• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Stand Your Ground Florida, Stand Your Ground

Thermal said:
I await a cite for unsportsmanlike conduct rules to further flesh out the legal nuances here
Click to expand...

O dear, did I miss a "cite" to the " definition" you have attempted to foist on this thread....?

Scans thread....

No it does not appear that I have. Hmmm.

Say, while driving a car, one typically refers to the side of the car as the blind side or blind spot, not the "opposite" side or "rear."
 
The Big Dog said:
O dear, did I miss a "cite" to the " definition" you have attempted to foist on this thread....?

Scans thread....

No it does not appear that I have. Hmmm.

Say, while driving a car, one typically refers to the side of the car as the blind side or blind spot, not the "opposite" side or "rear."
Click to expand...

Yes. Your blind spot is behind you. Not facing you or even at right angles. 'Behind you' encompasses about 180 degrees, plus or minus. None of those degrees are squarely in front of you.
 
bignickel said:
In TBD's argument, if you come out to your car and see someone yelling at your spouse, and you push the guy away and he falls to the ground, then you're an "attacker" and you're "attacking" him. And killing you is justified for shoving the guy away from your vehicle with spouse inside.

Seriously, why is anyone engaging with this troll? Am I the only one getting a Russian accent here?
Click to expand...

I'm told by many white friends that such opinions are commonly heard at holiday feasts by older relatives, so I'm getting more of a drunken slurred southern accent.
 
ahhell said:
I should clarify, the conservative pundits. I thought it was worth noting that even some folks of influence that support stand your ground think ti should shown in a court that ground needed to be stood. Specifically Ben Shapiro.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be shocked to hear similar from Schmitt, or the Reagan Battalion group (known for ousting that Milo creep from CPAC)
 
Thermal said:
Yes. Your blind spot is behind you. Not facing you or even at right angles. 'Behind you' encompasses about 180 degrees, plus or minus. None of those degrees are squarely in front of you.
Click to expand...

Guess you meant "178 degrees" hmmm...

:D
 
PhantomWolf said:
Doesn't matter, the shove had already happened and was done. You can't shot someone for an attack that has ended.

If I walk up behind you and whack you in the head with a baseball bat and then drop it and step back, you aren't entitled to draw your gun and shoot me, because the attack is clearly over. Doing so is not self defense, it's a revenge murder.

Same thing is someone is charging you with a knife and you shoot them in the shoulder dropping them to the floor. You can't then walk over and put three more bullets in them and claim self defense.

The shooter had enough time between drawing and firing to see that the guy was backing away, he was no longer a threat once the gun was draw. Without a reasonable imminent threat to his life or of serious bodily harm, the shooter no longer can claim that the shot was fired in self defense.

That reasonable threat to him had passed before he fired, thus it's murder.
Click to expand...

The SYG law in Florida doesn't give the option of what you would have thought, or what a cop thought afterwards. It only gives them the option of using what the shooter was thinking at the time of shooting. You might think the guy was turning away, a cop might think the gun alone would have deterred further assault. But, the shooter, after just being blindsided and shoved to the ground, and listening to what the assailant was saying, may have thought he was coming back for a head kick, or turning to grab a weapon. That is all they can go by if it is reasonable to believe.
 
Drewbot said:
The SYG law in Florida doesn't give the option of what you would have thought, or what a cop thought afterwards. It only gives them the option of using what the shooter was thinking at the time of shooting. You might think the guy was turning away, a cop might think the gun alone would have deterred further assault. But, the shooter, after just being blindsided and shoved to the ground, and listening to what the assailant was saying, may have thought he was coming back for a head kick, or turning to grab a weapon. That is all they can go by if it is reasonable to believe.
Click to expand...

Surely they can view the video to determine "if it is reasonable".
 
Drewbot said:
The SYG law in Florida doesn't give the option of what you would have thought, or what a cop thought afterwards. It only gives them the option of using what the shooter was thinking at the time of shooting. You might think the guy was turning away, a cop might think the gun alone would have deterred further assault. But, the shooter, after just being blindsided and shoved to the ground, and listening to what the assailant was saying, may have thought he was coming back for a head kick, or turning to grab a weapon. That is all they can go by if it is reasonable to believe.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what a jury should determine and not the sheriff?
 
Dr. Keith said:
Surely they can view the video to determine "if it is reasonable".
Click to expand...

No, because the video doesn't have audio, and the camera is not in a vulnerable position on the ground after just getting violently shoved to the ground.
 
Disbelief said:
Isn't that what a jury should determine and not the sheriff?
Click to expand...

After interviewing the man who was just blindsided and shoved violently to the ground, can you say for certain that the man was not in fear for his life?
 
Why would you take a case to the jury where the cops investigating all agree that the man who shot, thought his life was in danger?
 
Thermal said:
You forgot to hilite 'about' and 'plus or minus', coach. Can we shoot the offensive line on the next play, coach?
Click to expand...

then they could have been coming at "right angles" then?

Oh dear, it would appear that one has been hoisted on own's own petard...

Blindside mean on the "side" "plus or minus."

All'alba vincerò!
Vincerà!
Vincerò!
 
Drewbot said:
After interviewing the man who was just blindsided and shoved violently to the ground, can you say for certain that the man was not in fear for his life?
Click to expand...

Who cares? Would a reasonable person after being shoved, with no continued attack and the aggressor backing away fear that deadly force was necessary? Is that honestly reasonable to you? I'd say a jury really needs to decide that, not a sheriff.
 
Drewbot said:
No, because the video doesn't have audio, and the camera is not in a vulnerable position on the ground after just getting violently shoved to the ground.
Click to expand...

So they have to ignore evidence if it is not perfect evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom