• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Good Shoot or Not?

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
10,808
Reaction score
23,523
Location
North Carolina

Son of Gloin

Certainty of death? What are we waiting for?
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
9,290
Reaction score
22,641
Location
USA

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
My take on the above is that it's murder. Shooting someone who is no threat to you or anyone else and who is basically trying to flee is rally not good.
He had a weapon. The stolen hatchet. Good shoot.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Shooting someone who is no threat to you
Ever been chopped with a hatchet? Could Dunn have known that the thief wouldn't take a swing at him with the hatchet?
 

EO 11110

UNBANNED
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Survivor
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,662
Reaction score
20,091
Location
clown world
most gunshots are not fatal. that is a fatal flaw in a lot of the analysis that i've read -- they assume shoot = kill. slammed to the ground kills, kicked in the head kills, stabbed with knife kills, hacked with machete kills, gunshot kills.....all SOMEtimes

shooting once/twice does not indicate intent to kill

unload after hitting/stopping target = kill intent
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
shooting once/twice does not indicate intent to kill
The heck it don't. Per the law, the very act of using a gun is to use deadly force.
...and if there is no intent to kill, then using a gun is illegal. You can't rightly say you were in fear for your life if you only shoot to wound.
 

EO 11110

UNBANNED
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Survivor
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,662
Reaction score
20,091
Location
clown world
The heck it don't. Per the law, the very act of using a gun is to use deadly force.
...and if there is no intent to kill, then using a gun is illegal. You can't rightly say you were in fear for your life if you only shoot to wound.

intent is inside of the individual, and not inside any 'law'
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
intent is inside of the individual,
Right, and if inside that individual is the intent to only wound, then per the law that shooting is illegal.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Most definitely. They would have to go.
So if you were struggling with a criminal who is holding a potentially deadly weapon, would you be justified in responding with equal force?

I'm kinda thinking you would be.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
The heck it don't. Per the law, the very act of using a gun is to use deadly force.
...and if there is no intent to kill, then using a gun is illegal. You can't rightly say you were in fear for your life if you only shoot to wound.
Shoot to wound is all Hollywood
 

Unca Walt

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
14,746
Reaction score
29,080
Location
South Floriduh
Had they been struggling with the theft of a [stuffed bunny] [stick of gum] [roll of toilet paper] then it would have been a bad shoot.

Several of the guys here have it solved:

The guy stops, turns, and throws the hatchet into the victim's (person stolen from) forehead. <<== a distinctly possible outcome.

Those here who say "bad shoot" should consider this. Because if the above had been what had transpired instead, you would be thinking:

"Well, in this case the dead guy really should have shot one second or so sooner."

Here is my own rule: If I am in combat with anyone -- whether he is armed with a hatchet or just fists -- and I pull my gun and he does NOT MOVE...

He lives.

Last note: I understand your [possibly now revised] take on this. But let an old fart tell you: It is a real world out there, just behind the curtain. When that face comes through the curtain, it is you -- only you -- that will determine your fate. BTDT
 

DodgebyDave

Metal Messiah
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
14,567
Reaction score
19,535
Inside of my 10ft rule and it's the old Mozambique
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land

Fatrat

Site Supporter
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
8,555
Merchant protecting his business, good shoot, stick of gum or stuffed bunny, same deal...
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Merchant protecting his business, good shoot, stick of gum or stuffed bunny, same deal...
In most States you can't do that. The only reason I'd suggest that could be justified is to consider that the guy had a deadly weapon in his hand. (the hatchet) Absent that, it likely would be voluntary manslaughter or possibly even 2nd degree murder, depending on the State and Prosecutor.

Where I live, a person can legally be shot for simple theft and criminal mischief (even when fleeing), but only during nighttime hours. Shoot someone for those things during the day and you'll likely get charged with murder. In many States, you can't shoot 'em at all for things like that.
 

Fatrat

Site Supporter
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
8,555
In most States you can't do that. The only reason I'd suggest that could be justified is to consider that the guy had a deadly weapon in his hand. (the hatchet) Absent that, it likely would be voluntary manslaughter or possibly even 2nd degree murder, depending on the State and Prosecutor.

