We are an entitled, petty, barbaric country: Handicapped parking shooting

#201
#201
InVOLuntary said:
After watching it again, the man never really was a threat to the woman. He stayed several feet away. The dude should have never reacted the way he did by pushing him to the ground. He owns a significant portion of the the blame here. The shooter never should have shot imo. He was definitely in a compromised position on the ground. He stayed there for some time, even after he pulled the trigger. Plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

It's ashame someone had to lose their life over something so trivial. I never have one iota of sympathy towards people who are killed in commission of a crime, armed or not. But this sad all around.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Trivial. Sad man.

In his remarks Friday, the sheriff added that while others can debate the law as it applies in this incident, "I just ask everybody to understand ... I don't make the law. But I will enforce the law and I will enforce it fairly as the legislature has directed that it be enforced. And under these circumstances, this fits within the framework that the Florida Legislature has crafted."

Sheriff Gualtieri says there's no evidence that Drejka posed a threat to McGlockton's family, it was strictly a verbal argument, but McGlockton did engage in unlawful conduct when he pushed Drejka.

"Markeis wouldn't be dead if Markeis didn't slam this guy to the ground," Gualtieri said.
 
#206
#206
In all seriousness, I'm sitting in a handicap spot right now. Better move before someone tries to confront me over it.
 
#207
#207
Squints said:
Fair enough.

I’m not an attorney, either, but with as much as LG bills clients for time spent on VN, it’s looking more and more lucrative by the minute.
Click to expand...

Admit it. If you could bill your clients for time spent on VN, you'd do it.
 
#210
#210
InVOLuntary said:
Good point. That way my wife who is in physical therapy because she had a hip replacement two weeks ago can trek a little further with her walker.
Click to expand...

I should have asked if you were permitted to use one. My apologies and I hope your wife has a speedy recovery.
 
#213
#213
Grand Vol said:
Admit it. If you could bill your clients for time spent on VN, you'd do it.
Click to expand...

200.gif
 
#217
#217
InVOLuntary said:
It's all therapy. I might as well get something out of it. I do feel a tad bit guilty when she comes back with the wrong stuff though and I make her go back and get it right.
Click to expand...

If you don’t correct her she’ll never learn.

Did she fall walking from the bedroom to the kitchen?
 
#221
#221
T-TownVol said:
Something to consider......there was another man also coming at the man that was already on the ground......the shooter has every right to think he was about to be beaten by two men when he pulled the gun...........still does not prove need to actually shoot......
Click to expand...

This could be a game changer, but I would have to see the other man...if he was coming in a threatening manner and could have been easily thought to be another assailant...could change things...but no matter what, no matter what...there is still time to brandish the firearm, communicate the willingness to use it...AND NOT FIRE THAT DAMN WEAPON. This whole thing changed for me when I found out he is 47 years old. No excuse, unless they were stomping on his arse on the pavement,for him to shoot them up
 
#222
#222
marcusluvsvols said:
This could be a game changer, but I would have to see the other man...if he was coming in a threatening manner and could have been easily thought to be another assailant...could change things...but no matter what, no matter what...there is still time to brandish the firearm, communicate the willingness to use it...AND NOT FIRE THAT DAMN WEAPON. This whole thing changed for me when I found out he is 47 years old. No excuse, unless they were stomping on his arse on the pavement,for him to shoot them up
Click to expand...
shoot them up?
 
#223
#223
Grand Vol said:
The assault argument won't hold water because the victim in this case clearly is no longer a threat. I don't think anyone will argue brandishing the weapon wasn't lawful. But you back off at that point, get the tag and let the cops sort it out.
Click to expand...

"Clearly"?

It seems to me police are given a lot of leeway in shootings due to perceived danger. If you had an officer that had been violently shoved to the ground, postured over and then the aggressor moved back two steps when they saw your officer's gun...

...only to then turn his right side away from the officer and reach to his blind side hip...

Would you give your officer as little leeway as this citizen on what was "clearly" a non-danger? Or that the officer should have clearly not felt as though he was in physical danger any longer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#224
#224
Barbaric? Come on. I would say a great majority of the people in this country are wonderful people regardless of race, religion or anything else. We have our problems, but we always will. Sure of a helluva lot more civilized than most places in this world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#225
#225
orange_crush said:
"clearly"?

It seems to me police are given a lot of leeway in shootings due to perceived danger. If you had an officer that had been violently shoved to the ground, postured over and then the aggressor moved back two steps when they saw your officer's gun...

...only to then turn his right side away from the officer and reach to his blind side hip...

Would you give your officer as little leeway as this citizen on what was "clearly" a non-danger? Or that the officer should have clearly not felt as though he was in physical danger any longer?
Click to expand...

cropped.jpg

crop2.png



Sorry for the bad first pic.

First is 1:07. he is standing over the guy he's just blindsided and layed out. The (eventual) shooter is laying pretty helplessly as the guy seems to be posturing over him, and is actually still moving in as if to continue the attack.

Once the aggressor sees the gun, he steps back two steps and turns his right side away from the guy on the ground with the gun. This seems from the camera angle and common sense to be a natural movement, as you will reflexively want to present as small a target as you can.

But as you can see in the second picture (1:10 in video time, a mere three seconds since he's been towering over the man he's just layed out), what he's actually done is obfuscated his right side from the shooter's view and put his hand approx hip-high.

If I were the shooter's attorney, I would point all this out, ask how he could be expected to know there's not a gun there, and how we can expect him to not be afraid a mere 3 seconds after the guy who laid him out was still moving in on him and apparently reaching for his own gun.

Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top