LOCKED - OT:Justifiable?

[tired]

Not trying to start a political debate. I'm an advocate of the 2nd, and own many guns, but I'm not sure about this. Very sad.



usatoday.com

CLEARWATER, Fla.— A recent decision not to charge a man who shot and killed another man in a convenience store parking lot because of Florida’s “stand your ground” law prompted protest Sunday night.

Protesters gathered at the Circle A store on Sunset Point in Clearwater — the scene of the shooting — to express their frustration on how the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office handled the case.

It all started when Markeis McGlockton's girlfriend drove into a parking spot while he walked into the Circle A store.

During a press conference Friday, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri mentioned that a regular customer of the convenience store was frustrated when he saw McGlockton's girlfriend illegally parked in the handicapped spot.

The customer and the girlfriend started yelling at each other after the customer complained to her about parking there, according to deputies.

Another customer went inside to tell the manager about a disturbance outside. McGlockton walked outside and shoved the customer to the ground.

While on the ground, the man shot and hit McGlockton in the chest. McGlokton was taken to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.

Britany Jacobs, McGlockton's girlfriend, told Good Morning America the couple's 5-year-old son also witnessed the shooting.

The man who shot him is being cooperative with deputies and told them he was fearful for his life.

"After being slammed to the ground, he felt he was going to be further attacked," Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said.

More than 20 states have "stand your ground" laws, which generally allow the use of lethal force for self-defense without the duty of trying to escape. "Stand your ground" allows a person to use deadly force if they think they're about to face, "imminent death or great bodily harm." The law has been criticized by parents of slain black teens Jordan Davis and Trayvon Martin.

Protesters say the circumstances of the incident shouldn't categorize it as a "stand your ground" case. Hundreds called for an arrest in the case.

 

[J-Dawg]

This one is tough.

On one hand, it appears that even though a verbal argument was going on, that the deceased was the aggressor due to being the first to resort to physical confrontation. It doesn't help that the deceased appears to be an able-bodied, younger male while the customer appears to be an elderly gentleman. That doesn't bode well for the deceased in my mind, because he undoubtedly "coulda-woulda" had physical advantage over the old man. Just using those points, I would say that under their "Stand Your ground" law, that it was probably warranted.

HOWEVER, after the young man pushes the old man, he takes a few steps towards him then backs away. I believe that could be a signal that the threat was over, and that the shot after would be in retaliation as opposed to self-defense. Stand Your Ground or the Castle Laws only cover you until the threat is diminished, and I'm sure the lawyers on both sides will be arguing if the fact that the deceased "backed off" was the end of the confrontation or not.

Unfortunate situation all around, this covers all the political hot topics.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

I am a gun right believer, not a zealot, and I would call that murder or at least manslaughter. The guy shoved him down and stepped back. He also had no weapon and did not appear to be continuing to try and arm the shooter.

This ain't Tombstone folks. This is not "stand your ground" in my opinion.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

You cannot go around pushing and beating on people just because you disagree with them. That is the big thing in my mind. Yell all you want, but once you physically assault someone, you accept the consequences of what happens after that. That was where the whole thing went wrong. Well, and parking in a handicapped spot.

Looks to me like the guy was about to keep beating on him until he saw the gun.

 

[Shmuley]

Lesson: Mind your own damn business.

 

[J-Dawg]

I am a gun right believer, not a zealot, and I would call that murder or at least manslaughter. The guy shoved him down and stepped back. He also had no weapon and did not appear to be continuing to try and arm the shooter.

This ain't Tombstone folks. This is not "stand your ground" in my opinion.

I'm leaning that way too. The guy looked to have backed off and it was a few seconds later that the old guy pulled and shot. Had the deceased been standing over him or continuing towards him, that's a different story.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

People in general are selfish ******** with no manners. Hate the guy is dead, but they made some stupid moves.
At our local grocery store morons like this view not only handicapped spots as fair game, but the sidewalk, crosswalk, and fire lanes open to all too17ing lazy to walk 50 feet. Constant friction out there between those with manners vs those with none. Just a symptom of bigger issues.
That said, a big guy pushes me like that when I'm already mad, all bets are off. It's why I don't carry. The lack of manners and human decency keep me on edge enough as it is.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

You cannot go around pushing and beating on people just because you disagree with them. That is the big thing in my mind. Yell all you want, but once you physically assault someone, you accept the consequences of what happens after that.

Looks to me like the guy was about to keep beating on him until he saw the gun.

Yes, I can look at it and see that opinion but I don't think the situation called for a gun.

I agree that the deceased had no right to shove a guy like that in the first place just because he was arguing with his girlfriend, but the shooter had no right to shoot him just because he was shoved to the ground. The dead guy did not continue to beat him and it never looked like he began to draw back his fist or go to shove him again.

Pulling a gun that fast is one thing. Actually firing it when the guy was backing up changes everything.

 

[WrapItDog]

HOWEVER, after the young man pushes the old man, he takes a few steps towards him then backs away. I believe that could be a signal that the threat was over, and that the shot after would be in retaliation as opposed to self-defense.

I will play devils advocate. If you watch closely. The aggressor does the universal pull your sagging pants up prior to going into battle. He pulls up his sagging pants and pushes the guy to ground. He backs up and pulls his pants up again and appears to be going in for a second round prior to seeing the gun. He sees gun and backs down but it's too late.

 

[hydrodawg]

You cannot go around pushing and beating on people just because you disagree with them. That is the big thing in my mind. Yell all you want, but once you physically assault someone, you accept the consequences of what happens after that.

Looks to me like the guy was about to keep beating on him until he saw the gun.

The problem with this rational is that if the now-deceased had pulled a gun and shot the guy who was verbally sailing his girlfriend (and who would have later been found to be armed himself) and claimed fear and self defense then he would be spared from prosecution and the other guy would be dead in the parking lot. The way the law 8s written in Florida there are two options to a perceived threat, run for your life or shoot them dead. Any half-measures (aka proportional or reasonsable) and you have set yourself up to be a victim of justifiable lethal force.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Pulling a gun that fast is one thing. Actually firing it when the guy was backing up changes everything.

We agree on the theory.

At the end of the day, though, someone has to decide if the old guy committed a crime and deserves to be punish. The answer is probably no.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

The problem with this rational is that if the now-deceased had pulled a gun and shot the guy who was verbally sailing his girlfriend (and who would have later been found to be armed himself) and claimed fear and self defense then he would be spared from prosecution and the other guy would be dead in the parking lot. The way the law 8s written in Florida there are two options to a perceived threat, run for your life or shoot them dead. Any half-measures (aka proportional or reasonsable) and you have set yourself up to be a victim of justifiable lethal force.

You cannot shoot somebody for a verbal threat. That is the difference in the two aggressors here.

 

[hydrodawg]

Says who? If Florida you need only to perceive a threat, not actually be assaulted.

 

[paindonthurt_]

^This, but there are several lessons here.

Don't park in handicapped spots.
If someone does, mind your business or let authorities know.
Don't escalate a situation.

 

[GoToHellOleMiss.sixpack]

Lesson: Mind your own damn business.

Yep....this my motto. If you want to be a dubmass and live your life like a total 17wad....knock yourself out. Just don't involve me in any of your stupidity and I'll steer clear.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Says who? If Florida you need only to perceive a threat, not actually be assaulted.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ute&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Nos. 2 a and b.

Forcible act has to be occurring or already occurred.

It appears to me the woman was getting out of the car and probably about to hit the guy herself.

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

He confronted the woman about parking in a handicap spot. She's a piece of ****. Call the police... CCL is supposed to teach you to avoid confrontation, not start it. He had no business playing cop in that situation, it was not his property.

I am not sure what percentage, but some percentage of the CCL crowd are emboldened by the power of carrying. These tough guys, ruin it for the rest of the people who have a CCL for the right reasons and attempt to avoid confrontation.

The guy who shoved him was protecting his girlfriend in his mind. Can you imagine your reaction to some strange man yelling at your wife or girlfriend? This is **** that could have been solved with a parking ticket or at most a simple assualt charge. Instead it's a 17 travesty because someone thinks he's Dirty Harry. Manslaughter sounds about right.