Where I live, a person can legally be shot for simple theft and criminal mischief (even when fleeing), but only during nighttime hours. Shoot someone for those things during the day and you'll likely get charged with murder. In many States, you can't shoot 'em at all for things like that.
And you see where that got us, thugs rule the planet.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
Remember the hatchet guy in post #110...…………..


Florida politician, who fatally shot a shoplifter trying to steal a hatchet from his military surplus store, is charged with MURDER after shocking CCTV emerges


DM
Ariel Zilber For Dailymail.com and Associated Press
2 hrs ago

A Florida city commissioner has been charged with fatally shooting a man he accused of shoplifting a hatchet from an Army-Navy surplus store.

The Ledger reports that a Polk County grand jury indicted 47-year-old Michael Dunn on second-degree murder charges Friday in connection to the October 3 shooting death of 50-year-old Cristobal Lopez.

A conviction could mean a possible life sentence.


State Attorney Brian Haas said in a statement Friday evening: 'I have determined that this case and the actions of Mr. Dunn fall outside of Stand Your Ground.'

Surveillance video previously released to the public shows the Lakeland commissioner shooting Lopez.

Dunn is seen wrestling with Lopez at the entrance to his Vets Army Navy Surplus store in Lakeland.

Lopez is seen trying to escape while Dunn holds on to the intruder's arm in one hand and a pistol in the other hand.

As Lopez is about to slip away and flee the store, Dunn tries to grab his shoulder.

The entire time, Dunn is pointing his gun at Lopez.

As Lopez struggles to break free of Dunn’s grip, Dunn pulls the trigger and shoots him.

Lopez is seen falling to the pavement just outside of the store.

Nobody tries to offer Lopez assistance or first aid, and lies on the pavement unattended for three minutes.

Dunn accused Lopez of trying to steal a hatchet.

Dunn’s lawyer, Rusty Franklin, claims that his client was justified in shooting Lopez because he was holding a hatchet during the struggle, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

The Lakeland Police Department and the State Attorney’s Office continue to investigate the shooting.

A state attorney for the 10th Judicial Circuit told the Times that the investigation is expected to wrap up sometime this week.

Police said that Lopez tried to shoplift a hatchet from inside the store.

They arrived at the store at around 2:30pm and found Lopez dead on the sidewalk.

Dunn told police that he confronted Lopez by asking him if he was going to pay for the hatchet.

In Florida, a person is legally permitted to use deadly force ‘if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.’

From viewing the video, it does not appear that Dunn’s life was in any danger.

The so-called ‘stand your ground’ law does not require anyone who perceives themselves as being under threat to retreat before using force.

The video appears to show Lopez trying to flee. At no time did he appear to pose a threat to Dunn.

Two lawyers who reviewed the footage for the Times said that Dunn will have a difficult time explaining his position in court.

Florida law does allow store employees to use reasonable force to detain suspected shoplifters.

Dunn may claim that he feared Lopez would take a swipe at him with the hatchet while they were struggling near the door.

Lopez was laid to rest Monday morning in Wauchula, Florida.

This is the second time that Dunn has shot a person, though it’s the first time the shooting was fatal.

When Dunn was 19, Dunn accidentally shot a man, according to the Lakeland Ledger.

Dunn is known to be a strong advocate of gun ownership.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...r-shocking-cctv-emerges/ar-BBODl0j?ocid=ientp
Well, it's going to cost the store owner $75,000 to defend himself in court. Most likely he will be found not guilty by the jury.
 

Silver

Midas Board Mmbr
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,103
Reaction score
14,665
The heck it don't. Per the law, the very act of using a gun is to use deadly force.
...and if there is no intent to kill, then using a gun is illegal. You can't rightly say you were in fear for your life if you only shoot to wound.

You shoot to stop the attack, if they die or not is not the issue.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
You shoot to stop the attack, if they die or not is not the issue.
Right, but typically it has to be a "I was in fear for my life" situation. Which implies it's his life or yours. Hence the reason that to use a gun against another, is defined as using deadly force. If you seek less than deadly results, a gun is not the right tool for the job.

In other words, if one is only shooting with the intent to wound, it brings into question whether or not they truly feared for their life. If they weren't in fear for their life, it wasn't really a "him or me" situation that calls for deadly force.
...and the only reason I think the guy in that last vid was right, is because the guy he shot had a deadly weapon on him. Deadly weapon is a deadly weapon. Knife, gun, or even a hatchet.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
Right, but typically it has to be a "I was in fear for my life" situation. Which implies it's his life or yours. Hence the reason that to use a gun against another, is defined as using deadly force. If you seek less than deadly results, a gun is not the right tool for the job.

In other words, if one is only shooting with the intent to wound, it brings into question whether or not they truly feared for their life. If they weren't in fear for their life, it wasn't really a "him or me" situation that calls for deadly force.
...and the only reason I think the guy in that last vid was right, is because the guy he shot had a deadly weapon on him. Deadly weapon is a deadly weapon. Knife, gun, or even a hatchet.
Shoot to wound is only in Hollywood. When I shot the truck driver he had his fist and a large Stainless steel ice pick, I had my revolver. He's dead I'm not. I had to defend myself in court and I won there too.
 

Silver

Midas Board Mmbr
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,103
Reaction score
14,665
Right, but typically it has to be a "I was in fear for my life" situation. Which implies it's his life or yours. Hence the reason that to use a gun against another, is defined as using deadly force. If you seek less than deadly results, a gun is not the right tool for the job.

In other words, if one is only shooting with the intent to wound, it brings into question whether or not they truly feared for their life. If they weren't in fear for their life, it wasn't really a "him or me" situation that calls for deadly force.
...and the only reason I think the guy in that last vid was right, is because the guy he shot had a deadly weapon on him. Deadly weapon is a deadly weapon. Knife, gun, or even a hatchet.

If you are being attacked and do not fear for your life, you may have perception problems. You neither attempt to kill or wound, just stop the attack. Any defense lawyer will tell you that.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
You've peaked my curiosity...…...and probably some other's too. What happened?
16 years ago I was returning home from buying antiques. I had a trailer full behind my pickup truck. Traveling down the interstate and a semi side swipes my trailer. He stopped and I stopped. I exit my truck and he comes running at me and as soon as he got to me he swung his fist and knocked me down. Then he came at me with a long Stainless Steel pick. I shot him in the left eye from about 2 feet away. He died immediately. I called 911 and waited on the cops. I was taken to the police station and charged with manslaughter. I posted $5000 bail and went home. Next day I hired a shitty local lawyer, another $5000 down and balance later. He talked to the DA and was offered a plea bargain. I refused. So the DA was pissed and uped the charges to second degree murder. I fired the shitty lawyer(no refunds) and hired Herbert Moncier the best criminal defense lawyer in Tennessee(he cost $40,000 up front). It cost me a total of $50,000 but I was found Not Guilty. Money well spent. The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation didn't think I'd walk and the etched an inventory number on the frame of my S&W Bodyguard. They were very apologetic about the etched number when they gave it back to me in the courtroom.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Survivor
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
22,760
Reaction score
47,284
Location
ORYGUN
The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation should be liable for your expenses to prove your innocence. This would slow down this crap !
 

hoarder

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
13,881
Reaction score
17,601
Location
Montana
Next day I hired a shitty local lawyer, another $5000 down and balance later. He talked to the DA and was offered a plea bargain. I refused. So the DA was pissed and uped the charges to second degree murder. I fired the shitty lawyer(no refunds) and hired Herbert Moncier the best criminal defense lawyer in Tennessee(he cost $40,000 up front). It cost me a total of $50,000 but I was found Not Guilty.

The idea that you are "innocent until proven guilty" is a fraud. "Innocent" means you will not be punished for the crime you are falsely accused of. "Innocent" doesn't just mean that you have been absolved of a crime but you get punished anyway.

If you are really "found innocent", you would not be punished for a crime you didn't commit for the tune of $55K.

