Florida's Stand your ground to be tested

[aztek]

Just now, Regi said:

What I see is that the other two people in the video also either create distance or take cover once that guy pulled out a gun.

 

so?  what is that supposed to prove?

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, lost_shaman said:

Exactly right. Drejka is hiding out in his home right now afraid to even leave his house! Not knowing if any moment the police will knock down his front door and arrest him. And if you look at different youtube videos there are hundreds of people calling for Black Men to step up and Literally lynch the Man, Literally Lynch him as in the true sense of the word!!

God forbid that situation ever came on me.  I'm old enough to be willing to die to make a point and protect my freedom.  I don't want to harm a soul, never have been someone that looked to intentionally harm others but in a case where a crowd came to my door to pull me out... it wouldn't end well for a LOT of us.  

[Regi]

4 minutes ago, lost_shaman said:

McGlockton saw he was about to be shot and stepped back while he was in the act of being shot.

He was stepping back when he was shot.

[Regi]

2 minutes ago, aztek said:

so?  what is that supposed to prove?

To me, it proves that the mere threat of being shot is quite effective. 

[aztek]

Just now, Regi said:

To me, it proves that the mere threat of being shot is quite effective. 

yea it usually is, but not always, he was not gonna take that chance, and MG gave him good reason not to.

[lost_shaman]

23 minutes ago, Regi said:

What I see is that the other two people in the video also either create distance or take cover once that guy pulled out a gun

The law allows you to defend your self if you feel threatened from further bodily harm or death, if your attacker sees you are aiming to fire at them ofcourse they are going to step back or flentch, but that fact doesn't require you to stand down while in the act of aiming and firing.

Read the law. There is no such caveat that requires you to stand down once you are in fear for your life or further bodily harm once you decide to pull and fire your weapon. Unless it's absolutely clear the attacker is in a full retreat. i.e. you can't shoot someone in the back. 

Edited August 1, 2018 by lost_shaman

[Regi]

Just now, lost_shaman said:

The law allows you to defend your self if you feel threatened from further bodily harm or death, if your attacker sees you are aiming to fire at them ofcourse they are going to step back or flentch, but that fact doesn't require you to stand down while in the act of aiming and firing.

The way I see it, once Drejka pulled his gun, it was over for McGlockton.

[+and-then]

6 hours ago, Kismit said:

No. I know most handicapped people would park elsewhere, like the park by the door with the ramp and either complain to the shop assistant or actively shame the poor parking. 

I have no idea what thier age has to do with it.

Drejka was looking for a fight. Heven drove up to the vehicle, with the intent of policing that park (which is not his job). He walked around the vehicle, which gave him enough time to see there was no permit for the park, and also that it was a young woman alone with two small children in the vehicle. He may have said,"did you realise this is a disabled carpark? There are other car parks over yonder you could use". She may have responded my partner will be out in a secondition and we will be gone."  That's is all any of us actually has a right to do unless we are licensed to police those parks. 

However Drejka spends a lot more time than that saying whatever he says. I don't know what he says but I don't think he is passing the time of day.  And let us go back and remember Drejka is a 47 year old, able bodied man who has a loaded weapon, standing outside of a vehicle with a young woman alone, with her two small children. 

That's intimidation. Why should anyone allow another human being to intimidate thier wife and 4month old and 3 year old?

A couple of points here.  Kismit, there is a LOT of speculation going on about what words were exchanged.  I even did a small amount of it myself, based on his body language and arm gestures.  The truth is that none of us KNOW what was said or who might have escalated the language into something nasty.  We do know from her own mouth that she didn't respect handicap parking spaces because she said "I have my right to park anywhere I want" AND in an interview on TV she was shaking her head in dismay and sadness (it appeared to me) that he was bothering her over a "handicap parking space" as though it was a ridiculous thing for anyone to do.  Able-bodied people who park in those zones here in the South are regularly shamed, even if it's only with non-verbal communication.  People who have loved ones who use wheelchairs or have difficulty with breathing and carry O²  get angry when they see young people who just don't care.  Technically, in most states, it is within the rights of a citizen to call another citizen out for public lawbreaking though most people these days just ignore it.  I can't defend Dejka's seeming habit or possible obsession with this issue but even if he did do this more than once, he did not threaten this woman verbally or try to intimidate her physically.  I know this is true from a report by the police that she and other witnesses did not claim that he threatened her or that she threatened him and the video proves he did not get close enough to touch her nor did he fill his hand with a weapon until he was getting up off the ground.

