It's not illegal nor an escalation to simply have a loaded gun on you

Teslag said:

---

It's not illegal nor an escalation to simply have a loaded gun on you

---

And it's not like she got out her car brandishing the gun AT him. He was away. It looks like she had reason to believe he was coming back to get her, and she got out and held her gun at her side while talking to the car next to her. You then see when he initially gets there, he's coming at her pretty fast and she still hasn't raised the gun.

Looks like he notices the gun and backs off a little. She backs up even more and points and he starts following her around the car.

The gun argument now, is reminding me of the scene from the movie Chicago

Apparently he died doing what he loved, which was arguing over a parking space.

96AgGrad said:

---

Apparently he died doing what he loved, which was arguing over a parking space.

---

Rule 1:

If someone points a gun at you, assume the worst and exit the area as quickly and safely as possible. This guy was probably in the right but it was not a hill worth dying on.

Quote:

---

Texaggie7nine

---

spreadsheet updated

5Amp said:

---

Rule 1:

If someone points a gun at you, assume the worst and exit the area as quickly and safely as possible. This guy was probably in the right but it was not a hill worth dying on.

---

Rule 1: always stay strapped
Rule 2: stay away from idiots (and dont be one)

Three rules. Got it.

JDUB08AG said:

---

What the hell is that guy doing walking towards her when she has a gun pointed at him? How incredibly stupid.

---

Did he cross a line? Audio would help. One thing is for certain. He was stupid for approaching her. Not quite Darwin stupid, but pretty damn close.

Quote:

---

Law enforcement can still investigate a self-defense incident using standard procedures, but they cannot arrest you unless they find probable cause that the force was unlawful.7 If charges are filed anyway, you can request a pretrial immunity hearing before a judge. This hearing is separate from the trial and resolves the self-defense question first.
At the hearing, once you raise a basic self-defense claim, the burden shifts to the prosecution. The state must prove by clear and convincing evidence that your use of force was not justified.7 "Clear and convincing" is a higher bar than the "preponderance of evidence" standard used in most civil cases, though lower than "beyond a reasonable doubt." If the prosecution fails to meet that burden, the judge dismisses the charges entirely. You never face a jury.

---

Based upon what we have seen at this point, she will not prevail at such a hearing, IMO.

She will go to trial.

Teslag said:

---

It's not illegal nor an escalation to simply have a loaded gun on you

---

That's not what's being discussed, and you know it. Brandishing a firearm and pointing it at someone when you're not facing an imminent threat isn't lawful self-defense.

Ag_SGT said:

---

Teslag said:

---

It's not illegal nor an escalation to simply have a loaded gun on you

---

That's not what's being discussed, and you know it. Brandishing a firearm and pointing it at someone when you're not facing an imminent threat isn't lawful self-defense.

---

Agreed. Florida law explained.

Quote:

---

Chapter 776 explicitly protects the threat to use force, not just the actual use of force. You can display or mention a weapon as a deterrent when the circumstances would justify actually using that weapon. But there is a razor-thin line between a justified defensive display and a criminal offense under a separate statute.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Section 790.10 makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to display a firearm, knife, or other weapon in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner when you are not acting in legitimate self-defense.6 The practical distinction comes down to whether a reasonable person in your position would have believed a threat was imminent. If yes, showing the weapon is a protected threat of force. If no, the same act is "improper exhibition" and you are the one committing a crime. Drawing a gun during a verbal argument that hasn't turned physical is the classic way people end up on the wrong side of this line.

---

---

LINK

WalMart isn't exactly known for drawing in the deep thinkers who can control their emotions when stressed. Looks like a bad combination got together here and resulted in one person dead and the other's life altered in a way she likely didn't want it to be facing the legal system.

aggiehawg said:

---

Ag_SGT said:

---

Teslag said:

---

It's not illegal nor an escalation to simply have a loaded gun on you

---

That's not what's being discussed, and you know it. Brandishing a firearm and pointing it at someone when you're not facing an imminent threat isn't lawful self-defense.

---

Agreed. Florida law explained.

Quote:

---

Chapter 776 explicitly protects the threat to use force, not just the actual use of force. You can display or mention a weapon as a deterrent when the circumstances would justify actually using that weapon. But there is a razor-thin line between a justified defensive display and a criminal offense under a separate statute.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Section 790.10 makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to display a firearm, knife, or other weapon in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner when you are not acting in legitimate self-defense.6 The practical distinction comes down to whether a reasonable person in your position would have believed a threat was imminent. If yes, showing the weapon is a protected threat of force. If no, the same act is "improper exhibition" and you are the one committing a crime. Drawing a gun during a verbal argument that hasn't turned physical is the classic way people end up on the wrong side of this line.

