Stand your ground laws tested ...

[Broncojohnny]

He was in the street.

I watched the video. The article says he shot the one dude fatally in his own driveway but I tend to agree with you that it appears he is in the street in the video and the driveway is across the street.

I can't believe the drunken idiots charged him. I also can't believe that he took a gun to go over and tell his neighbors to "keep it down". I think the guy needlessly escalated the situation by revealing the gun, it isn't like that is going to do anything positive. He should have told them to keep it down, kept the gun hid and then went home to call the cops. But it appears that the drunken idiots who decided to attack him have most of the blame for what happened.

[Broncojohnny]

You need to, dummy! He refereced the law with a bunch of "I have to defend myself/in fear for my life/I'm standing my ground..." nonsense. He's a fucking retard and needs to go to jail. On that note I think Zimmerman is fucked.

I think he is a retard and did the buzzword thing. I just think he has the right to defend himself in that situation. Him talking to those fools didn't help the situation at all but that doesn't mean he is guilty of murder to me.

[Steve]

The key here will be proving if he intended to go out there and shoot someone or not.

He went outside armed with a pistol, a camera and using keywords on the phone with 911 escalating the situation. In my opinion, the guy was just looking for a reason to shoot someone and he went to find out. Otherwise, he could have kept his ass in the house.

Now, if the drunks were on his property and trying to get into his house, by all means shoot them. The whole situation is stupid and someone lost their life over some noise. Stupid.

[onemeangixxer7502]

The key here will be proving if he intended to go out there and shoot someone or not.

He went outside armed with a pistol, a camera and using keywords on the phone with 911 escalating the situation. In my opinion, the guy was just looking for a reason to shoot someone and he went to find out. Otherwise, he could have kept his ass in the house.

Now, if the drunks were on his property and trying to get into his house, by all means shoot them. The whole situation is stupid and someone lost their life over some noise. Stupid.

I'd agree, very odd he brings a camera

[Vertnut]

He shouldn't have flashed a gun, but how stupid (or drunk) do you have to be to advance on, and attack a guy with a gun? There's no doubt in my mind had he gone over empty handed, that they wouldn't have beaten his ass to death.

[ceyko]

In my opinion, he escalated and it was downhill from there.

[DON SVO]

I'm of the opinion that these neighbors have all had words a number of times, they might have even gotten into heated arguments and/or shoving matches. Mr. CHL Badass decides he's gonna shut them up and record it, things got out of hand with the cursing and arguing, he draws and they taunt him aaaaaaaaaaaaand roll video.

[BERNIE MOSFET]

Getting aggressive and running your mouth at someone who you know has a weapon is a good way to get shot. Those guys got what they were asking for, right or wrong.


It seems there are two separate incidents here. The first being where he initially pulled the weapon, and the second where he was in the street and fired the weapon.

I believe it hinges on the first issue of whether or not producing the weapon was justifiable. If he can show that he was justified in using force to create an apprehension of deadly force, then he stands a chance. The law (PC 9.31) clearly states that verbal provocation alone is insufficient, and the only viable defense he has is that he felt he was in imminent danger of being murdered. That's why CHL classes teach the phrase "I feared for my life".

I think his defense fails because he didn't beat feet the hell out of there first chance he got and hole up in his home. I know he doesn't have to, and whether he did or did not is inadmissible, but it's an unavoidable fact when considering he was apparently in the street long enough for the altercation to turn south the way it did. If his attorney can successfully argue that he abandoned the encounter by retreating as far as the street from the other person's property, then perhaps the first bit is irrelevant.

It's not comparable to Joe Horn because the law clearly says that he could use deadly force to protect another person's property. Rodriguez's defense rest solely on showing he reasonably feared for his life, and didn't provoke the attack. I'm not sure that producing a weapon without justifiable cause isn't provocation. I think you can argue that anyone approaching you while you have a weapon visible is extremely hostile and not of sound mind.

[347Mike]

I am no rocket scientist but if there were a group of drunks in a heated situation why the fuck didn't he just walk 10 feet back into his house and call the cops?

[KBScobravert]

You pull iron, you better use it. I am not going to flash my gun to scare off a bunch of fuck sticks that are across the street making noise. Come on to my property and threaten to even put a single finger on me and disparity of force comes into play and I might use the line from Another 48hrs "Who else wants to limp (insert: be dead)".

Part of being a responsible gun owner is knowing when to walk away because being forced to use something you brought and end someones life is not worth what started the situation to begin with.

Those that went on the Power Tour ride last week know I did just that, walked away cause I knew that if it escalated someone was going to get shot. I did find out that my wife may be more dangerous. First time I heard her say "I'll go hit that fucker".

[ceyko]

Part of being a responsible gun owner is knowing when to walk away because being forced to use something you brought and end someones life is not worth what started the situation to begin with.

This is why I think he'll be in trouble in the end and is generally making gun owners look bad. Based off the article and video, he antagonized the situation.

Just because they had it coming when the jumped him, does NOT mean he was in the right or did not create the situation.

[matts5.0]

Why didn't he just take his instagating ass inside?

[KBScobravert]

Why didn't he just take his instagating ass inside?

So he could stand his ground and get his gun on. You can even hear him tell the person on the phone "I am standing my ground, sir". Hard for your defense to argue you were fearing for your life when you have the awareness to develop your defense before your actions.

I thumbs up the guy charging a man with a gun getting two to the chest. I thumbs down the escalation of the situation by the gun owner.

[kainzien]

When he walked onto his neighbors prperty brandishing a hangun, he lost all defense as a CHL holder. Also, him not returning to his property is another problem. A man lost his life over bullshit that could have been handled by Police. And this case is probably making gun haters jump for joy...

[SS Junk]

I am no rocket scientist but if there were a group of drunks in a heated situation why the fuck didn't he just walk 10 feet back into his house and call the cops?

Because how this shooter interprets the law, he does not have a duty to retreat. He believed he could stand his ground while mouthing off and showing he was armed. The way I understand the law and my opinion, stand your ground is a law for defense only. It has nothing to do with going outside, starting a squabble and then ending it by shooting someone. This is why I am interested in the outcome of the Zimmerman case. If it can be proven that Zimmerman retreated and was attacked he may go free whereas if he did exactly what this guy did, he will be found guilty. This of course if he can actually have a fair trial.