who got verbally aggressive.Once you choose to assault another person, all bets are off in terms of their response
You should be required to have a reasonable fear for your life or grave bodily harm.That’s why the woman’s husband should have been armed and shot the guy who got verbally aggressive.
Florida’s stand your ground law says as long as you fear for your life and have a right to be where you are you may use deadly force. So always be armed and shoot first and you’ll make it home. /s
What the fu*k is wrong with you?You're arguing against your own position here. Given how stupid that position is, it's no wonder.
So the dead thug saw someone TALKING to a person sitting in a car and has enough fear that the person was being threatened to commit a violent assault to remove the threat and that's okay to your sad little bleeding heart. But the person that was assaulted, after having been attacked once and faced with a known enemy still moving forward is not entitled to take steps to remove the threat? Gotcha. Yep, no contradictions there.
I hereby promise that if I ever assault another person without provocation I will not complain whatever happens to me and I hereby absolve you of the need to shed tears on my behalf because even I am gunned down my criminal ass had it coming for attacking another person who could rightly fear for their own life.
If there are people anywhere behaving poorly/inappropriately (like that never happens) and one or both have a gun (like that never happens) reactions are often out of proportion; justification is needed.https://nypost.com/2018/07/20/stand...r-in-deadly-fight-over-parking-space-sheriff/
Video of incident at link.
Summary. Man starts argument with woman for parking in a handicap spot without a permit. Husband of woman comes out and sees argument and pushes man to the ground but then steps back. Man on ground pulls out a gun and shoots the husband in the chest. He dies.
It has been ruled he can not be charged under Florida's current stand your ground laws.
If I legally carried a deadly weapon, I'll do my best not to be an asshole and avoid getting into arguments with complete strangers.You know how most people with dash cams are assholes just because they have a dash cam? This may be a case where the guy with the gun is overstepping his authority because he is carrying around steel courage. So I wonder if the guy would have not confronted the woman if he didn't have a gun.
Also, what gives him the right to enforce the law? That's not his job and because he took it upon himself someone is now dead and a family now has no father or husband. If he had made a phone call this would have never happened. This is his fault for taking the law into his own hands.
And so would I. We have police that can't handle that responsibility so what makes every Tom, Dick and Harry think that they can?If I legally carried a deadly weapon, I'll do my best not to be an asshole and avoid getting into arguments with complete strangers.
People who take their religion seriously may have imbibed and sufficiently absorbed the apophthegm, 'resist not evil' to the degree they may let pass a handicap parking violation but we will never know watching YouTube.If I legally carried a deadly weapon, I'll do my best not to be an asshole and avoid getting into arguments with complete strangers.
You know how most people with dash cams are assholes just because they have a dash cam? This may be a case where the guy with the gun is overstepping his authority because he is carrying around steel courage. So I wonder if the guy would have not confronted the woman if he didn't have a gun.
Also, what gives him the right to enforce the law? That's not his job and because he took it upon himself someone is now dead and a family now has no father or husband. If he had made a phone call this would have never happened. This is his fault for taking the law into his own hands.
AFAIK here in IL, if someone enters your place, you just can't shoot him. That person has to be an actual threat or give you good reason to believe that he is.
I agree.Knocked to the ground, that's not just a threat - violence has been used against him.
Approaching while on the ground, that's the threat of more violence. He wasn't wrong to be afraid.
The issue is this: He draws the gun, but should he use it? Should he fire and kill the person? The gun was being respected, he was backing down. That points towards deescalation unless he was retreating to grab his own weapon. But that is an unknown risk. The actual risk was diffused before he killed the assailant. Then there is the fact that he did instigate the conflict in the first place. He gets no points for doing that.
He was not wrong to be afraid, but he was completely wrong to pull that trigger. If our laws do not reflect that - then our laws need to change.
The way the murderer was jutting his neck forward to emphasize his words he wasn't talking gently enough for it to be mistaken for a conversation about adorable puppies.I don't think he was trying to be a cop, he was just miffed that she parked in a handicap spot. You don't get mad when you see that or people taking 2 spaces or parking up against your door?
It's impossible to say from the video, but it doesn't look like it was a heated argument between the lady and the shooter. It got out of hand when the husband pushed the shooter so hard he fell to the ground.