---

---

LINK

---

Nice find. I think based on statute shes ****ed and I change my mind. No self defense claim here.

Quote:

---

Nice find. I think based on statute shes ****ed and I change my mind. No self defense claim here.

---

You are welcome. I try to explain how the law works in these cases in an accessible manner for laymen. I recommend you read that entire article on Florida's self defense laws because it not just citing statutes it is providing clear explanations of the practical effects of those statutes.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

Ducks4brkfast said:

---

Texaggie7nine said:

---

The second video is plenty of evidence. He followed her AROUND a car while she had the gun and told him to get away? You think a man should be able to threaten and stalk a female like that and she can't defend herself?

---

People are allowed to get into arguments. People are allowed to move about freely in public.

A woman telling a man to get away is a prima facie case for deadly force?

Does this same standard apply to sporting events if a man a woman start arguing?

In line in for a ski lift?

If a woman tells a man to get away, he must? Or he dies?

---

Why are you leaving out the fact that she had a gun pointed at him telling him to get away, while he followed her around multiple cars as she continued to back up and tried to get away from him? He still kept stalking her.

---

Or he's an innocent, poor judge of other people.

We don't know what the man said. Would it make a difference if he said something like, "Drop that gun or I will shove up your back door"?

Teslag said:

---

Need more facts but if you are backing away with a gun and someone ignores that and keeps coming at you then they do intend to harm you, possibly with deadly intent.

---

Or they're just very stupid.

Think about the intelligence of the average person. Half the population is below that.

Teslag said:

---

It's not illegal nor an escalation to simply have a loaded gun on you

---

Good thing that's not what happened.

EMY92 said:

---

Just based on the video, he looked to be aggressive, the woman was backing up and he kept approaching. I don't have any issue with the woman's actions.

Now, that could change with more facts, but based on the short video, I don't think she was in the wrong.

---

So we get to kill angry people now?

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

Yea, although I know little to nothing about this video/case, this one shouldn't have anything to do with race IMO, like so many others do. Maybe she shouldn't have pulled a gun, who knows. Could be and most likely is more to the story.

However, for you guys, what would you want your wife to do while a man keeps getting closer and closer despite her retreating and asking him to back off? Seriously would you want her to wait until this (obviously messed up) gentleman attacked her and did who knows what???

Then it would be, oh you should have shot that SOB when you could have!

---

Even "better safe than sorry" has it's limits. It's highly unlikely her life was in danger, yet she met the threat with deadly force. Really not much different from those high schoolers in Frisco.

Jeeper79 said:

---

EMY92 said:

---

Just based on the video, he looked to be aggressive, the woman was backing up and he kept approaching. I don't have any issue with the woman's actions.

Now, that could change with more facts, but based on the short video, I don't think she was in the wrong.

---

So we get to kill angry people now?

---

Looks like the standard is...

If you and I are in a road rage incident, we get out of our cars and you point your loaded gun at me, and I walk towards you and you say stop or I'll shoot and I don't stop, you can kill me dead. No harm, no foul. SMH

Logos Stick said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

EMY92 said:

---

Just based on the video, he looked to be aggressive, the woman was backing up and he kept approaching. I don't have any issue with the woman's actions.

Now, that could change with more facts, but based on the short video, I don't think she was in the wrong.

---

So we get to kill angry people now?

---

Looks like the standard is...

If you and I are in a road rage incident, we get out of our cars and you point your loaded gun at me, and I walk towards you and you say stop or I'll shoot and I don't stop, you can kill me dead. No harm, no foul. SMH

---

If I were on the jury, I'd say manslaughter. Illegal to brandish gun in a threatening manner for an argument, but once your gun is pulled and if you made it clear you had no intention to fight and told him to get back, and you kept walking back around your car saying get back and he kept coming at you. I'd say you were forced into shooting him but you instigated it so manslaughter.

Jeeper79 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Need more facts but if you are backing away with a gun and someone ignores that and keeps coming at you then they do intend to harm you, possibly with deadly intent.

---

Or they're just very stupid.

Think about the intelligence of the average person. Half the population is below that.

---

I always remind myself that the people I interact with regularly are ahead the curve, at least one standard deviation above the mean likely. I'd be shocked if I interact, regularly, with people below the mean.

