More People Use a Gun in Self-Defense Each Year Than Die in Car Accidents

I can see where you’re coming from, but I just can’t get behind it. Once on the ground, if the guy doing the shoving moves in and starts going for the MMA knockout, then yeah, I can see it. But dude got shoved and knocked off balanced. Not taking hammer fists to the temple. I just don’t agree that deadly force was justified here.

 

Also another thing to note about the law on Florida is that it says you don’t have to retreat from your vehicle or home. Not a parking lot that you don’t own. The shooter could’ve easily avoided this, but considering this is in Florida, it’ll stand.

 

I think the "stand your ground" is not exclusive to location and extends to any situation.

 

I do not believe that’s correct. But let me verify

 

Yeah I think you’re right. I was reading a different subsection

 

Thanks for verifying.

 

Legal schmegal. It’s not the law that’s the problem, it’s readiness of too many people to think that just because they have a gun they can use it like Dirty Harry. When shooting another human is so lightly considered our society has a serious problem. It’s a problem that NO LAW limiting gun ownership will solve. It will take a change in what’s considered acceptable. From what I see on the tape neither person was without fault. This could have and should have been de-escalated easily except both men solution was violence. Think about it people is either man’s position worth violence?

 

I agree. I also agree that it wasn't over a parking space. While the parking issue may have been where it started, it wasn't what caused the final outcome.

An interesting question when you consider that McGlockton has a rap sheet that includes Aggravated Battery-Domestic, Resisting Arrest, Disorderly Conduct while the baby momma sitting in the car was arrested just 2 years ago for Battery, Causing Injury. Drejka probably had a good reason for legally carrying and it IS Florida. At this point, if you live there and don't know the law, it's a good time to study up.

There is no audio so we are all left to interpret only what we see and video can be compelling or it can be misleading depending on what he expect or hope to see. Frankly, while I see a lot of people claiming that the video shows the shooter to be in the wrong, I say he should be thanking God there is a video. And that is important since the baby momma has proven to be a liar in stating she only parked there because there were no open spots....the video shows that to be false.

It all starts with her choosing to park illegally. Don't park there, no problem. Drejka has every right to initiate a complaint with the woman as she has no Handicap placard visibly placed. That's what free speech allows....maybe even compels when you see someone else willfully breaking the law. Once her selfishness was pointed out, she should have moved the car. Move the car, no problem. Another motorist parks, observes the "argument" (we have no idea what was said), pauses briefly at the door, and enters the store. Mere moments later, McGlockton exits the store without his 5-year old son and moves quickly to Drejka. With zero hesitation, no attempt to talk, he aggressively shoves Drejka with both hands so that Drejka hits the ground with enough impact that had his head hit, he could likely have been knocked out. There are lots of cases where people were fighting, one falls and hits their head on the pavement/curb....dies...and it results in manslaughter.

Watch the video one more time. Just as the other motorist exits the store, look at McGlockton. The view is partially obscured but to me it looks like he may have put his hands in his pockets....could it have looked like he was reaching for a gun? Maybe. And at the same time, the baby momma exits the vehicle so we have one man down on the ground having been assaulted by a man 20 years younger and much bigger, and another potential threat in the woman. Is it reasonable that he shot? I think so....despite the near-4 second delay between pulling the weapon and shooting. Again, we have no idea what was said and the baby momma's testimony can't be trusted. How much time did it take for McGlockton to hear about the argument, exit the store, walk to the parking spot? Every step can be considered a moment of reflection. But once you decide to start the violence, all bets are off.

But this isn't about a parking spot. It's about race IMO. Racial issues, violence, and fear may be what led Drejka to carry. And IMO, it was race that caused McGlockton to go hard. If Drejka had been another black man of equal size or age, I'm not convinced he reacts the same way.

Why did McGlockton find it necessary to "protect his family" when he had no problems beating the shit out of his baby momma all by himself?

 

How can you fault a man for shoving the cretin who was harrassing his wife and then not following it by continuing to escalate the encounter. He did nothing wrong. What would you have done?

 

How do you know he was harassing her? There is no audio. Maybe she was giving it right back. And it wasn't his wife. 3 kids and he still didn't put a ring on it....but he did the beat the shit out of her at least one time the police know about.

Of course he did something wrong. He came out of the store knowing absolutely nothing about what was happening other than what another customer may have told him, saw the other party, and had just one thought. Is there some reason he couldn't have initiated words first, rather than the shove?

And since when is exercising your first amendment rights to express your displeasure at a selfish law-breaker, the accurate description for a "cretin"?

I have expressed comments to those who park in handicap spots without a placard. I've gotten the finger, been cussed out, told to mind my own business. But it's worth it. The real cretins are the selfish, scofflaws who don't give a shit about anyone but their own convenience. If that bitch hadn't parked there, or had moved when he first approached, the father of her children would probably still be here. Actions and choices have consequences. She hasn't owned hers yet.

But to answer your question, in my opinion the first thing he should have done is secure the safety of his girlfriend and children. He acted with no thought toward them whatsoever. And then perhaps he might have taken a moment to consider who it was he was planning to assault. The man was significantly older and smaller. If we're at a point where 20 year olds can physically assault people 20 to 30 years older than they are, that's going in the wrong direction. He went macho for no reason other than to cause bodily injury.