Hyperbolic remarks have been made here that she was "abused, threatened, that he "got in her face" and that he was yelling and cursing.  Psyche even made a comment that he'd have had to read the guy's mind to know.  He said something like, he's done this before and this time he wanted to feel the thrill of shooting.  I paraphrase but that was his gist.  People have gotten way over the top emotional about this and they don't even live here.  Dejka is unable to leave his home for fear he'll be lynched.  I'm only guessing and I hope I'm wrong but I think a couple of people here would think his lynching was justice.  I hope the police release the incident report to verify which if any of those charges are valid.  

We have Sharpton coming down to stir the pot and try to drum up some cash out of the situation.  From the looks of Dejka's car, I doubt he has anything worth suing him for civilly but expect Benjamin Crump (her attorney and the guy who handled Trayvon Martin's case) to go for the deep pockets and sue the store owner for not having a secure place of business or maybe even for knowing Dejka had done this before and not somehow stopping him (as though he could get a restraining order for such a thing).  From this point on it's about money and stirring the RACE pot.

At some point these incidents are going to break into full-fledged gunfights in parking lots or even inside stores.  I don't mean to go off-topic but this is an indication also of the toxicity of our media since half of us had the audacity to vote against the Prog agenda.  Most armed Americans are carrying for their safety and that of their family and want no part of ever having to use the weapon.  If these kinds of incidents begin to become more common because of anger stirred by Sharpton and his ilk, they may become a lot quicker to draw and defend. THAT's going to be very bad for all of us.

[lost_shaman]

Just now, Regi said:

The way I see it, once Drejka pulled his gun, it was over for McGlockton.

Yes. It was, unless McGlockton had raised his hands in the universal sign of "don't shoot" or if he had turned his back to Drejka. McGlockton did not do those things. 

[Regi]

2 minutes ago, lost_shaman said:

Yes. It was, unless McGlockton had raised his hands in the universal sign of "don't shoot" or if he had turned his back to Drejka. McGlockton did not do those things. 

McGlockton was backing away, which is enough for me.

[+and-then]

1 minute ago, lost_shaman said:

Yes. It was, unless McGlockton had raised his hands in the universal sign of "don't shoot" or if he had turned his back to Drejka. McGlockton did not do those things. 

Exactly.  Had McG done EITHER of those things and Dejka still fired then I'd be calling him a murderer.  As it was, it was a tragic escalation between people who all seemed a little p***ed and privileged and the final straw was McG causing Dejka's body to leave his feet and hit the pavement so hard that it rattled him.  THAT fact alone could be used by an attorney to argue that Dejka couldn't have been sure McG was backing away.  That and the fact that Jacobs was also in proximity and moving or had been moving and distracted him.  NO ONE can know what he was thinking and if he was in fear for his life, SYG is a justified shield for him and any other citizen in that place.  I'd be saying exactly the same thing if McG had been Caucasian, Asian or other.  People have to learn in this day and time that putting your hands violently on strangers is a really bad idea.

[lost_shaman]

Just now, Regi said:

McGlockton was backing away, which is enough for me.

It's not enough for the Law. So people like you are the problem. You don't even bother to learn what the law says and just want to act how you feel. That's a major problem and you are admittedly a part of that problem then. 

[lost_shaman]

You can't act how you "feel"! You have to act within the letter of the Law. If you act how you "feel" you are subject to the consequences that the actual Law allows Law abiding citizens to defend themselves. That is likely to end up badly for you. 

[Regi]

What I've expressed here is what I think and it's based on what I've observed and not on how I "feel"!

[+and-then]

1 minute ago, Regi said:

McGlockton was backing away, which is enough for me.

Yes, he backed up 2 steps and instinctively turned his body to provide a smaller target.  That's something anyone would do.  If I saw a gun pulled on me, I'd yell stop and put my hands in the air as high as I could reach.  If you watch the video at full speed you see him WALK, not run, to challenge McG.  He never says anything because Dejka never reacts to him at all.  He slams him hard enough for his feet to leave the ground and his body goes airborne a short distance and hits the pavement.  I'm 10 years older than Dejka and I suspect I'd have trouble getting up at all but even he had to have had his cage rattled a bit.  As he's getting up, McG, arresting his momentum, takes 3 more steps in Dejka's direction and shoves his hands down by his sides to pull his pants up.  Dejka's head is toward him at that point and he could easily have thought he was coming either to beat him down or to pull a gun and shoot him.  EITHER of those scenarios was possible at that moment. Jacobs had gotten out of the car on his right and was moving, also.  He changed his focus to her for a moment, then he reacquired McG and shot him once.  Making decisions about what a person should do when we are not flooded with adrenaline and fear is, at best, unfair.  McG acted like a thug and he died a thug's death.  That is just the truth.  No one here was a saint but he was the only one to initiate violence.

