Florida Stand Your Ground Shooting. Prison time or Miller time?

[Head Hunter]

This whole thing could have been avoided if the shooter had just minded his own **** business. He had no right trying to enforce a parking spot violation. The shooter instigated the altercation. I wonder if it had been the guy in the car instead of the lady and kid if he would have said anything. Seems cowardly. The dead guy had no right to shove him to ground either but he hardly deserved to die over it. this is bad for the gun rights movement. Serious lack of judgement. Again, mind your own dang business will save everyone a lot of grief.

[systemnt]

Yes it is.

Try that with a LEO.
See what their definition is.

[Head Hunter]

Yes it is.

I agree he was backing. The shooter will pay in a lot of ways. This thread would even be here if he wasn't trying to be some kinda parking spot cop on private property.

[txwhitetail]

The way the law reads he was justified.

[systemnt]

This whole thing could have been avoided if the shover hadnt escalated it to a physical altercation. He had no right assaulting the man. The shover instigated the altercation by escalating it to a physical confrontation.<not relevant> .Seems cowardly. The dead guy had no right to shove him to ground either but he hardly deserved to die over it. this is bad for the shooter , he will lose his *** in civil court. Serious lack of judgement. Again, thinking everyone is armed will save everyone a lot of grief.

.

[Burntorange Bowhunter]

After watching it again several times....what an unnecessary death.

The dude shouldn't have pointed his finger at a young lady over a parking space. It looked as if he was airing her out.

The second dude could have easily handled it differently.

There was absolutely no reason to shoot.

[txhunter007]

Try that with a LEO.
See what their definition is.

I would hope our LEO's would show better judgement.

[TxKronik]

all going to play monday morning quarterback, let's at least do it the right way[/B]: apply the applicable law to the facts.
Here is the law in Florida:

776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.
(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening 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. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

Section .041 probably deserves a mention as well.

776.041 Use or threatened use of force by aggressor.
The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use or threatened use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force or threat of force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use or threatened use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use or threatened use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use or threatened use of force.[/quote]

So let's use your post here

It says deadly force is justified against a "forcible felony" shoving someone to the ground is not a felony class b misdemeanor at best.

Further down in .041 it says

The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(2) Initially provokes the use or threatened use of force against himself or herself,

That means the instigator can't claim the defense to prosecution if they started it and someone jacks them up for it.

I would argue (and have argued in court and won a similar case but nobody died) that the shooter was the instigator of the situation and therefore is not awarded the protections of the self defense law.

I agree the shover shouldn't have shoved but the yeller instigated the whole event and should not get self defense.

Otherwise if I want to kill someone all I have to do is berate them or their significant other until they take a swing then I shoot them and I'm good?

Without a doubt the shover was retreating and the shooting is not justified and the video is clear in that. The guy stepped back and his shoulders dropped he was no longer an aggressing threat.


kronik by Diamond

[Ætheling]

"Im gonna kill you" Someone prove he said otherwise.

[Smart]

one half step is not backing away.

Quartered away while doing that is **** sure not walking to him. And why the pause between when he pulled/aimed and then shot? Just looks bad all the way around.

[batmaninja]

I agree the shover shouldn't have shoved but the yeller instigated the whole event and should not get self defense.

The yeller would not have been yelling, if the shover wasnt breaking the law parking in a handicapped spot. And they could have clearly left the handicapped spot, when they got called out, and were still in the drivers seat of the car in the handicapped spot. Shoving somebody to the ground is not on the same level as any kind of verbal confrontation. Especially if there is a 20 year age difference.

[JeffK]

I would not have pulled the trigger if I was the shooter. Wonder what he was telling the wife when the fellow walked up on him?

[35remington]

So let's use your post here

It says deadly force is justified against a "forcible felony" shoving someone to the ground is not a felony class b misdemeanor at best.

Further down in .041 it says

The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(2) Initially provokes the use or threatened use of force against himself or herself,

That means the instigator can't claim the defense to prosecution if they started it and someone jacks them up for it.

I would argue (and have argued in court and won a similar case but nobody died) that the shooter was the instigator of the situation and therefore is not awarded the protections of the self defense law.

I agree the shover shouldn't have shoved but the yeller instigated the whole event and should not get self defense.

Otherwise if I want to kill someone all I have to do is berate them or their significant other until they take a swing then I shoot them and I'm good?

Without a doubt the shover was retreating and the shooting is not justified and the video is clear in that. The guy stepped back and his shoulders dropped he was no longer an aggressing threat.

Did you become a criminal defense lawyer after you were a LEO and before you became a Building Inspector/Fire Marshal?

[bakin7005]

IDK about that one, when he pulled the gun the guy shot started backing up.

Shooter is white, I'm surprised the whole thing hasn't blown up more.

Parking lot monitor lives matter.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[systemnt]

Quartered away while doing that is **** sure not walking to him. And why the pause between when he pulled/aimed and then shot? Just looks bad all the way around.

I dont know.. i cant hear the conversation..
could have been...
Guy on ground: "GET AWAY FROM ME" (while pointing firearm at him)
Shover: "You aint gonna do **** I'll ****in kill you mother****er"

OR it could have been:

Guy on ground: "Hold still"
Shover: "What?"

We dont know what we dont know but to blanketly say the shooter wasnt in fear for his life..and the shover didnt further escalate it by not running away (when everyone else did).. isnt a good way to determine true blame.