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

Need more info

Hard to make an informed judgment on a grainy tape with no sound.

edit. One thing can be determined from the video... there is a whole lot of stupid in it.

 

[hydrodawg]

Deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

Yeah I can cut and paste too. The standard is reasonable believe. And now with a recent amendment the shooter doesn't have to prove their belief. The burden is on the state to prove what the shooter believed. Good luck with that.

 

[engie]

Looks to me like the guy was about to keep beating on him until he saw the gun.

I agree with this. The threat was neutralized once the gun was shown. I'm a strong second amendment supporter, and I think this guy was probably going to keep coming at him. But once the gun was shown, it was over.

How about let's not park in the handicapped spot? And if you do and get called on it, just move. It's simple. There were at least 2-3 open parking spots in the video. And let's not push the old fella down that's mad at your girlfriend for doing something ridiculous? And let's not immediately shoot to kill the guy because you were pushed down. So many ways that could have been mitigated.

 

[OurPrideAndJoySnots]

I will play devils advocate. If you watch closely. The aggressor does the universal pull your sagging pants up prior to going into battle. He pulls up his sagging pants and pushes the guy to ground. He backs up and pulls his pants up again and appears to be going in for a second round prior to seeing the gun. He sees gun and backs down but it's too late.

This is what I see too. Watch the third party reverse direction after the gun is pulled vs how the deceased reacted.

 

[FQDawg]

He confronted the woman about parking in a handicap spot. She's a piece of ****. Call the police...

I agree with the first part but I'm not even sure I agree with the second part. There's no real reason to call the police. Parking in a handicap spot is a ****** thing to do but the likelihood is that she would have been gone in less than five minutes. Mutter under your breath about what a ****** person she is but otherwise mind your own business.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

Yeah I can cut and paste too. The standard is reasonable believe. And now with a recent amendment the shooter doesn't have to prove their belief. The burden is on the state to prove what the shooter believed. Good luck with that.

This is why so many people protest over dumb things. Just admit when you get proven wrong, and move on.

 

[GloryDawg]

That will keep that **** from happening again in Florida.

 

[hydrodawg]

So you admit that you are wrong? I stand by my original statement. Proportional response is not an option in Florida. Their stand your ground law provides two options. Run or kill. Otherwise you're dead yourself.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

I have a conceal carry and do carry. I also have a Handicap tag due to an arthritic hip. With that said in that circumstance I believe I would have pulled my gun, but probably not shot once he backed off. However the shooter probably should get off. Would that guy have pushed down a younger, bigger guy? There was no reason to push that guy down. I can't defend myself like I once could and a confrontation like that would scare me. I also have a hard time getting up after being put on the ground.

 

[hydrodawg]

This is the correct answer. Or kill someone. That is also OK in Florida.

 

[engie]

So you admit that you are wrong? I stand by my original statement. Proportional response is not an option in Florida. Their stand your ground law provides two options. Run or kill. Otherwise you're dead yourself.

I'm not following you here. Option 3 is still show the ability to use excessive force but don't pull the trigger in cases like this one where I believe it could be avoided. Show the gun, the guy backs away, you stfu and get in your car and leave. Of course, you can say in this theoretical scenario the other guy comes back at him with a gun once he withdraws the threat of deadly force on the guy. But nothing was stopping anyone else in that parking lot from coming at him initially. You can't look at the infinite possible scenarios if he doesn't pull the trigger as if they are factual. All we know for sure is the guy doing the threatening was neutralized as soon as he saw the weapon in the immediate sense. And in that sense didn't have to die. But I'm not going to cry very much for the guy assaulting an elder like that for rightly calling out his girlfriend.
-

 

[johnson86-1]

I have a conceal carry and do carry. I also have a Handicap tag due to an arthritic hip. With that said in that circumstance I believe I would have pulled my gun, but probably not shot once he backed off. However the shooter probably should get off. Would that guy have pushed down a younger, bigger guy? There was no reason to push that guy down. I can't defend myself like I once could and a confrontation like that would scare me. I also have a hard time getting up after being put on the ground.

