'Stand your ground' law, Edit: Drejka Found Guilty 8/23/19

Rum, beer, women, movies, nice websites, gaming, etc., without interrupting the flow of martial threads.

'Stand your ground' law, Edit: Drejka Found Guilty 8/23/19

Postby marvin8 on Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:08 pm

CNN
Published on Jul 28, 2018

Civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump, who represents the family of Markeis McGlockton, tells CNN's Michael Smerconish he believes Florida's "stand your ground" law is not applied equally and encourages people to take the law into their own hands:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEwsmzxeKEw

Edit: Drejka is found guilty of manslaughter on 8/23/19.

Excerpt from Michael Drejka found guilty of fatally shooting unarmed man outside convenience store over parking spot in 2018:
WFTS Digital Staff on 10:41 PM, Aug 23, 2019 wrote:CLEARWATER, Fla. — Michael Drejka was found guilty of fatally shooting Markeis McGlockton over a handicapped parking spot outside a Clearwater convenience store in July of 2018.

The 6-person jury deliberated for over six hours before convicting Drejka, 48, on Friday. He was found guilty on manslaughter charges.
Last edited by marvin8 on Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby oragami_itto on Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:25 pm

The piece of shit that shot that man has been masturbating to fantasies of shooting someone most likely most all of his life.
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby grzegorz on Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:51 am

It is obvious that dude was looking for trouble.

But he will probably get off like Zimmerman even though in any sane country these people would be locked up.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
User avatar
grzegorz
Wuji
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Tuck Frump

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby Steve James on Mon Jul 30, 2018 6:26 am

If we eliminate reference to the color of the victim, the troubling aspect is the ease at which people find reasons to kill. The fact is that simply being afraid is now enough. "Stand your ground" means that one has no obligation to retreat. However, it's used as a license to kill.

I think attitudes would change if people started shooting back. Though, if Trayvon Martin had shot Zimmerman, he wouldn't have gotten off on a stand your ground claim. After all, he was the one who was followed and he had no obligation to allow it, if he felt threatened. Sure, one can argue that Zimmerman had the right to protect himself once Martin did attack. My point is that Martin should have had a gun to attack with first. Of course, he'd be considered a thug for carrying a weapon. (He was anyway and he only had candy on him). He'd be in jail, but alive.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18595
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby windwalker on Mon Jul 30, 2018 11:55 am

Steve James wrote:If we eliminate reference to the color of the victim, the troubling aspect is the ease at which people find reasons to kill. The fact is that simply being afraid is now enough. "Stand your ground" means that one has no obligation to retreat. However, it's used as a license to kill.

That still has to be proven in a court of law. There are cases where the defense lost using stand your ground
as a defence



I think attitudes would change if people started shooting back. Though, if Trayvon Martin had shot Zimmerman, he wouldn't have gotten off on a stand your ground claim. After all, he was the one who was followed and he had no obligation to allow it, if he felt threatened. Sure, one can argue that Zimmerman had the right to protect himself once Martin did attack. My point is that Martin should have had a gun to attack with first.

Of course, he'd be considered a thug an opinion.for carrying a weapon. He considered himself to be a weapon which is what he used to attack with. (He was anyway and he only had candy on him). He'd be in jail, but alive.


He's dead because he attacked someone who had a concealed weapon who used it after being attacked.
Last edited by windwalker on Mon Jul 30, 2018 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
基於開合、虛實與吞吐 的知覺運動
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7698
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby marvin8 on Mon Jul 30, 2018 3:25 pm

windwalker wrote:
Steve James wrote:If we eliminate reference to the color of the victim, the troubling aspect is the ease at which people find reasons to kill. The fact is that simply being afraid is now enough. "Stand your ground" means that one has no obligation to retreat. However, it's used as a license to kill.

That still has to be proven in a court of law. There are cases where the defense lost using stand your ground
as a defence



I think attitudes would change if people started shooting back. Though, if Trayvon Martin had shot Zimmerman, he wouldn't have gotten off on a stand your ground claim. After all, he was the one who was followed and he had no obligation to allow it, if he felt threatened. Sure, one can argue that Zimmerman had the right to protect himself once Martin did attack. My point is that Martin should have had a gun to attack with first.

Of course, he'd be considered a thug an opinion.for carrying a weapon. He considered himself to be a weapon which is what he used to attack with. (He was anyway and he only had candy on him). He'd be in jail, but alive.


He's dead because he attacked someone who had a concealed weapon who used it after being attacked.

"He's dead because he attacked someone who had a concealed weapon who used it after" the new victim turned away and retreated. At this point, the shooter became the aggressor. Once the shooter becomes the aggressor, he is not entitled to stand your ground:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1o6NbK5jg8

Edit: windwalker, If you were speaking of Martin not McGlockton, then I apologize. I may have misread.
Last edited by marvin8 on Mon Jul 30, 2018 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby Steve James on Mon Jul 30, 2018 4:31 pm

He considered himself to be a weapon which is what he used to attack with.