So when I'm thinking of stupid people, I'm still thinking of people who are above average. When you deal with the opposite, you're dealing with people who do not possess the intellect to think using the same logic and problem solving skills. People are dumb, really dumb. Dumb to the point that they don't handle emotions well or make sense of things especially when there's a surge of adrenaline pumping through their veins

Florida is a stand your ground state and I believe in cases like this they conduct a "stand your ground" hearing.

Not sure, but I would guess the hearing is at a judge's discretion. Someone enlighten me.

From listening to Branca too much, I've learned that self defense burden of proof lands on the defendant. As opposed to the State. Can't wait to hear what he says.

Escalation could be a factor, but FL is pretty "liberal" when it comes to stand your ground. I think there's been cases like this where no charges were filed and no "stand your ground" hearing was conducted.

That she got out of her car w/ her phone in one hand and a gun in the other is troubling. Had she stayed in the car and was approached, her self defense case would be stronger. OTOH had the victim retreated, you could argue she could be charged w/ aggravated assault w/ a deadly weapon.

W/ the racial aspect, this will be interesting to say the least.

Get your popcorn ready...

When she pulled the gun, if the dude would have walked away and called 911, she would have gone to jail over that.

If the woman was a cop, everybody would be saying she had a right to shoot under those circumstances.

Principal Uncertainty said:

---

When she pulled the gun, if the dude would have walked away and called 911, she would have gun to jail over that.

If the woman was a cop, everybody would be saying she had a right to shoot under those circumstances.

---

First point, yes.

Second point, no. It's not even a hypothetical that is plausible either.

Principal Uncertainty said:

---

When she pulled the gun, if the dude would have walked away and called 911, she would have gun to jail over that.

If the woman was a cop, everybody would be saying she had a right to shoot under those circumstances.

---

That is so wrong as to be spectacular. LOL.

No, we would not say that under the tests for excessive use of force applicable to LEOs. Not by a longshot, pun intended.

I don't see this as a race thing. Honestly, the guy is nuts and it was just a matter of time that he flips sheat on an innocent bystander.

Darwin +1

Edit: someone on pg.2 brought up the mic drop point. If that was your wife or kid would you not have agreed with them to drop the idiot? She gave him plenty of chances

Meh, that dude was far less of a threat than Markeis McGlockton. Michael Drejka went to prison in Florida for killing him, so I think this lady is probably toast.

Ducks4brkfast said:

---

Texaggie7nine said:

---

The second video is plenty of evidence. He followed her AROUND a car while she had the gun and told him to get away? You think a man should be able to threaten and stalk a female like that and she can't defend herself?

---

People are allowed to get into arguments. People are allowed to move about freely in public.

A woman telling a man to get away is a prima facie case for deadly force?

Does this same standard apply to sporting events if a man a woman start arguing?

In line in for a ski lift?

If a woman tells a man to get away, he must? Or he dies?

---

What ? Yea if someone is pointing a gun at you and tells you to get away from them and you do the opposite. Chances are high that you're getting shot. So yea back tf up.

Hill08 said:

---

I don't see this as a race thing. Honestly, the guy is nuts and it was just a matter of time that he flips sheat on an innocent bystander.

Darwin +1

Edit: someone on pg.2 brought up the mic drop point. If that was your wife or kid would you not have agreed with them to drop the idiot? She gave him plenty of chances

---

She had many more. She was in her car. A space where STG might have actually applied under Florida law.

He comes at her car? Trying to open the doors or using a crowbar to break the windshield with her inside? Shoot away through whatever is there or not there,. Florida law would allow that as self defense.

NONE of that happened here. The moment she exits her car, obviously armed with a gun, she loses that. No children nor anyone else in the car she is protecting. No legal reason to pull the gun in the first place. Might have helped had there been young children in the vehicle but none wee present that I have seen.

Please correct me if I am mistaken about that..

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Agree with the end. However, I would need to see and know more about how it started and what was said along the way. If she instigated and escalated it into a deadly situation, I don't give her points for backing away at the end. She was the first (and only) to pull the gun, so what exactly was happening, being said, and their positioning around that is the portion I'm most interested in.

---

She was safe in her car. She left that protection armed, openly so. That's escalation wherein she was presenting the deadly threat. Backing up a few feet with the gun still pointed at him is not retreating nor deescalation.

To put this into perspective, had he been armed and she pointed her gun at him in the fashion she did, he would then have a claim of self defense had he shot her.

---

Is she allowed to leave her car and walk freely. The safety of her car? Is she allowed to carry this weapon legally? What is she supposed to do? Fight him? Run?