(08-17-2018, 06:02 PM)copycat Wrote:

(08-17-2018, 03:18 PM)Jagwired Wrote: We basically agree. I have no problem with the state bringing a charge. If there is a shred of evidence that proves this man made a habit of looking for/instigating situations hoping for the result he got then appropriate punishment will be handed down. I just kinda doubt that the state will be able to disprove that in the 1.5 to 2 seconds that elapsed from the assault and the subsequent shot that the shooter had time to realize he was not in eminent danger of more physical attacks and shot the man any way. Sucks his kids had to see it.

I beg to differ.  Watch the video again, unbiased.  He was shoved and fell down.  He fumbled in his pocket to grab his pistol all the while the "assailant" did not advance upon him.  When he did produce his gun the "assailant" backed away.  Defending this jerks actions gives law abiding gun owners a bad name and gives gun control activist ammunition to take away law abiding citizens gun rights.

I've looked at the video dozens of times, and have timed the different segments with a stopwatch. McGlockton did advance three steps toward Drejka after the shove, and was pretty close to him before backing away. I agree with Kane from a previous reply that Drejka would have been more justified if he had immediately shot McGlockton when he was basically standing over him and presenting an imminent threat. However, McGlockton takes four steps backward and one step away as he turns to his right before he is shot. From the shove to the shot is approximately 4.5 to 5 seconds (not 1.5 to 2 seconds that Jagwired states). The time from McGlockton's first movement backward to the shot is approximately 2.25 to 2.5 seconds. Once Drejka has the pistol trained on McGlockton, it is approximately 1.25 seconds before the shot is fired.

Once Drejka has the pistol trained on McGlockton (a justifiable threat of the use of deadly force), and McGlockton continues to move away from Drejka, it is reasonable to believe that the use of deadly force is no longer necessary. FL Statute 776.012(2) reads, in part, "A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm ... ."

---