You're reading his mind. We can say that he considered himself being followed.

He's dead because he attacked someone who had a concealed weapon who used it after being attacked.


He attacked someone who was following him. He didn't follow Zimmerman to attack him. He didn't initiate contact with Zimmerman. That was Zimmerman's testimony. But, my point was that Martin should have had a weapon and shot the man following him because he reasonably feared for his life.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18595
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby windwalker on Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:07 pm

Steve James wrote:
He considered himself to be a weapon which is what he used to attack with.


You're reading his mind. We can say that he considered himself being followed.

He's dead because he attacked someone who had a concealed weapon who used it after being attacked.


He attacked someone who was following him. He didn't follow Zimmerman to attack him. He didn't initiate contact with Zimmerman. That was Zimmerman's testimony. But, my point was that Martin should have had a weapon and shot the man following him because he reasonably feared for his life.
You're reading his mind.
We don't know why he attacked Zimmerman,
we do know he did attack some one who didn't initiate contact with him



We also know that he didn't use a rock, knife or gun, the only weapon he had , "himself" against what he perceived to be an unarmed man.
In general people do not attack those that are armed if they are not,
nor do they attack those they feel they can not deal with.

In most cases they try to get away if there are opportunities to do so.

Following some one is not a crime, no contact was made no threats issued....According to you if he had a gun he should have shot someone who
he didn't know was armed.

yep ok, makes sense :-\
Last edited by windwalker on Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
基於開合、虛實與吞吐 的知覺運動
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7698
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby Steve James on Mon Jul 30, 2018 11:04 pm

Following some one is not a crime, no contact was made no threats issued....According to you if he had a gun he should have shot someone who
he didn't know was armed.


You can say that following someone is not a crime. My point was that Martin rightfully feared for his life and fled. Nope, he couldn't know that Zimmerman had a gun. And, he was unarmed. Zimmerman initiated the contact --for reasons he has given. Martin had not done anything illegal or improper and was walking down the street minding his own business. But, I'm not trying to argue the case again. My point is that, rather than getting into a fist fight, Martin should have been armed to protect himself from Zimmerman.

If Martin had been breaking into cars or homes, or even walking down the street smoking a joint or doing something illegal, I'd say that Zimmerman may have been right to report him --as the police said. Sure, he could confront Martin on his own, especially since he was armed. But, as I suggested, if the situations were reversed and good neighbor Martin were following a visiting Zimmerman, I'd say that Zimmerman would be justified in using a weapon if he felt threatened. I'm not saying change the rules; I'm saying that it's logical for people to understand them. If that's the society they want, then let them have it.

For example, if my daughter were walking alone, and "you" started following her, I'd tell her to use any weapon she had, if "you" refused to stop. F- the perceived right to follow someone. If you follow someone who doesn't want it, you are a threat. That is, unless you've committed a crime. We ain't got not minority report ability yet.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18595
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby windwalker on Tue Jul 31, 2018 12:42 am

Steve James wrote:You can say that following someone is not a crime. My point was that Martin rightfully feared for his life and fled.
How do you know this. How do you know he rightfully feared for his life and yet chose to attack when he could have done anything else.

Nope, he couldn't know that Zimmerman had a gun. And, he was unarmed. Zimmerman initiated the contact --for reasons he has given. Martin had not done anything illegal or improper and was walking down the street minding his own business. But, I'm not trying to argue the case again. you just did... My point is that, rather than getting into a fist fight, Martin should have been armed to protect himself from Zimmerman.Or he could have called the police 911 ect, on his cell instead of his gf.

"On March 20, 2012, Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump revealed that Martin had been on the phone with a friend moments before he was shot"

was that the point he was in fear for his life ?....


If Martin had been breaking into cars or homes, or even walking down the street smoking a joint or doing something illegal, I'd say that Zimmerman may have been right to report him --as the police said. Sure, he could confront Martin on his own, especially since he was armed. But, as I suggested, if the situations were reversed and good neighbor Martin were following a visiting Zimmerman, I'd say that Zimmerman would be justified in using a weapon if he felt threatened.

I'm not saying change the rules; I'm saying that it's logical for people to understand them. If that's the society they want, then let them have it.

It wasn't logical which why he was not charged....

For example, if my daughter were walking alone, and "you" started following her, I'd tell her to use any weapon she had, if "you" refused to stop. F- the perceived right to follow someone. Good you understand rights...but ignore others rights if favor of your own. If you follow someone who doesn't want it, you are a threat. That is, unless you've committed a crime. We ain't got not minority report ability yet.




