Author Topic: It's legally a good shoot, but  (Read 31678 times)

gunsmith

  • I forgot to get vaccinated!
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,173
  • I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #50 on: July 22, 2018, 09:23:52 PM »
The guy had argued over that parking spot so many times he’d been told by the shop owner to just leave it be.



interesting, you have a cite?

Politicians and bureaucrats are considered productive if they swarm the populace like a plague of locust, devouring all substance in their path and leaving a swath of destruction like a firestorm. The technical term is "bipartisanship".
Rocket Man: "The need for booster shots for the immunized has always been based on the science.  Political science, not medical science."

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,333
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #51 on: July 22, 2018, 10:37:47 PM »
interesting, you have a cite?

Somebody posted a video of the Sheriff's statement on this. He confirmed that, and said things got loud. He didn't say anything about children being in the car, or seeing the action, like De Selby keeps harping on. Funny how he keeps talking about Drejka shooting a man in front of his kids, but doesn't complain about Dad starting said fight.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #52 on: July 22, 2018, 10:46:44 PM »

My point is that having this sort of confrontation would’ve been at least foreseeable to the shooter.
 

What evidence do you have that the shooter is (or was) psychic?
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #53 on: July 22, 2018, 10:52:04 PM »

The only thing that bothered me about the shoot was that the guy hadn't followed up his shove and gotten closer there was a few seconds time between then and the shots.
But the assailant DID follow up the shove by walking over and standing right over the shooter. The assailant then started to back up a bit, which may have been because he saw the victim was reaching for a gun. We don't know what the assailant said between the shove and when he apparently began to back up. When he fist stepped closer he may well have been telling the shooter he was going to stomp him.

I'm still calling it three shots. The video is grainy, but you can see the slide move three times. The third shot, you can also see gunsmoke.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

230RN

  • It's like swimming to shore in an ebb tide.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,826
  • Pushing back. Help me out, here...
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #54 on: July 22, 2018, 11:15:21 PM »
Quote from Hawkmoon, Reply #42, Today at 3:37:10 PM :
Quote
...
A cynical person might even think they had rehearsed that tactic.


Quote from me, Reply #31. Today at 11:43:55 AM :

Quote
...
Addendum:
Looks to me, without seeing the layout of the storefront with respect to the surrounding streets, that they could have parked closer to the store, where there were two or three empty spots right by the entrance, at least in the video portions I saw.  It kind of makes me wonder if they were trying to set up a confrontation.  Or at least one could raise that question.   Not that that matters to the outcome, but.

Thanks for confirming my suspicions, Hawkmoon.

Terry
« Last Edit: July 22, 2018, 11:32:40 PM by 230RN »

De Selby

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,817
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #55 on: July 23, 2018, 06:52:35 AM »
https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/No-arrest-in-fatal-shooting-during-argument-over-handicap-parking-space_170174041


Quote
At the convenience store Friday, customers filed in and out, buying cigarettes, lottery tickets and sodas, many of them familiar with details of the shooting. Mustafa Hashen, a clerk and witness, said both men were regulars.

It wasn’t the first time he saw Drejka in a fight with another customer. A couple of months back, Rick Kelly stopped by the store, parking his tanker truck in the same handicap spot.

The details to Thursday’s incident are similar: Drejka walking around the truck checking for decals, then confronting Kelly, 31, about why he parked there. The fight escalated, and Drejka threatened to shoot him, Kelly said.

"It’s a repeat. It happened to me the first time. The second time it’s happening, someone’s life got taken," Kelly said. "He provoked that."

Quote
Records show Drejka does not have a criminal history in Florida, although the Sheriff’s Office had prior contact with him in 2012 when a driver accused him of pulling a gun during a road rage incident. Drejka denied he showed the gun, and the accuser declined to press charges. McGlockton’s history included a drug conviction in 2010 and an arrest for aggravated battery a decade ago, records show, but the charge was dropped.


The more I watch the video the more it looks to me like he shot as the assailant was backing away.  It’s obviously not okay to shoot in retaliation for a criminal assault.

Running around starting arguments over a parking spot is dumb in the first place. I wonder if the history of threatening to shoot people will weigh on the decision to prosecute or not.
"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #56 on: July 23, 2018, 10:10:52 AM »
I'm not sure its a bad shoot at all.

We only see what the camera sees, and not from the standpoint of the shooter.

From the shooter's point of view, it most certainly could have appeared that the deceased was blading his body away and drawing a firearm- the right hand of the deceased was most likely hidden from view of the shooter, and was at the waist level.

"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,333
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #57 on: July 23, 2018, 11:16:37 AM »
I'm not sure its a bad shoot at all.

We only see what the camera sees, and not from the standpoint of the shooter.

From the shooter's point of view, it most certainly could have appeared that the deceased was blading his body away and drawing a firearm- the right hand of the deceased was most likely hidden from view of the shooter, and was at the waist level.



