Stand your ground strikes again..

[Sav'nBass]

Florida teen shot to death by man after dispute over loud music, police say

My question is.. if there was a gun where was it? Why was it not found at the scene? If they stayed in the gas station then cameras would have shown someone leaving the car to hide the gun. It's still too early to make an accurate assessment of this case but it sounds even worse than the Martin case.

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by Sav'nBass

My question is.. if there was a gun where was it? Why was it not found at the scene? If they stayed in the gas station then cameras would have shown someone leaving the car to hide the gun. It's still too early to make an accurate assessment of this case but it sounds even worse than the Martin case.

Why would the gun be found at the scene? The article says the shooter drove away afterwards.
Im not certain where your questions are coming from, it almost seems as if we've read different articles, but Ive only read the one you linked to.

[i_got_a_mohawk]

I think he's talking about the kids in the car (ie the guy who was shot, not the guy who shot and drove off)?

[macaroni tony]

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

I think he's talking about the kids in the car (ie the guy who was shot, not the guy who shot and drove off)?

and I'm figuring he's saying that because the shooter "felt threatened." I'm not sure. Savnbass your post is a tad confusing

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

I think he's talking about the kids in the car (ie the guy who was shot, not the guy who shot and drove off)?

Oooooh, as in "if the kids had a gun why was it not found at the scene"?
The article didnt say the kid had a gun, just that the shooter "felt threatened".

[carlos840]

This is why people should not walk around with guns!

[Relic]

there's a lot of controversy regarding "stand your ground" laws as Sav'n alludes to in the thread title... There's another story I read a few days ago where a home-owner for all intents and purposes executed two teenaged intruders.
Anyway, in this story, there's no where near enough detail for me to draw any conclusions yet. My suspicion is that the shooter's a douche lashing out but I don't know that for sure.

[FreakyStyley69]

Originally Posted by carlos840

This is why people should not walk around with guns!

.......... No

[Sav'nBass]

Originally Posted by MatticusMania

Oooooh, as in "if the kids had a gun why was it not found at the scene"?
The article didnt say the kid had a gun, just that the shooter "felt threatened".

You may not know this yet and it wasn't in the article .. but the man's lawyer said that the man said he saw a shotgun come out of the window and tat was why he felt threatened.. from what I have read thus far no one left the car..

CNN's take

This is why people should not walk around with guns!
Today 04:40 PM

I think that this is more a testament to the fact that "SyG needs to be ammended or repealed outright.

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by Sav'nBass

You may not know this yet and it wasn't in the article .. but the man's lawyer said that the man said he saw a shotgun come out of the window and tat was why he felt threatened.. from what I have read thus far no one left the car..

CNN's take

Thanks for the elaboration. Seems a phony excuse used to justify his reaction to the alleged threat.
Im sure if the kids did have a shotgun it would have been found.

[Simo98]

Those damn punk kids with their loud music. Only way to shut them up is to pop a few rounds into the passenger side door.

He clearly felt that the loud music was a threat to his health and general well-being.

[Downunderwonder]

I don't see that the legal niceties of when it's appropriate or otherwise to shoot your fellow citizens have anything to do with the case. To me it's open and shut, either self defence or murder depending on the alleged shotgun being there or not.

[iamlowsound]

Originally Posted by carlos840

This is why people should not walk around with guns!

Agreed 100%.

lowsound

[pin_head_47]

I don't see a mention of stand-your-ground in either article, though the suspect is claiming "self defense". They don't mention whether he is a legal concealed-carry permit holder, either. Also notice that the guy is currently being held without bail for murder, it's not like the cops were letting him off under the guise of "self defense" or stand-your-ground.

Whether you're in state that has any laws for or against concealed carry, every suspect is going to try and cling to "self defense" at some point.

[Smokin' Toaster]

And if he had rammed him with his automobile instead of shooting them you'd be saying "thats why people shouldn't drive automobiles around" ... wouldn't you?

A guy locally beat a girl almost to death with his fists on Thanksgiving. And that's why people shouldn't walk around with fists.