[Kittens Are Jerks]

1 hour ago, lost_shaman said:

Yes. That's exactly what SYG laws empower you to do. Look up the law and read it very carefully until you understand what it says. 

I have a better idea. YOU look up the law and read it very carefully until you understand what it says.

Chapter 776 of the 2108 Florida statute, Justifiable Use of Force, section 776.012 specifically.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

Note the circumstance contemplated in 776.012(1) where a person is authorised to use force but not deadly force. A person is not granted the right to pull out a gun and shoot someone every time they are pushed, shoved, or punched. They can push, shove or punch back, but such physical altercations do not necessarily grant the victim the right to kill someone.

Deadly force is authorised only in extreme circumstances where, as according to 776.012(2), a person reasonably believes that it's necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.  In other words, a person using deadly force must reasonably believe it’s necessary.

McGlockton used force; Drejka used deadly force.

This is not a subjective test by the way, regardless of what the Sheriff involved stated. In other words, it isn’t whether Drejka was afraid or believed he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, but rather, whether his belief was reasonable.

A couple of articles you should read:

NRA, Republicans refute GOP sheriff's stand-your-ground claims
https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2018/07/30/nra-republicans-refute-gop-sheriffs-stand-your-ground-claims-534054

NRA, GOP Lawmakers Reject Florida Sheriff’s Application of Stand-Your-Ground Law
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/nra-gop-lawmakers-reject-florida-sheriffs-application-of-stand-your-ground-law/

[+OverSword]

On 7/30/2018 at 10:56 PM, psyche101 said:

Really how did this happen then? 

It would seem not in this case. 

 

 

You have not only read the post wrong, I told you directly that was the case and your interpretation was incorrect. No edit mark to prove what you said, nothing to support your accusation and clarification directly from the poster  yet you continue to make the accusation. 

Your wrong and won't admit to it.

I see what you're saying now.  I didn't click the link before and the edit mark doesn't show up in your quote.  I was wrong, sorry about that.

[+and-then]

7 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I have a better idea. YOU look up the law and read it very carefully until you understand what it says.

Chapter 776 of the 2108 Florida statute, Justifiable Use of Force, section 776.012 specifically.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

Note the circumstance contemplated in 776.012(1) where a person is authorised to use force but not deadly force. A person is not granted the right to pull out a gun and shoot someone every time they are pushed, shoved, or punched. They can push, shove or punch back, but such physical altercations do not necessarily grant the victim the right to kill someone.

Deadly force is authorised only in extreme circumstances where, as according to 776.012(2), a person reasonably believes that it's necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.  In other words, a person using deadly force must reasonably believe it’s necessary.

McGlockton used force; Drejka used deadly force.

This is not a subjective test by the way, regardless of what the Sheriff involved stated. In other words, it isn’t whether Drejka was afraid or believed he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, but rather, whether his belief was reasonable.

A couple of articles you should read:

NRA, Republicans refute GOP sheriff's stand-your-ground claims
https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2018/07/30/nra-republicans-refute-gop-sheriffs-stand-your-ground-claims-534054

NRA, GOP Lawmakers Reject Florida Sheriff’s Application of Stand-Your-Ground Law
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/nra-gop-lawmakers-reject-florida-sheriffs-application-of-stand-your-ground-law/

From the last link:

Hammer said she didn’t want to discuss the facts of the case, only the law. But her decision to publicly dispute Gualtieri’s claims about "stand your ground" underscores how much gun-rights advocates have grown displeased with the sheriff’s statements in the middle of an election year. Democrats are calling for an end to "stand your ground" and say it has racial overtones. Meanwhile, the politics of guns have shifted to the left after the Feb. 14 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

It won't surprise me if the DA decides to arrest and get this guy indicted.  Simply put, the bolded above will explain why it happens if it does.  The weak-kneed politicians in Florida need to remember that their constituents are apt to be very displeased if this guy winds up in prison for what they will perceive as him defending his life from a violent thug.  There were many different scenarios where this guy walks away but none of them were possible once he physically attacked another man for what he was SAYING to Jacobs.  THAT really is the bottom line.  If we begin down that road where we have to watch every word we say and every opinion we express openly for fear of being physically attacked and being unable to defend ourselves (except  for the young and strong) then there WILL be a backlash.  It's much easier to just demand of citizens that they respect each other enough to resist physical altercations.

[Opus Magnus]

I watched the video again, and it doesn't look like McGlockton retreated until after the gun was being pulled. Initially, after shoving Drejka to the ground McGlockton makes three squabbles toward Drejka. So, McGlockton was still approaching to either give the beat down or just yell his victory yell at Drejka, but I find it ironic he got shot instead. As McGlockton was half the age of Drejka and in his prime, it is more deadly and I don't have much sympathy for McGlockton just ironic humor. 

[Myles]

36 minutes ago, and then said:

  NO ONE can know what he was thinking and if he was in fear for his life, SYG is a justified shield for him and any other citizen in that place.  I'd be saying exactly the same thing if McG had been Caucasian, Asian or other.  People have to learn in this day and time that putting your hands violently on strangers is a really bad idea.

This is very accurate.  

[Regi]

24 minutes ago, and then said:

Yes, he backed up 2 steps and instinctively turned his body to provide a smaller target.  That's something anyone would do.  If I saw a gun pulled on me, I'd yell stop and put my hands in the air as high as I could reach. 

You say what anyone else- including yourself- would do, but I know that that's just what you like to think.

[lost_shaman]

30 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I have a better idea. YOU look up the law and read it very carefully until you understand what it says.

Chapter 776 of the 2108 Florida statute, Justifiable Use of Force, section 776.012 specifically.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

Note the circumstance contemplated in 776.012(1) where a person is authorised to use force but not deadly force. A person is not granted the right to pull out a gun and shoot someone every time they are pushed, shoved, or punched. They can push, shove or punch back, but such physical altercations do not necessarily grant the victim the right to kill someone.

Deadly force is authorised only in extreme circumstances where, as according to 776.012(2), a person reasonably believes that it's necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.  In other words, a person using deadly force must reasonably believe it’s necessary.

McGlockton used force; Drejka used deadly force.

This is not a subjective test by the way, regardless of what the Sheriff involved stated. In other words, it isn’t whether Drejka was afraid or believed he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, but rather, whether his belief was reasonable.

 

I think you should read the very last statement, i.e. his belief was reasonable. 

Also here is what the Sheriff referred to... the law 776.032

Quote

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use or threatened use of force.—

(1) A person who uses or threatens to use force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s.776.031 is justified in such conduct and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use or threatened use of such force by the person, personal representative, or heirs of the person against whom the force was used or threatened, unless the person against whom force was used or threatened is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using or threatening to use force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use or threatened use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using or threatening to use force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used or threatened was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

(4) In a criminal prosecution, once a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution has been raised by the defendant at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence is on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution provided in subsection (1).

Here the Sheriff is citing this statute as "justifiable use" of deadly force. Where here Drejka is immune from both criminal prosecution and civil action. 

You can see 776.032 cites 776.012(2) Deadly force is authorized only in extreme circumstances where, as according to 776.012(2), a person reasonably believes that it's necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.  In other words, a person using deadly force must reasonably believe it’s necessary. 

Here 776.032 places the burden of proof on the State to show "clear and convincing evidence" the defendant is not entitled to such a defense. 

Edited August 1, 2018 by lost_shaman

[lost_shaman]

48 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I have a better idea. YOU look up the law and read it very carefully until you understand what it says.

I think an apology is in order for failing to do your homework correctly.  

[Setton]

6 hours ago, lost_shaman said:

I'm sorry you feel that way about what I said I truly am. And I do have an Idea of how you feel. The majority of my family are women, I'm only one of three men in a family of around 20 female Cousins, and two Sisters. I'm all of 5'6'' if I stand completely as tall as I can stretch, and around 160 lbs. Almost every Man I meet is larger and taller than I am with a greater reach than I have. I walk around with a crocked Nose because some idiot in a stolen Car sucker punched me when I confronted him Stalking around my Parents house, by the time I got to the ER the Dr. refused to set it. So now I have a crocked nose because I'm a single father of two Girls and all my extra money had to go to them as opposed to spending a few thousand dollars to have a Surgeon re-break my Nose and re-set it, so I just live with it. I've also had my Skull fractured around the orbital of my right eye when another young 19 year old Idiot sucker punched me. Two years ago I had my Ribs broken by one of my Daughters Boyfriend when I tried to break up a Fight between them in my own house! So yes, I do have an IDEA what it's like to walk around being the smaller person in most situations in life. 

Well now I know why you're so keen on Drejka. You're just two peas aren't you?

Both with a habit of picking fights you can't win. 

[lost_shaman]

4 minutes ago, Setton said:

Both with a habit of picking fights you can't win. 

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? In those instances I was either blind sided or sucker punched.