I don't know about all that, but he hadn't backed away very far. The shooter was on the ground, and his actions after the shooting suggest that he had trouble getting to his feet. So he may have felt trapped by the situation more than the rest of us might.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

gunsmith

  • I forgot to get vaccinated!
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,173
  • I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #58 on: July 23, 2018, 04:45:43 PM »
i had nearly the same thing happen to me about 10 yrs ago, a much larger/younger guy knocked me down, I cleared leather and advised him that a rapid departure
is in his own self interest.
overall, I think the shooter made a mistake and has some culpability but the lions share is the guy knocking him down.
Once you attack someone - some chitchat might get into the fan.

this is a good analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TBXz2_o0KM&t=570s
Politicians and bureaucrats are considered productive if they swarm the populace like a plague of locust, devouring all substance in their path and leaving a swath of destruction like a firestorm. The technical term is "bipartisanship".
Rocket Man: "The need for booster shots for the immunized has always been based on the science.  Political science, not medical science."

JN01

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 883
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #59 on: July 23, 2018, 05:10:20 PM »
What drives me crazy is that every time one of these comes up, the talking heads on TV all claim that "stand your ground" allows anyone to legally use deadly force for no reason as long as they claim they were scared.  They ignore the elements of "reasonableness" that are involved, and people that know better never seem to call them on it.

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #60 on: July 23, 2018, 05:55:51 PM »

this is a good analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TBXz2_o0KM&t=570s

IMHO it's far from a good analysis.

Around the 3:00 mark, the speaker says the shooter created a "conflict." Sorry, but I don't think politely pointing out to someone that he/she is parked in a reserved space and doesn't have the required permit is necessarily initiating a conflict. No, we don't know that his initial words were polite, but we also don't know that they were not.

At around 3:10 he says "Just because you're carrying a firearm does not give you a right to be a jerk, it does not give you a right to get after people and tell them what they should be doing." In reality, everyone has a right to be a jerk, and everyone has a right to tell someone that they're breaking the law. Whether or not you may elect to do so is a personal decision, but we all DO have that right. And it's not dependent on carrying a gun.

4:32 -- "I gotta be honest with you, stand your ground has nothing to do with this event, at any capacity." The sheriff of the jurisdiction seems to disagree, since that was the law he cited in announcing that his office would not pursue charges unless directed to do so by the prosecutor.

5:28 - "Pointing a gun at him, pointing a firearm is not deadly force -- it's force, but it's not deadly force." Florida statutes don't seem to have a definition of "force" vs. "deadly force." In most states, pointing a firearm at someone IS deemed to be use of deadly force. It appears that court precedent in Florida may have established that pointing without firing is "force" rather than "deadly force."

6:04 - "Now notice there's about two seconds here and the problem we're going to see is, is between the draw and pointing it at the guy, and then he took two seconds and the guy was backing away from him and you could see him quartered away from him when the shot went off." The elapsed time on the video does not show a two second delay between drawing and firing. And I still say the video clearly (as clearly as is possible with a grainy image) shows at least three shots, not one.

It goes on. But thanks for posting the link, because I have now identified a trainer from whom I absolutely would not take a course.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Chester32141

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 642
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #61 on: July 23, 2018, 06:19:53 PM »
Sure looks like 3 shots to me which removes the time delay prior to the first shot problem ... this is an election year ... I expect him to be charged ... after all Zimmerman was clearly innocent from day one yet he was charged for political reasons .... The Democrats won't let this event go to waste  ...
 [popcorn]
"The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter...... "

Photos
CBs Hawg Sauce


gunsmith

  • I forgot to get vaccinated!
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,173
  • I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #62 on: July 23, 2018, 06:23:57 PM »
all excellent points - which is why i come here to APS for the real expertise.

one thing i have noticed from my own personal experience is i am a lot less likely to publicly correct someone, stand my ground etc when i carry.
I am a meek fraidy cat when i carry.

my inner nyc jerk arises when im unarmed
Politicians and bureaucrats are considered productive if they swarm the populace like a plague of locust, devouring all substance in their path and leaving a swath of destruction like a firestorm. The technical term is "bipartisanship".
Rocket Man: "The need for booster shots for the immunized has always been based on the science.  Political science, not medical science."

230RN

  • It's like swimming to shore in an ebb tide.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,826
  • Pushing back. Help me out, here...
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #63 on: July 23, 2018, 06:39:14 PM »
I suppose one could gently and smilingly offer "Say, you know, there's a $xxx.xx fine for not having a handicapped sticker here.  Just trying to save you some grief, buddy."

Basically, I'm a wimp too.  Worst I've done is park the store's electric cart right close to the driver's side door and skulk away like the armed coward I am.