I'm sure Herbert Moncier has a different explanation, LOL.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation should be liable for your expenses to prove your innocence. This would slow down this crap !
The very anti gun DA was the one that cost me.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
The idea that you are "innocent until proven guilty" is a fraud. "Innocent" means you will not be punished for the crime you are falsely accused of. "Innocent" doesn't just mean that you have been absolved of a crime but you get punished anyway.

If you are really "found innocent", you would not be punished for a crime you didn't commit for the tune of $55K.

I'm sure Herbert Moncier has a different explanation, LOL.
I've got no beef with Moncier, with out him I'd still be in jail. The system is fucked though. During the voir dire, when they brought in the jury pool, a jurist, a biker looking guy, looked at me, smiled and winked. I told my attorney I wanted him on my jury. That jurist made it to my jury. He was very vocal in the jury room about my innocence. I was sitting in the court room and could hear him telling the other jurors that I was not the one who started the fight! If not for him I would have lost.
 

hoarder

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
13,881
Reaction score
17,601
Location
Montana
I've got no beef with Moncier, with out him I'd still be in jail. The system is fucked though. During the voir dire, when they brought in the jury pool, a jurist, a biker looking guy, looked at me, smiled and winked. I told my attorney I wanted him on my jury. That jurist made it to my jury. He was very vocal in the jury room about my innocence. I was sitting in the court room and could hear him telling the other jurors that I was not the one who started the fight! If not for him I would have lost.
That's awesome. You are very fortunate that the jerk DA allowed that juror to serve. He must not have seen that smile and wink.

Under the circumstances, I too would have considered the $50K money well spent and thankful for the Lawyer. The part that gets me is that getting falsely accused is damn expensive and a handy way for your enemies to get to you.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Survivor
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
22,760
Reaction score
47,284
Location
ORYGUN
The idea that you are "innocent until proven guilty" is a fraud. "Innocent" means you will not be punished for the crime you are falsely accused of.

I am in the midst of that shit right now !!! Lawyers are allowed to lie cheat & steal, in the litigation leading up to trial. !!!
Yes, our system is fucked ! It is more about money than anything else.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Under the circumstances, I too would have considered the $50K money well spent and thankful for the Lawyer.
Yes.

Although these days a $50 dashcam could save the $50k lawyer fee.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Survivor
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
22,760
Reaction score
47,284
Location
ORYGUN
Yes.

Although these days a $50 dashcam could save the $50k lawyer fee.

Slim to no chance. Dead guy with powder burns in eye socket & SS pick in hand is better than a dash cam AND should have been "End of Story" !

The very anti gun DA was the one that cost me.
There is the WHOLE story in a nut shell, or nut case !
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Slim to no chance. Dead guy with powder burns in eye socket & SS pick in hand is better than a dash cam AND should have been "End of Story" !
Right, but when it comes down to one persons word against another, or a situation with no direct witnesses other than those involved, an unbiased recording of the events can mean the difference between having to go through what @mtnman describes and not having any charges filed to begin with.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Survivor
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
22,760
Reaction score
47,284
Location
ORYGUN
Right, but when it comes down to one persons word against another, or a situation with no direct witnesses other than those involved, an unbiased recording of the events can mean the difference between having to go through what @mtnman describes and not having any charges filed to begin with.
You may be correct, unless an asswipe like this guy interferes, The very anti gun DA was the one that cost me.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
15,433
Location
Instant Gratification Land
You may be correct, unless an asswipe like this guy interferes, The very anti gun DA was the one that cost me.
It may not help in every situation, but having video proof that supports ones version of events, should only help ones case. In fact, there's lots of cases that had video proof not existed, people would have gone to jail based on someone else's word.
 

mtnman

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
5,380
Reaction score
12,412
Location
East Tennessee
It may not help in every situation, but having video proof that supports ones version of events, should only help ones case. In fact, there's lots of cases that had video proof not existed, people would have gone to jail based on someone else's word.
A dash cam wouldn't have helped me. The incident took place at the rear of my truck. Now if the Semi had one it would have recorded the whole thing. There were witnesses. They saw the event unfolding and stopped on the overpass to watch. Everyone of them put on the bench by the DA and they all testified in my behalf. Even the ambulance driver testified he had the spike in his hand when they got there. One witness testified that the DA had tried three times to get him to change his story.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Survivor
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
22,760
Reaction score
47,284
Location
ORYGUN
One witness testified that the DA had tried three times to get him to change his story.
Witness tampering under the color of law/authority. The SOB should loose his job & pension !! :totally steamed:
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Survivor
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
22,760
Reaction score
47,284
Location
ORYGUN
I wonder how this one will play out?

