(07-26-2018, 05:14 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Not disputing anything you said, but is there a standard for when something is considered PHYSICAL.

(07-26-2018, 04:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Bend over; I'll come by and show you.

(07-26-2018, 05:07 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I'mma just leave this here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulhsieh/2018/03/20/any-study-of-gun-violence-should-include-how-guns-save-lives/#6ec13afd5edc

(07-26-2018, 05:40 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: And just so you know, Davy Crockett had THREE ears: a left ear, a right ear and a wild front ear.

(07-26-2018, 05:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: As many of you know I have often commented on how both sides try to manipulate gun violence statistics to promote their position, and there are clearly some problems with the numbers in this story.

For example he claims that there are just as many defensive gun uses as violent crimes and that these defensive uses saved 162,000 lives.  Yet the statistics show that there are 34 times more gun murders than defensive killings.  

I don't want to ban guns.  I own a gun.  I just think we need some reasonable laws that help keep guns out of the hands of criminals without restricting the rights of law abiding citizens.

(07-26-2018, 11:59 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Often a gun is used in self defense without ever having to be fired.

A person pulls a knife on you, or tries to carjack you, or tries to rob your convenience store/delivery vehicle, or break into your house... generally simply brandishing a gun is enough to save you.

Most people find completing their crime less important than not getting shot.

(07-26-2018, 05:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The term "physical" does not matter.  All that matters is a reasonable perceived threat.


If I pull a knife on you that is an assault even if I don't touch you.  And you don't have to wait until someone stabs you to defend yourself.

On the other hand if a person is standing a few feet away he call yell all sorts of dirty names at you but if he does not threaten imminent violence it is not a threat.  However if he gets close enough to hit you and is yelling in your face that is generally considered a threat.

(07-27-2018, 02:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This analogy would make sense if the woman had pushed him.

(07-27-2018, 02:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: A third party is allowed to defend a person who is in threat of imminent bodily harm.

(07-27-2018, 02:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So that I'm tracking that I am within my rights. If I see someone yelling at someone else I have the right to shove them to the ground?

(07-27-2018, 03:03 PM)GMDino Wrote:  The victim then backed away from him and the SOB pulled his gun and fired.

(07-27-2018, 03:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: The victim then backed away from him and the SOB pulled his gun and fired.

(07-27-2018, 03:12 PM)PhilHos Wrote: If this is true (can't see the video at work), then i don't see how this can be a "Stand Your Ground" defense. I get that the law is not a literally someone coming after you defense, but an unarmed individual backing up is usually a sign of waiting to see what you do; they're ready to fight, but they're waiting for you to make the next move.

(07-27-2018, 03:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is the key point.  If the boyfriend had continued to attack then the guy may have been justified in shooting him, but the boyfriend actually stepped back.

I don't see any way this could be justified as a "stand your ground" defense.

(07-27-2018, 04:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: WTS, I hope they determine a "reasonable person" would not view this as a threat of life and limb and charge him with a form of manslaughter. My fear is the message of no charges could send.  

Quote:The Florida sheriff who declined to arrest a white man who invoked the "stand your ground" law after shooting a black man in a parking dispute said Tuesday that he made the "correct" decision.

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said at a news conference that he sticks by his decision not to arrest Michael Drejka, 47, in the shooting death of Markeis McGlockton, 28, in Clearwater, Florida.

"A lot of things have been said since this incident happened on July 19," Gualtieri said. "A whole bunch of people offered a whole bunch of different opinions. And I'd suggest to you that the mere fact that so many people have so many different opinions validates that the decision not to arrest Drejka in this stage is correct under the law."

Gualtieri said the investigation of the shooting is ongoing and the final decision on whether charges against Drejka are warranted will be up to Bernie McCabe, the Pinellas County state attorney.

"We have not turned the case over to the state attorney's office but we anticipate doing so shortly," Gualtieri said. "This is a very long route on a path and this was the first stop on that route. So just picture a bus route with a bunch of different stops and this was the first stop. This is not the final stop."

(07-27-2018, 05:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This.

Let a jury decide the issue.  If they let him go then no one can accuse the police of being biased.

Also I want people who carry guns to know they will at least have to go to trial before they just start blowing everyone away.