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

[exnihilo]

No, it was just the cops making the unsurprising decision not to punish a white man for shooting a black man.

Yep. No white person has ever gone to prison before for shooting a black person. Funny thing is when it comes to interracial violence whites are far more often the victims rather than perpetrator.

 

[exnihilo]

Yet again you try to shift the blame to this black family. You wonder “Why didn’t he just tell his wife to move the car?” instead of “Why did this guy kill a man over a parking space?”

Well the blame is entirely on the man who shoved the other man. He started the violence. Just because it didn’t end well for him doesn’t take away the blame which he bears entirely for being violent.

 

[Mi_Rose]

Entirely? Not even a tiny bit on the guy who pulled the trigger…? None!

 

[exnihilo]

However, she and her husband could have made different choices also that could have led to a peaceful outcome.

You’ve uncovered the problem. Liberals don’t think actions should have consequences. And it they do they think someone else should pay them.

He may have felt threatened when he was first pushed down, and if he had shot him immediately right then I might have agreed with you. But it is clear from the video that some time elapsed during which McGlockton took no further action and was in the act of backing away when Drejka pulled out his gun. You can see McGlockton raise his hands and continue to back away calmly while Drejka held a gun on him. There was no need to fire the gun at that point. Drejka has secured his safety that he thought was threatened.

Hard to say. I can see how you’d come to the conclusions you did. But I don’t think video evidence is always as clear as we think it is. A lot can be lost based on the angle. We just don’t see what the shooter saw. I’ve seen countless videos where what I though happened was disproved by another angle. It happens frequently with something as simple as sports replays.

As for time and distance that is also hard to say. Not a lot of time had really elapsed. When we watch the video we aren’t experiencing a real threat. We haven’t just had violence initiated against us. Also, a short distance like that can easily be covered before you can fire your weapon. The man was at a disadvantage havin been shoved to the ground by the attacker.

To me it is obvious the sheriff was right when he didn’t want to bring charges. The man who initiated violence created a legitimate self defense case. I think a good defense lawyer will easily win this case.

 

[exnihilo]

From a legal standpoint yes. The man who initiated the violence is entirely responsible. For instance if the man who did the shooting had first shoved the man who shoved him then the shooter would not be able to claim self defense.

 

[Mi_Rose]

Why I am glad I am not a lawyer

 

[LeafByNiggle]

John24:

No, it was just the cops making the unsurprising decision not to punish a white man for shooting a black man.

Yep. No white person has ever gone to prison before for shooting a black person.

“Few” white people…

Funny thing is when it comes to interracial violence whites are far more often the victims rather than perpetrator.

This reports says the opposite. But consider that any such statistics are gathered from victim reports. Once you factor in the distrust that minorities feel for the police, it is not surprising that they do not report as incidences of violence as often.

 

[exnihilo]

I’m sorry but the FBI uniform crime reports is very clear that when it comes to interracial violence Whites are disproportionately the victims. We have to trust the FBI and its numbers, right?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

From a legal standpoint yes. The man who initiated the violence is entirely responsible. For instance if the man who did the shooting had first shoved the man who shoved him then the shooter would not be able to claim self defense.

That is not a valid defense. If there is no imminent threat, the conditions that preceded the shooting cannot be used to justify the shooting. Imagine for instance if 1 hour had gone by. Could you still say that the shoving to the ground an hour ago justifies the shooting right now, an hour later? Of course not! The only relevant factor for self-defense is the presence of an imminent threat, regardless of who started the dispute. (And it could be argued that Drejka started the dispute by yelling at McGlocton’s girlfriend. Depending on how loud and in-your-face it was, that could be considered a threat. Maybe it was McGlocton who was initially “standing his ground” by defending his girlfriend from attack.)

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I’m sorry but the FBI uniform crime reports is very clear that when it comes to interracial violence Whites are disproportionately the victims. We have to trust the FBI and its numbers, right?

None of which you have cited. Whereas I did cite my sources.

 

[dvdjs]

The video made it look like the situation was over by the time he fired.