Under your scenario she shoots the guy, the cops get there
she says she was being followed and was scared it turns out the guy had some mental disability and wanted to know how to get home


ya might want to read up on the law about deadly force and when it can or not be used...
Last edited by windwalker on Tue Jul 31, 2018 4:47 am, edited 3 times in total.
基於開合、虛實與吞吐 的知覺運動
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7698
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby windwalker on Tue Jul 31, 2018 5:12 am

Steve James wrote:
He considered himself to be a weapon which is what he used to attack with.


You're reading his mind. We can say that he considered himself being followed.

He's dead because he attacked someone who had a concealed weapon who used it after being attacked.


He attacked someone who was following him. He didn't follow Zimmerman to attack him. He didn't initiate contact with Zimmerman. That was Zimmerman's testimony. But, my point was that Martin should have had a weapon and shot the man following him because he reasonably feared for his life.



actually this was Zimmerman's testimony:

Zimmerman told investigators he was returning to his vehicle after locating an address on Retreat View Circle when Martin approached him from his left rear and confronted him.[155][156]

[
Last edited by windwalker on Tue Jul 31, 2018 5:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
基於開合、虛實與吞吐 的知覺運動
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7698
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby Steve James on Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:00 pm

Zimmerman says that Martin did so and so, but Martin can't respond because Zimmerman killed him. However, I'm not arguing about what happened. Like you said, I wasn't there. I'm saying that there was no reason why Martin shouldn't have been armed and stood his ground. Then, he could let his story be judged.

And I still think the argument that "it's not illegal to follow someone" is just an excuse. Following someone is threatening, especially when it happens on the street, at night, and there aren't others around. Period. If it happened to me, I would feel threatened. I would question whether or not I was being stalked. I would not call 911 because someone was following me, either. At that point, I would like to be armed. I would be very capable of using it.

It's funny. If it's dark, and I see that I'll end up walking behind someone, I will sometimes cross the street or speed up or say something just to make sure that the person ahead doesn't think I'm following him. Maybe it's because I live in "da hood." Anyway, there's a big difference between what's legal and what's right. YMMV.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18595
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby grzegorz on Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:43 am

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
User avatar
grzegorz
Wuji
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Tuck Frump

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby Peacedog on Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:59 pm

I'd say this illustrates the value of being polite. And the penalty for acting like a jerk around the wrong man.

I make this point to younger guys all the time. Most people have no idea just how dangerous other people can be. The younger generation has been raised on participation trophies and it has come at the expense of their treating others with respect. If you do this with the wrong guy, you will pay.

My favorite example was a young Puerto Rican reservist who deployed to Afghanistan with me about four years ago. At the pre-deployment training I specifically warned everyone there that Afghanistan has a culture of violence. That the little 5'5'' 135 pound Afghan locals they were dealing with had grown up and survived in a locale where killing another man is perfectly okay and may well be a pathway to respect and power.

This kid was a good six feet tall, 200 pounds, Golden Gloves boxer and very cocky. I remember looking at him during the inbrief and thinking "trouble." Sure enough he gets into some kind of long term argument with one of the local Afghan truck drivers on his FOB. Finally he made the near fatal mistake of turning his back on the man during an argument. Which in Afghan society is a way of saying "you are so far beneath me that I don't even have to listen to you." He got knifed from behind and beaten unconscious by a tiny guy who might have weighted 140lbs. The funny part was the Afgan did it just to teach the boxer a lesson. If he'd wanted to kill him, he would have.
Peacedog
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 5:22 am
Location: Standing right next to your girl....

Re: 'Stand your ground' law is license to kill people of color

Postby grzegorz on Sat Aug 18, 2018 1:16 pm

I hear what you are saying but I take it that you didn't let the Afghan off with a slap on wrist which will probabaly happen to the 48 year old man. The victim was 28 not exactly a teenager.

Lesson to be learned? Yes as soon you touch someone you have opened a door to violence which may or may not go in favor. Any martisl artist should know that, I don't think it has anything to do with the self-esteem movement. But sure blame the victim instead of asking why anyone would give a f*** why some random ass stranger parked in a spot while still in their car which has nothing to do with you while their kids run into a shop to buy some candy. I think you are assuming that Drejka was a normal well balanced human being who has never threatened a fly.

As to trophies and youth, even Socrates bemoaned how easy the younger generation had it. That is every generation. I don't think ours was any different viewed from the eyes of my own father a Marine who fought in Vietnam.

The fact is Zimmerman and this guy are just assholes.

As to the US invasion of Afghanistan perhaps it was a reminder that we are in "their" country. The good news about Trump is "we" no longer have to wonder why the world hates us. The soldier's second mistake was messing with trucker. Never mess with a trucker!
Last edited by grzegorz on Sat Aug 18, 2018 1:53 pm, edited 8 times in total.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
User avatar
grzegorz
Wuji
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Tuck Frump

Next

Return to Off the Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests