Weaponry; Discussion of Rights and Responsibilities

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Unless the shooter was physically assaulting the woman, which doesn't seem to be the case as far as I can find out, just yelling, then physical violence is not justified.

If the shooter had tried pulling his gun than anyone would have been justified in laying him out with a well placed punch, for escalating a simple squabble into a deadly conflict. AFAIK, the thug was not aware the shooter had a gun, and thus felt courageous enough to get thuggish with him and push him down. Correct me if any of the above is wrong.

All else aside, the thug was committing assault in defense of a crime, i.e. illegal parking. No prosecutor wants to touch that.

actually I still say but Thug in all this was the shooter himself and here's why I know if you ever consulted with the police about this that they told him not to confront the people about the parking space they probably told him to take a picture and send it to him and they would handle it and it might even had him download an app to do such a thing I know this because I've dealt with disabled people who have had such concerns and that's exactly what they told them to do. Heck, the customer sales are not going to be confronting people about parking spaces, they are going to write the ticket and keep it moving. What Mr. Mcglockton did he did in protection of is mate and not out of thuggery of nobody's going to be able to tell me what to do about some parking spot. apparently he was told about somebody at cost and his mate outside and that's why he responded.

[LadyLuck]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

What Mr. McGlockton did he did in protection of is mate and not out of thuggery of nobody's going to be able to tell me what to do about some parking spot. apparently he was told about somebody at cost and his mate outside and that's why he responded.

Protecting her from what? It was an argument over a parking space in which she had parked her car illegally. She hasn't mentioned in any of the interviews I have seen that the man touched her in any way. They were arguing over the parking space. Her boyfriend comes outside and his first instinct is physical violence instead of walking up and asking "What is going on here?" or "What's the problem?". "Nobody's gonna tell me what to do about some parking spot". Right. "I'll park wherever I want. Screw the law. I'll shove whoever I want". Dude resorted to violence as his first option and it cost him his life. Get over it.

[Rogerbh]

McGlockton was guilty of battery. There was no immediate fear of bodily harm.

If everyone who pushes, throws a punch or kicks someone - is shot in retaliation, the streets will be full of gunshot victims.

I agree that you should shoot if you are in immediate fear of bodily harm. I didn't see it here when he was on his butt and the guy wasn't charging him.

Trayvon Martin was trying to smash Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

Michael Brown Jr. was trying to disarm a police officer in a police vehicle.

I would have shot both of them as well.

I would not have shot McGlockton.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by LadyLuck

Protecting her from what?

Protecting her from a random guy accosting her. He had no idea that he was crying over the parking spot he just knew that he was accosting his mate.

Originally Posted by LadyLuck

It was an argument over a parking space

which I totally blame the shooter for. what parking enforcement do you know goes out there and confront drivers over a parking space? He went out there looking for trouble and escalated this whole situation.

Originally Posted by LadyLuck

in which she had parked her car illegally. She hasn't mentioned in any of the interviews I have seen that the man touched her in any way. They were arguing over the parking space.

so we basically was playing a role of a law enforcement officer while not being one can you see where the confusion could come in?

Originally Posted by LadyLuck

Her boyfriend comes outside and his first instinct is physical violence instead of walking up and asking "What is going on here?" or "What's the problem?". "Nobody's gonna tell me what to do about some parking spot". Right. "I'll park wherever I want. Screw the law. I'll shove whoever I want".

I'm still trying to figure out why did the guy confront them over the parking space law enforcement is it going to do that and then curves their officers not to do so all of this could have been avoided if he would have just took a picture and sent it off to the cops

Originally Posted by LadyLuck

Dude resorted to violence
as his first option and it cost him his life. Get over it.

my question is how does stand your ground apply in this situation but not in the exact situation that happened a couple days prior? There the Killer is facing a second-degree murder charge for killing a guy over a handicap spot in Fort Lauderdale.

[bowlinggreen]

The whole situation is kind of sticky, there is assholery on both sides.

It's quite logical to argue the shooter was in danger of great bodily harm, people have been severely injured by being pushed to the ground, if they hit their head on a hard surface like a parking lot. You could argue as a defense attorney that the shooter was dazed and confused by being pushed down, when he fired. Also, we don't know what further damage the thug might have inflicted, if the shooter had NOT pulled his gun.

On the other side, the thug was apparently backing off when the shooter fired, which would not bode well for the shooter where I live, he probably would have got charged with something.

I think if I were the prosecuting attorney, I would have charged him with something, and then let him plead it down in court - the upshot and the goal being to relieve the shooter of his carry permit, given that he had apparently threatened to shoot people before. Taking away Drejka's gun would be in the interest of public safety to me, as an officer of the court.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Where I live, he probably would have got charged with something.

as I posted previously there was a similar incident a couple days ago. Guy killed another over a handicapped parking space in Florida and now he's facing a second-degree murder charge. That's the thing about the law it is so selectively applied it seems to be reserved for only certain demographics.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

as I posted previously there was a similar incident a couple days ago. Guy killed another over a handicapped parking space in Florida and now he's facing a second-degree murder charge. That's the thing about the law it is so selectively applied it seems to be reserved for only certain demographics.

I think it also varies, though, from place to place. Where I live it is mostly white, and I think if that had happened here the guy would have been charged regardless just because the people here don't have a lot of patience with violence in public, legal or not.

In Florida, it's different, aside from it being in the South, you have all those well-to-do retirees down there afraid of getting robbed, so I bet the unofficial attitude is, keep the dark-skinned people in line and bust them for every little thing to make the rich old folks happy, lest they get scared of Floridian crime and decide to retire to someplace else warm instead.

[Rogerbh]

Doesn't Hackenbush live in Florida? Didn't he say there were parts of Florida where if you go off the highways, some of the neighborhoods are extremely dangerous?

I can see why people are trigger happy there.

My area, like yours, punishes everyone who uses a gun illegally and usually those who use one legally too.

[HugoHackenbush]

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

Doesn't Hackenbush live in Florida? Didn't he say there were parts of Florida where if you go off the highways, some of the neighborhoods are extremely dangerous?

I can see why people are trigger happy there.

I do, but I think someone else said that. Every large city has dangerous parts, but Miami is not nearly as dangerous as it used to be in the "Cocaine Cowboys" era.


I have a gun, and have not fired it anywhere but on a gun range. Now was I glad I had it after a hurricane left me without power for ten days? Yep.


IMHO in the McGlockton case the shooter should have been charged with manslaughter, as he created a dangerous situation that escalated.

[LadyLuck]

Originally Posted by HugoHackenbush

IMHO in the McGlockton case the shooter should have been charged with manslaughter, as he created a dangerous situation that escalated.

Here's a good layman's explanation of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" statute:

https://www.blakedorstenlaw.com/flor...f-defense.html

Like many laws it's written in rather vague parlance. Looking at the video IMO the threat was neutralized as soon as he drew his weapon. He had every right to draw it but based on what I see he should have held off pulling the trigger. I think the matter would have been concluded at that point. If McGlockton still advances after that then shoot him. If they study all of this and end up charging him I won't lose any sleep over it.

That said, I have no sympathy for McGlockton. I have no sympathy for anyone who resorts to physical violence and ends up on a slab. That is the point at which this situation escalated from an argument over a parking space to someone being killed.