Guns & Stand Your Ground victory. Got a problem with that? video included.

But you've determined that all other blacks do? Do you mind me asking how you came to these findings?

 

Still seems racist. Can't see myself saying that to anyone, question mark or not.

 

God is..

 

Why did he not get a ticket for parking in a handicap parking spot with no handicap markers or displays on the tags?

 

You can't see yourself asking for clarity and so doing so seems racist to you?......




Uh oh, I put a question mark in the sentence above. Seems I just can't contain my racism.

 

If you look at the video McGlockton was re-evaluating but not disengaging, the other guy that is advancing, as soon as he sees the gun, puts considerable distance between himself and Drejka, McGlockton does not.

 

That's true. But I didn't have to move the goalposts.

 

.
You're right. I'm sorry. I meant some black people.

 

In most states, beligerant verbal abuse IS assault, and it is a chargable offense.

I didn't know there was a racist component to this, until I started reading the posts.

I did not see the woman, and both of the men involved appeared to be white to me based on what I saw on the video.

 

Look in the mirror when you say that.

 

Sure you did. You have to introduce some magical hypotheticals to make your magical point.

Reality does not care.

 

I accept your concession of the points you tried to make.

 

Agreed.

 

Yes, you can be charged with assault for verbal abuse but it isn't a felony, pushing someone is.

This means that the courts have separated the acts, one violent and justifies an action, the other doesn't.

 

I agree. I'm glad that "fear for your life" is not in Texas law. In Texas, deadly force is authorized to prevent specific crimes. The shooter might have been prosecuted in Texas because the dead guy did not have a weapon. Disparity of force would be his only possible defense. The guy who attacked him was twice his size. "Fear" isn't part of the equation, only the threat of deadly force. Does being blindsided by a guy twice your size constitute a "threat of deadly force"? That would be the question in Texas.

Texas Penal Code 9.32
(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31 ;  and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force;  or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

 

Where did he say "all other blacks"?

He was referring to himself.

 

He's already apologized and corrected himself and I liked his post doing so. You lose. Give it up already.

 

The value of life isn't relevant?

 

Sounds like an attempt at racist language control, and ducking a direct question.

 

I'm not trying to control your racist language. Have at it hoss.

 

Which does not alter my point one bit.

The guy with the gun was committing assault before he committed cold blooded murder. Which is what happens when you make it easy for hot headed idiots to walk around in public with a gun.

 

Sounds like you feel yourself to be the arbiter of what speech is acceptable, and apparently your criteria is race based.

 

How so?

I have not followed this in the news and blogs. I was only vaguely aware of it.

I watched the video. I have no heard what anyone has to say about it.

I was commenting strictly on what I saw on the video. Nothing else.

You don't shoot somebody for knocking you down, especially after you are the one who's running his mouth and committing assault.

I don't even know who these people are, or what was said.

Parking in a handcapped spot is not a mortal sin. It is usually punishable by a fine of anywhere between $125 and $500.

It was no one's business that someone parked in a handicapped spot other than law enforcement, or maybe the property owner.

 

What part of "have at it hoss" comes across as trying to be the arbiter of speech?

I literally said that I wasn't trying to control your racist language.

 

The fact we have the right to self-defense says it is, yes.
Again: what's your point?