I've had a permit for over 15 years and looking back, it's kind of amazing how polite I've become, especially when driving.  And especially since I'm from New York where a graded part of the Driver's Test is hollering invective out the car window and using various Italian gestures.

Terry, 230RN

BobR

  • Just a pup compared to a few old dogs here!
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,246
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #64 on: July 23, 2018, 07:06:23 PM »
Pay attention to the guy that exits the store after the one who does the shoving, it seemed to me he was headed that way to help de-escalate (?) or referee when the gun came out. He suddenly stops and side steps. You can't see the gun come out but his actions tell me he could. The shot was within 2-3 seconds of that. I think the shooter will spend a bundle on a lawyer but will not be charged.

bob

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,243
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #65 on: July 23, 2018, 07:33:59 PM »
IMHO it's far from a good analysis.

Around the 3:00 mark, the speaker says the shooter created a "conflict." Sorry, but I don't think politely pointing out to someone that he/she is parked in a reserved space and doesn't have the required permit is necessarily initiating a conflict. No, we don't know that his initial words were polite, but we also don't know that they were not.

That seems to be a common thing now. Where they attack the person who wasn't breaking the law instead of the one that was. "How else he going to get his money?"
"so I ended up getting the above because I didn't want to make a whole production of sticking something between my knees and cranking. To me, the cranking on mine is pretty effortless, at least on the coarse setting. Maybe if someone has arthritis or something, it would be more difficult for them." - Ben

"I see a rager at least once a week." - brimic

Chester32141

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 642
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #66 on: July 24, 2018, 08:14:16 AM »
The president has a rally in Tampa next week ... Bet the shooter is indicted before then ...  [popcorn]
"The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter...... "

Photos
CBs Hawg Sauce


MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #67 on: July 24, 2018, 09:14:12 AM »
IMHO it's far from a good analysis.

Around the 3:00 mark, the speaker says the shooter created a "conflict." Sorry, but I don't think politely pointing out to someone that he/she is parked in a reserved space and doesn't have the required permit is necessarily initiating a conflict. No, we don't know that his initial words were polite, but we also don't know that they were not.

At around 3:10 he says "Just because you're carrying a firearm does not give you a right to be a jerk, it does not give you a right to get after people and tell them what they should be doing." In reality, everyone has a right to be a jerk, and everyone has a right to tell someone that they're breaking the law. Whether or not you may elect to do so is a personal decision, but we all DO have that right. And it's not dependent on carrying a gun.

4:32 -- "I gotta be honest with you, stand your ground has nothing to do with this event, at any capacity." The sheriff of the jurisdiction seems to disagree, since that was the law he cited in announcing that his office would not pursue charges unless directed to do so by the prosecutor.

5:28 - "Pointing a gun at him, pointing a firearm is not deadly force -- it's force, but it's not deadly force." Florida statutes don't seem to have a definition of "force" vs. "deadly force." In most states, pointing a firearm at someone IS deemed to be use of deadly force. It appears that court precedent in Florida may have established that pointing without firing is "force" rather than "deadly force."

6:04 - "Now notice there's about two seconds here and the problem we're going to see is, is between the draw and pointing it at the guy, and then he took two seconds and the guy was backing away from him and you could see him quartered away from him when the shot went off." The elapsed time on the video does not show a two second delay between drawing and firing. And I still say the video clearly (as clearly as is possible with a grainy image) shows at least three shots, not one.

It goes on. But thanks for posting the link, because I have now identified a trainer from whom I absolutely would not take a course.
I was just watching that this morning and when I reopened this thread.  On the pointing of a gun, I have been told that (at least in Texas) you can't draw and threaten someone with a gun without justification.  Also, the video that Active Self Defense uses starts a little earlier and we see that there are at least 3 parking spots closer to the door when the guy went over to check for tags.  

"Stand Your Ground" doesn't really apply in the traditional sense, but it does apply in the sense that part of Florida law gives the guy some immunity from prosecution as he was defending himself.  

Re-watching it this morning when I saw the Active Self Defense video, I did notice the guy took a few more steps toward him after shoving him.  He does take a step back after seeing the guy drawing a gun, but he didn't exactly retreat.  He is still right there.  I think I see what y'all are seeing in thinking there were three shots.  The footage is pretty grainy to say for sure.  The part I don't like about Active Self Defense is he applies emotion and intent to the shooter confronting the driver that he cannot know and assumes the guy is just some parking nazi being a jerk.  

