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

I suppose you would say that the Anifa protester, who gets popped in the face completely unprovoked, would be justified in pulling out a gun and shooting the guy who attacked him?
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...nched-at-a-protest-against-the-police.538036/

 

If it indeed happened like that, then yeah except I think Portland is anti gun so there are probably laws there that you would have to abide by that they don't have in Clearwater Fla.

 

Some people sure do seem happy about this. I'd also argue he did not shoot to save his own life. He became the aggressor the second the attack ceased and the deceased backed off.

 

Hogwash and you're still relying on a false, stupid analogy.

 

Dazed? Ridiculous. Stop ignoring the shooters past.

 

Angry man's victim selection process failed him that day... That's one guy you definitely shouldn't shove...

 

The THUG didn't keep his hands to himself. Further, he was not the even the one being yelled at. And yelling at someone is NOT violence. Double hammering chest punching and knocking another person down IS. Some just cannot see it.

 

It is a stupid analogy to you, because you cannot counter it. It is the facts and reality of the situation. You are trying to make it something it isn't.
In the law, a verbal response elicits a verbal reply. A violent attack allows a violent defense. That is the law.

 

It is simple. The shooter did not want a violent reaction. The thug who pushed him to the ground did, AND HE PROVED IT with the double hammer put down.

 

Wrong! you dont know if hes going to violently attack you again or not and therefore dont know if the danger is over. He already did it once theres a reasonable chance he will do it again if he feels he has the oppurtunity. You dont give him a second chance you drop him like the bag of crap he is. Many police officers are killed because they believed the threat to be over when it wasnt. Secondly this piece of **** wont ever get a chance to violently attack anyone ever again. A+ on weeding out thugs.
Lastly, he or any other piece of garbabge like this should know that theyve given up their rights to live the second they decide to violently attack someone. In America you have a right to defend yourself against someone who is assaulting you. If you dont like it, I suggest moving to another country or telling people not to assault other people because many of us are legally armed citizens and are trained to shoot center mass. Please spread the word if you want to side with violent thugs. We arent going to stop defending ourselves....ever.

 

I rest my rape victims fault case. Thanks for the support I have said all alone.

 

Well what a lesson. DO NOT GO TO THE 2 scale, you simply up the anti. If he didn't go to the 2 scale (really a 4 scale by the violence of the thugs attack). Don't start something you cannot finish I guess.

 

So the shooter wanted a passive victim to shoot?

You're not getting off the hook that easy. The shooter was clearly fatalistic or he wouldn't have been seeking this. His past behavior proves it.

 

No, it's a nonsensical, ridiculous and idiotic comparison.

The law allows you to use force to protect yourself. simply flashing the gun was clearly enough. You're ignoring the reality here.

Stop.

 

Your lesson is "I dislike the way you bumped my shoulder so I am going to execute you with a handgun."

It's absurd. It's also slobberingly grotesque.

 

I'll also point out, this thread is evidence my claims this forum is infested with right wing demagogues is factual and true. Look at the astounding difference in the poll, despite the video clearly showing there was no need for force, and witness testimony proving the shooter was a fatalistic, weak chinned moron with an axe to grind who tried to do this before.

 

Sure...go with that

 

You say this after watching the video several times from the safety of your lair.
The guy on the ground likely had a different perspective, and yours doesn't matter.

 

The danger was over the second the unarmed man saw the gun, ceased his "attack" and stepped backwards.

It's especially telling because the shooter had done this before.

And if you lump yourself in with this slobbering, weak chinned ingrate shooter, I pity you. You can have that lot. As an armed citizen, these sorts of fatalistic and idiotic instances, where the victim becomes the aggressor, is how I will lose my rights to own and carry.

I have to wonder. Why do you guys have this viewpoint when it comes to slobbering morons shooting people ove rparking spaces, but you don't think citizens should be able to shoot and kill police officers that are illegally assaulting them?

 

Neither does his, because he was a fatalistic charlatan who had been seeking this type of encounter and instigated it.

 

You do know that protection of family and self is the main goal for getting a CHL, right?

 

Nevermind....it went over your head.

 

Thanks for admitting this law allows people to provoke you into legally letting them murder you.

****ing face palm.

 

it wasnt over as I explained...the part you glossy eyed over, many officers get killed in this exact situation. Why is it difficult for leftists to see that the thug was the problem not the guy defending himself against a guy that just tried to smash his head into concrete. Dont want to get shot, its real easy, dont assault people.

 

The real issue here that you and others continuously ignore is the clear and present mental health issue of the shooter. He instigated this. He wanted it. His past ACTIONS show it.

I'm in no way excusing assaulting someone. However, the second he backs up and is more than a few feet from the shooter, the threat is abated. There was no impending attack.

The shooter wanted to kill someone, period.

Stop ignoring the ****ing evidence.