People aren't responsible for their actions... It's those dammed inanimate objects that are causing all the trouble.

Oh wait... that doesn't apply to fists... I think.

[Simo98]

Originally Posted by Downunderwonder

I don't see that the legal niceties of when it's appropriate or otherwise to shoot your fellow citizens have anything to do with the case. To me it's open and shut, either self defence or murder depending on the alleged shotgun being there or not.

I don't want to make this a gun thread or anything, although it's probably going to turn into one, but I think even in the case that they did have a shotgun on him for some reason, shooting them is hardly an appropriate response.


Someone is playing loud music, in a petrol station of all places, hardly something that is a major issue in the grand scheme of things. Maybe you walk over to them and get into some sort of argument, already a bad decision in my opinion, but for whatever reason (presumably stupidity, or had something to prove) this guy did.

Somehow this escalates to violence, presumably due to some sort of threats being made, and it ends with someone in the car pointing a gun (allegedly) at the same person who walked up to argue with them, far from appropriate, but what happens next is what really irks me. He also pulls a gun

(somehow he manages to pull a gun with a supposed shotgun in his face and fire shots without getting shot himself, seems fishy, but who knows?)


Why not just walk away? Why the **** did he have to shoot somebody? To make a point? Because he felt threatened? Don't get yourself into this sort of stupid situation in the first place, how much of an idiot do you have to be to go engage in an argument with a group of young adults, late at night, over something as insignificant as loud music. Hell, they could have called him names, insulted his mother and made snide remarks about his colour socks, he's a ****ing ADULT, walk away, this isn't primary school.

[Simo98]

Originally Posted by Smokin' Toaster

And if he had rammed him with his automobile instead of shooting them you'd be saying "thats why people shouldn't drive automobiles around" ... wouldn't you?

A guy locally beat a girl almost to death with his fists on Thanksgiving. And that's why people shouldn't walk around with fists.

People aren't responsible for their actions... It's those dammed inanimate objects that are causing all the trouble.

Oh wait... that doesn't apply to fists... I think.

Whoo! Here we go!


In all seriousness, there is a good reason I don't agree with people carrying guns, and it's exactly that, people can't even be responsible enough to put their litter in the bin and recycle, or drive safely, let alone carry a machine that shoots speeding pellets of death. I like to think people should be able to carry them safely, just like I like to think people should be able to gauge how much they've had to drink and make a good decision as to whether or not they should drive, but unfortunately it isn't so. People are stupid, and they let everybody down.

In this exact situation, had he not have had a gun, he probably never would have walked up to the car because he would (rightly so) be concerned about his own safety. Even if for some reason he did, the problem with carrying a gun is that when you're threatened, the response goes from "How can I get out of this alive" to "how can I shoot this guy and not get shot".

If he didn't have a gun on him, he'd have walked away when somebody pulled one on him. Assuming they did, which seems highly unlikely.

[hdracer]

Why isn't there ever any threads about people dieing from gang shootings?
Chicago has had 400+ people killed this year by people with no permit to carry in a city that does not allow anyone to carry a gun.

[Sav'nBass]

Originally Posted by Downunderwonder

I don't see that the legal niceties of when it's appropriate or otherwise to shoot your fellow citizens have anything to do with the case. To me it's open and shut, either self defence or murder depending on the alleged shotgun being there or not.

Yeah that's my take on it. I think SYG needs to be amended with a clause that requires at the very least reasonable effort to remove ones self from the situation because as it is now it is a license to kill ..

[Smokin' Toaster]

If someone points a shotgun at me, if they are not faster on the trigger than me I will shoot them dead. Until my gun goes click instead of bang. If someone points a gun at me, I will assume that they intend to use it and absolutely NOT wait around to find out if they are bluffing, kidding, or fooling around.

That being said, if this guy approached the car, he's an idiot and shooting him would probably have removed some bad genes from the gene pool.

And FWIW, I didn't turn it into a gun thread, Carlos840 did nine posts before mine.