(08-21-2018, 12:38 PM)Kane Wrote: If I may play Devil's advocate here... do McGlockton's initial steps forward initiate an aggravated approach and thus definitely provides an additional threat level for Mr Drejka?

I would say yes. If McGlockton pushed him but didn't subsequently advance, it is still an assault on Drejka, but the dynamics would seem to shift toward a reduced threat. By advancing, it's pretty clear that McGlockton is presenting an imminent threat of further violence to Drejka.

Quote:Also... is a 3 second difference enough for any person to decide (after already pulling the weapon) that the trigger doesn't need to be pulled.

I'd say yes to this as well, or even in much less than 3 seconds, in a situation like this.

Quote:I've heard often from gun owners "only pull a gun if you're going to use it" or "if you plan to use it"
Honestly I don't know... I've never shot anyone. Or had to pull a gun to protect myself.

The saying really should be something like, "Don't pull a gun if you have no intention of potentially using it." There are many situations where someone may reasonably pull a gun and then not use it as the situation develops. Police officers do that in hundreds or even thousands of instances every day across the US. I've done it myself.  In this particular situation, it was reasonable that Drejka pulled a gun in order to protect himself from further imminent threat. What's somewhat murky is if it is reasonable that he fired the shot when he did, after McGlockton had backed up and started to turn away. I think most people would say that Drejka's actions would have been more reasonable if he had shot McGlockton immediately. And I believe that most people would say that Drejka's actions would not have been reasonable if a couple more seconds had elapsed and McGlockton had continued to move away before Drejka fired. But in regards to what actually transpired, is it reasonable that Drejka would believe that the use of deadly force was necessary in that time frame and McGlockton's disposition toward him? In my personal opinion, it is not reasonable, but I can see the other side of the argument, and would trust the court system to come up with a just verdict after all facts are presented.

Quote:Personally I'd like to think that if I were to pull a gun I wouldn't pull the trigger unless further approached. And it seems to me Drejka decided WHEN he pulled his gun that he was firing it

Based on his prior behavior he seems pretty aggressive in brandishing a weapon or threatening someone. He may have been someone just looking for an excuse.

Quote:All I know is the law is good and right. The wording may need some adjusting though.

I think there will be some changes to the law, particularly if Drejka gets off. One reason why many (but admittedly not all) of the original proponents of the law, including the NRA lobbyist that pushed the law, wanted Drejka charged is because of public outcry against the law if Drejka got off scot-free.  They would like to keep the law essentially intact with perhaps only some minor tweaks, but don't want the law to be seen as justifying incidences like this.

---