Exactly. As noted in the article:

Rayner pointed out that the security video shows McGlockton retreating from Drejka after he pushed the man down in an effort to protect Jacobs and his children. She said that it took four seconds for Drejka to make “the conscious decision” to shoot McGlockton.

 

[7_Sorrows]

McGlockton saw the gun and realized the situation had changed. If the man did not
have a gun, what would have happened?
The man while on the ground was still at the disadvantage. That is why he pulled the gun and was still frightened from what had just taken place.
It will be up to 2 lawyers and a jury now.

 

[7_Sorrows]

7_Sorrows:

If you don’t understand by now that complaining about someone parked in a handicapped parking space would never have ended in murder if the man had not
exited the store and

I’m glad to see that you recognize that it was murder.

I think we’re on the same page here.

Yes, by murder I mean he was killed.

I am a woman, but if I had had a gun I might have done the same thing if someone had pushed me to the ground like that and I felt threatened.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The gunman first went to the woman’s car and yelled at her for parking in a handicap spot.

The man did not have the authority to do this and was acting in an aggressive manner until the husband came out of the store.

The husband then shoved the man to the ground to get him to back off and mind his own business,

At that point, the man pulled out a gun and murdered the husband.

The fault lies with the man trying to take the law into his own hands about the handicap parking spot.

BTW, my son is has cerebral palsy and has a handicap placard but I wouldn’t yell at some one for taking a handicap parking spot.

Jim

 

[sallybutler]

Didn’t the man who was killed have a right to protect his family? He came out of the store because someone was threatening his wife and children.

Or does stand your ground only count if you have a gun? Trying to get someone to stop threatening your family with only a shove doesn’t count???

 

[ucfengr]

The gunman first went to the woman’s car and yelled at her for parking in a handicap spot.

The man did not have the authority to do this and was acting in an aggressive manner until the husband came out of the store.

I don’t know about authority, but I’m pretty sure the 1st amendment gives him the right. And from the video, I don’t see that Drejka was acting in a threatening manner. It doesn’t look like he was approaching her or making any threatening gestures.

The husband then shoved the man to the ground to get him to back off and mind his own business,

Which he had neither the authority nor right to do. You don’t get to violently assault someone because you don’t like what they say.

At that point, the man pulled out a gun and murdered the husband.

He’s been charged, but not convicted, with “manslaughter”, not murder.

The fault lies with the man trying to take the law into his own hands about the handicap parking spot.

Drejka exercising his 1st amendment right to free speech justifies a violent assault.

BTW, my son is has cerebral palsy and has a handicap placard but I wouldn’t yell at some one for taking a handicap parking spot.

That’s nice for you, but you certainly would be within your rights to if you chose to do so.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

He’s not the law and the man was yelling at the wife in the car.

That’s aggression and had she had a gun, under the Florida “Stand Your Ground Law,” and the logic you’re giving the gunman here, she could’ve shot him and not be charged.

That’s nice for you, but you certainly would be within your rights to if you chose to do so.

No I would not be in my rights to yell at a person who was parked in a handicap spot.

BTW, a person sitting in the car with the engine running is not considered parked, but standing.

Jim

 

[Imdaman]

I’m sorry but there is no way that this man was justified with shooting this man. I believe a manslaughter charge is the correct charge for this shooting.

 

[Theo520]

That guy had been in trouble before for accosting people and using racial slurs at that same place…he’s not some poor little old shrinking violet…I hope he gets thrown in jail for a long time…that’s just a knee jerk reaction killing…I think the Sheriff who said he wouldn’t be initially charged was making the point how pathetic the stand your ground law is here in Florida…the Trayvon Martin case was another classic example of a senseless killing by someone who thought he was a law unto himself

Yea, the sheriff seems a dolt.

The Trayvon Martin case had zero, zilch, nada to do with Stand Your Ground Law.
It was a pure old school self defense case that never should have been prosecuted.

 

[Inisfallen]

McGlockton saw the gun and realized the situation had changed. If the man did not
have a gun, what would have happened?

What might happen, maybe, maybe not, hardly seems to me adequate reason to take a life.