'He brought it on himself, I have no sympathy': Homeowner in Oklahoma fatally shoots an intruder five years after he shot ANOTHER would-be burglar who survived

  • Charles Sweeney shot and killed an attempted intruder on Tuesday morning
  • Donald Stovall was killed after breaking in to Sweeney's home on Tuesday
  • The incident comes five years after Sweeney shot another would-be burglar
  • Michael Watts survived the shooting in 2013 but remains in prison for the crime
  • Sweeney said he feels 'no sympathy' for Stovall and would do it again
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-shoots-intruder-five-years-shot-burglar.html

I hope he does well.
BUT: He said he did what he felt he had to do to protect himself and feels 'no sympathy' for the deceased. It would have been best to stop here !!!
 

Fatrat

Site Supporter
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
8,555
And we have a conviction for Manslaughter...https://nypost.com/2019/08/24/florida-man-using-stand-your-ground-defense-convicted-of-manslaughter/
A white Florida man who told detectives he had a “pet peeve” about illegal parking in handicapped spots was convicted late Friday of manslaughter for the fatal shooting of an unarmed black man outside a convenience store.

Six jurors deliberated for six hours before convicting Michael Drejka for the July 19, 2018, death of Markeis McGlockton. Drejka, who could get 30 years, looked down after the verdict was read then wiped his brow with a blue handkerchief. The 49-year-old Drejka was ordered held without bond until his sentencing in October. He stared straight ahead as he was handcuffed and led out of the courtroom.
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
19,694
Reaction score
30,543
And we have a conviction for Manslaughter...https://nypost.com/2019/08/24/florida-man-using-stand-your-ground-defense-convicted-of-manslaughter/
A white Florida man who told detectives he had a “pet peeve” about illegal parking in handicapped spots was convicted late Friday of manslaughter for the fatal shooting of an unarmed black man outside a convenience store.

Six jurors deliberated for six hours before convicting Michael Drejka for the July 19, 2018, death of Markeis McGlockton. Drejka, who could get 30 years, looked down after the verdict was read then wiped his brow with a blue handkerchief. The 49-year-old Drejka was ordered held without bond until his sentencing in October. He stared straight ahead as he was handcuffed and led out of the courtroom.
This guy was stupid to think "Stand Your Ground" meant justified "Pet Peeve" retributions. His life was never in danger over a Traffic /Parking Violation.
He SHOULD get all 30 years and the victims family get all his liquidate assets now and future. IF and when he gets out he should be flippin' burgers the rest of his days with a percentage of his income going to the victim's family until he "Dirt Naps". JMO

He give good responsible gun owners and carriers a bad look.
 

Son of Gloin

Certainty of death? What are we waiting for?
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
9,290
Reaction score
22,641
Location
USA
And we have a conviction for Manslaughter...https://nypost.com/2019/08/24/florida-man-using-stand-your-ground-defense-convicted-of-manslaughter/
A white Florida man who told detectives he had a “pet peeve” about illegal parking in handicapped spots was convicted late Friday of manslaughter for the fatal shooting of an unarmed black man outside a convenience store.

Six jurors deliberated for six hours before convicting Michael Drejka for the July 19, 2018, death of Markeis McGlockton. Drejka, who could get 30 years, looked down after the verdict was read then wiped his brow with a blue handkerchief. The 49-year-old Drejka was ordered held without bond until his sentencing in October. He stared straight ahead as he was handcuffed and led out of the courtroom.
He deserved that. That dude he shot did not need to be shot for knocking him down. Now, if he’d knocked him down and still come after him, maybe so, but the guy was not pressing the attack. If you carry a gun, engage your brain and leave all your anger at home.