This is where I am, although I don't think he should get off completely. Pulling the gun was fine. A younger, bigger person shoves you down without warning and keeps advancing, definitely time to pull it out. But the guy halted when he saw the gun. Definitely shouldn't have shot him at that point, but I also get that it's easy to say looking at it on video when you're not being threatened and weren't just assaulted. So I don't think he should be looking at jailtime but I do not think he should be let off completely. Maybe it should just be a civil matter now, not criminal, b/c I'm not sure what charge would be appropriate that wouldn't carry significant jail time.

 

[hydrodawg]

I'm not following you here. Option 3 is still show the ability to use excessive force but don't pull the trigger in cases like this one where I believe it could be avoided. Show the gun, the guy backs away, you stfu and get in your car and leave. Of course, you can say in this theoretical scenario the other guy comes back at him with a gun once he withdraws the threat of deadly force on the guy. But nothing was stopping anyone else in that parking lot from coming at him initially. You can't look at the infinite possible scenarios if he doesn't pull the trigger as if they are factual. All we know for sure is the guy doing the threatening was neutralized as soon as he saw the weapon in the immediate sense. And in that sense didn't have to die. But I'm not going to cry very much for the guy assaulting an elder like that for rightly calling out his girlfriend.
-

I appreciate the response and yes, there are infinitely more than three options; however, brandishing a gun in an argument over a parking spot is a piss-poor option.

And again my point. The now-deceased could have pulled a gun and killed the dude standing next to the car. His defense would be "I thought he was going to pull my girl out of the car and assault her based on his words and demeanor." In this case he would be shielded from prosecution. This scenario highlighted the pitfalls of the Fl law specifically. It is far too easy for hothead to get away with murder.

As far as not shedding at tear for a guy who died in an argument over a parking spot, I leave that to your conscious.

 

[hatfieldms]

You. People are crazy these days and you just never know what you are going to run into. I have just made the decision to try to avoid arguments with random strangers whether it is on the road, in a store, or wherever. You never know when some lunatic is going to pull out a gun and shoot you. Hell I was at Dick’s yesterday and was waiting in line. I was next in line for the cashier with 3-4 people behind me. Some guy walks up and stands right in front of me to be the next line and kept glancing back at the group he cut in front of. As much as I wanted to say something it just isn’t worth it.

 

[kired]

There was no reason to push that guy down.

Hard to say that without knowing what the guy was saying to the women in the car. If I walk out of a store to my car, and some dude's yelling at my wife with my kid in the back --- I really can't say what I'd do. I'd like to think I'd be a responsible person and remain somewhat calm, but I also might lose it and knock the guy the 17 out (and then get shot).

It's one thing for someone to confront me - but doing that to my wife & small kid? I can't blame him for pushing the guy. But I also don't let me wife park in handicap spots...

 

[hydrodawg]

This is why so many people protest over dumb things. Just admit when you get proven wrong, and move on.

And I would add this...overzealous defense of these questionable acts is a far greater threat to our 2nd amendment rights than anything the liberals can muster. Once the moderates are turned off then it's "game over".

 

[ronpolk]

It would be pretty hard for me to say that guy didn’t feel pretty damn threatened. He was taken to the ground pretty damn hard.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

Not trying to start a political debate. I'm an advocate of the 2nd, and own many guns, but I'm not sure about this. Very sad.



usatoday.com

CLEARWATER, Fla.— A recent decision not to charge a man who shot and killed another man in a convenience store parking lot because of Florida’s “stand your ground” law prompted protest Sunday night.

Protesters gathered at the Circle A store on Sunset Point in Clearwater — the scene of the shooting — to express their frustration on how the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office handled the case.

It all started when Markeis McGlockton's girlfriend drove into a parking spot while he walked into the Circle A store.

During a press conference Friday, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri mentioned that a regular customer of the convenience store was frustrated when he saw McGlockton's girlfriend illegally parked in the handicapped spot.

The customer and the girlfriend started yelling at each other after the customer complained to her about parking there, according to deputies.

Another customer went inside to tell the manager about a disturbance outside. McGlockton walked outside and shoved the customer to the ground.

While on the ground, the man shot and hit McGlockton in the chest. McGlokton was taken to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.

Britany Jacobs, McGlockton's girlfriend, told Good Morning America the couple's 5-year-old son also witnessed the shooting.

The man who shot him is being cooperative with deputies and told them he was fearful for his life.

"After being slammed to the ground, he felt he was going to be further attacked," Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said.

More than 20 states have "stand your ground" laws, which generally allow the use of lethal force for self-defense without the duty of trying to escape. "Stand your ground" allows a person to use deadly force if they think they're about to face, "imminent death or great bodily harm." The law has been criticized by parents of slain black teens Jordan Davis and Trayvon Martin.

Protesters say the circumstances of the incident shouldn't categorize it as a "stand your ground" case. Hundreds called for an arrest in the case.

I saw the video a few days ago and reading the comments I also believed at first he shouldn’t have fired. But after watching it again a few times that wasn’t a push down of an old man. He slammed him with a head rocking whiplash. The old guy was probably shaken and panicked.

It should have never come to this but in 2018 this is the culture. Punk got what he deserved. Punk could have also de-escalated but he did the opposite. Maybe other punks will watch and learn

 

[NWADawg]

I would like to know what was being said. I can't hear anything in the video. If the pusher was verbally threatening the old man, then maybe I can see self defense. If the pusher is telling his girlfriend, "let's get out of here", that's a totally different scenario. Actual probably lies somewhere in between.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

How about let's not park in the handicapped spot? And if you do and get called on it, just move. It's simple. There were at least 2-3 open parking spots in the video. And let's not push the old fella down that's mad at your girlfriend for doing something ridiculous? And let's not immediately shoot to kill the guy because you were pushed down. So many ways that could have been mitigated.

As a person who needs those spaces, I agree totally. It grinds my gears when someone does this. My favorite is putting up an expired tag and parking there. But I haven't gotten mad enough to ***** someone out over it.

All parties share part of the blame for this happening and if you delete any other part, you probably get a different result.

However, I still don't think you can pull the trigger on a guy for pushing you down. If you do, what's the next step?

As far as gun rights go, this isn't a gun's right issue... This is a gun's use issue.

 

[Lawdawg.sixpack]

And again my point. The now-deceased could have pulled a gun and killed the dude standing next to the car. His defense would be "I thought he was going to pull my girl out of the car and assault her based on his words and demeanor." In this case he would be shielded from prosecution.

Not exactly. It still has to be a REASONABLE belief that deadly force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. We don't know all the facts (what the shooter was saying to the woman, etc.). But in your hypothetical, the belief doesn't seem reasonable.

The burden is on the state to prove what the shooter believed.

This is wrong. Burden is on the state to show that the shooter intentionally shot the victim. Burden is on the shooter to prove his stand-your-ground defense, i.e. what he believed.

 

[ckDOG]

Tough one. I guess I could view it from either side.

1) Would I fear for my life as an old guy after being slammed to the ground? Maybe if the guy was younger and stronger and still approaching me.

2) Would I shove the hell out of an old guy if he's arguing with my wife with child nearby? Maybe if it's an intense argument.

If you made me pick the biggest mistake out of the whole ordeal - it's the man with the CCL placing himself into an argument. It you are carrying, you don't create conflict. That's exactly what he did there and was very irresponsible. You call the authorities and report it. That's the only responsible reaction from an armed or unarmed person but even more important if you have a loaded weapon on your person. Just mind your business and hope karma or the law gets even.

 

[hydrodawg]

Not exactly. It still has to be a REASONABLE belief that deadly force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. We don't know all the facts (what the shooter was saying to the woman, etc.). But in your hypothetical, the belief doesn't seem reasonable.



This is wrong. Burden is on the state to show that the shooter intentionally shot the victim. Burden is on the shooter to prove his stand-your-ground defense, i.e. what he believed.

Afraid not

www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/0128

The state must adjudicate "reasonable" and holds the burden of proving intent to overcome the defense.