Florida 'stand your ground' shooter Michael Drejka charged with manslaughter

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So what motivated the deceased to shove the man to the ground angrily? To show how tough he was?
Click to expand...
I would guess a strange man verbally harassing his wife outside the car his kids were in and refusing to back off and leave when asked to do so.

Look, I know it’s easy to get caught up in wanting to defend 2nd amendment laws and the principle of self defense. But you do not have to defend this guy to be consistent in upholding the right to self defense. This guy shot an unarmed man to death for parking in a handicapped spot and pushing him away from his wife. None of that justifies shooting him, and no hypothetical situation involving the shooter being in danger of his life is even remotely plausible with the evidence. He is charged with manslaughter, which is generous because a death resulting from DUI is manslaughter and this guy clearly had intent to shoot. A driver who killed someone while drunk at least didn’t mean to harm anyone. I fully expect him to be sentenced because there is zero evidence he was in danger of more than bruising his bum, especially after he pulled out the pistol.
 
Last edited:
No, what point are you trying to make?
That the woman was not in the car?
 
7_Sorrows said:
No, what point are you trying to make?
Click to expand...
:roll_eyes:

You incorporated into your discussion justifying the killer’s actions that he was “standing away from the car”. O have pointed out that that idea is untrue. You might, therefore, consider revising your assessment of incident.
 
Let’s get one thing straight - the guy was not shot for parking in the handicap spot.

The man did not walk up to him and shoot him because the car was parked in the handicap spot and he didn’t think he should park there.

He clearly was shot for the aggression he displayed by shoving the man to the ground. You don’t know all the facts or evidence and neither do I.

The jury will have to decide the case now in court.
 
He initiated the confrontation over a handicap spot. That started the entire scene. I also said that he pulled out the gun and shot the dad after getting pushed to the ground. But ultimately he killed a man over an argument about handicap parking; there is no way around this.
 
Yes, he made contact with the person sitting in the car (who was not the person who accosted him) and the person in the car had the choice of ignoring him or parking somewhere else to get away from him.

He was not killed over an argument about handicap parking unless the victim walked out of the convenience store and yelled to the man he couldn’t tell him where to park.
I don’t know if any words were exchanged between the 2 men or not. I don 't know if
any words were exchanged between the woman in the car and the other man.

If the victim had walked out of the store and handled the situation differently, the
shooting would never have happened and the family would still have the father.
 
I’m sorry, you can’t pretend that the “person in the car” and the “man in the store” are two wholely unrelated people, or that the man confronting the shooter was unrelated to the shooter harassing “the woman”. They were husband and wife and the car belonged to both of them. You can’t seperate the incident. Blaming this on the man who got shot and killed is ridiculous. The shooter is a nutcase and his nutcase actions finally resulted in someone’s death.
 
I wasn’t pretending they were unrelated.
I don’t know their names. Stop trying to
twist what I am saying. Whether the shooter is unstable or has mental health issues will be decided before they go to court I assume. It seems he had a legal right to own a gun and he has a right to
defend himself. It will be up to the jury
to decide if his life was in danger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top