1.  Yes, he was justified in shooting based on the guy attacking him.  
2.  Yes, he probably could have avoided it by not hanging around to argue with the woman driver.  That is just for 3rd party advice and doesn't remove the shooter's justification.  
3.  He might have gotten through this by just displaying the firearm without shooting, but without audio to know what is being said, that would just be a guess.  I think this idea is eroded by the fact that the guy blindsided him with a shove to the ground without saying a word.  
4.  When it comes to advice for others, Yes, he was in the right and legally justified, but he is probably going to pay for it with legal costs even if it doesn't go to court.  If a civil lawsuit were to be allowed to proceed, he could easily get hurt that way also.  Just something to keep in mind for the rest of us.
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

De Selby

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,817
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #68 on: July 24, 2018, 09:24:42 AM »
Maybe this guy who had a history of threatening to shoot people over that parking spot wasn’t so clean - what if the guy who did the shoving g heard the shooter threaten to shoot his wife? Seems realistic from what the store owner and other victims of the shooters threats had heard
"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #69 on: July 24, 2018, 09:30:11 AM »
Maybe this guy who had a history of threatening to shoot people over that parking spot wasn’t so clean - what if the guy who did the shoving g heard the shooter threaten to shoot his wife? Seems realistic from what the store owner and other victims of the shooters threats had heard
Do you have a cite for the history?  I didn't see that in the links.  The only only other people I see were in the store.  I will grant that one or two more cars had pulled up so someone may have heard a piece of the conversation, but they didn't hear all of it and that still doesn't justify the physical attack. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

De Selby

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,817
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #70 on: July 24, 2018, 09:31:32 AM »
Do you have a cite for the history?  I didn't see that in the links.  The only only other people I see were in the store.  I will grant that one or two more cars had pulled up so someone may have heard a piece of the conversation, but they didn't hear all of it and that still doesn't justify the physical attack.  

https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/No-arrest-in-fatal-shooting-during-argument-over-handicap-parking-space_170174041

Would a physical attack be justified if the shooter had said “I’ll shoot you” or “I’ve got a gun”? Given he both brandished and threatened to shoot someone in the past both are realistic
"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,745
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #71 on: July 24, 2018, 09:37:07 AM »
I was just watching that this morning and when I reopened this thread.  On the pointing of a gun, I was thinking I have been told that (at least in Texas) you can't draw and threaten someone with a gun without justification especially when not on your own property. 

With the caveat that I'm not an "expert", but have taken defensive pistol courses, I think the "Don't draw your gun unless you're going to use it" thing has all too often been, "over-interpreted". I would assume the law in Texas (and likely other states) is there to prevent negligent use of a gun. The problem comes in letter of the law vs spirit of the law.

I think the basic message of, "Don't draw your gun every time you feel threatened, or think you're going to be threatened" is generally good advice. At least to the point of keeping people from being Homer Simpson with the gun bottle opener. However, there are a LOT of situations that can be deescalated if a gun comes into view (as a next to last resort). Certainly, a gun you're ready to use versus "Hey I've got a bloody gun!"

https://youtu.be/A3JMYEKvm8Q
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

Pb

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,887
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #72 on: July 24, 2018, 10:21:30 AM »
Arguing with strangers over handicapped parking is moronic, but not illegal or immoral.  Let us all take note.

Shooting people who violently attack an innocent person is 100% legal and moral. Good shoot, by a stupid person who hopefully learned a lesson. 

I think the real lesson was learned by the thug who though it was acceptable to attack someone else.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #73 on: July 24, 2018, 10:27:19 AM »
With the caveat that I'm not an "expert", but have taken defensive pistol courses, I think the "Don't draw your gun unless you're going to use it" thing has all too often been, "over-interpreted". I would assume the law in Texas (and likely other states) is there to prevent negligent use of a gun. The problem comes in letter of the law vs spirit of the law.

I think the basic message of, "Don't draw your gun every time you feel threatened, or think you're going to be threatened" is generally good advice. At least to the point of keeping people from being Homer Simpson with the gun bottle opener. However, there are a LOT of situations that can be deescalated if a gun comes into view (as a next to last resort). Certainly, a gun you're ready to use versus "Hey I've got a bloody gun!"

https://youtu.be/A3JMYEKvm8Q
I do think there is a difference between drawing and holding it at your side versus pointing it at someone.  When it is discussed, most people just simplify it to not drawing at all.  Without video, someone can lie and claim you pointed the gun and it can be hard to disprove.
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,243
Re: It's legally a good shoot, but
« Reply #74 on: July 24, 2018, 10:27:37 AM »
Maybe this guy who had a history of threatening to shoot people over that parking spot wasn’t so clean - what if the guy who did the shoving g heard the shooter threaten to shoot his wife? Seems realistic from what the store owner and other victims of the shooters threats had heard

I would think that if that was the case the guy wouldn't of stopped after shoving him down, I know I wouldn't of have.
"so I ended up getting the above because I didn't want to make a whole production of sticking something between my knees and cranking. To me, the cranking on mine is pretty effortless, at least on the coarse setting. Maybe if someone has arthritis or something, it would be more difficult for them." - Ben

"I see a rager at least once a week." - brimic