Stand Your Ground Law's Latest Victim

[OzmO]

Mute Air Force Vet Ronald Westbrook, With Advanced Alzheimer's...

Unreal... what a clown, running into a situation with guns blazing, having zero information on the situation.

Dude deserves to be locked up just for being stupid.

I have to agree.  He should, and i think he will be charged.

Can anyone here argue that he had justifiable reasons to feel life threatened?

[Dos Equis]

I have to agree.  He should, and i think he will be charged.

Can anyone here argue that he had justifiable reasons to feel life threatened?

According to the first article I posted, "Georgia's self-defense law generally allows a person to use force when they have reason to believe they are under a physical threat."

Did he have a reasonable belief that he was under a physical threat?  I say yes.  He was new to the neighborhood.  He thinks someone is trying to break into his house.  It's 4 a.m.  The person is trying to open his door.  The person is on his property and fails to respond to commands while walking towards him, on his property.  Sounds like a physical threat to me. 

[240 is Back]

I have to agree.  He should, and i think he will be charged.

Can anyone here argue that he had justifiable reasons to feel life threatened?

He was inside the house, safely locked door, police on the way, staying put for 10 minutes.

SOMETHING motivated him to leave safety and put himself into the confusing situation outside.  His woman was on phone with 911, he KNEW they would be there soon.

This SOMETHING... was it frustration with police taking so long?  If so, that's very bad for him.  The 911 tapes tell all... have they been released yet?  Whatever he said to wife/police the moment before he opened that door.

let's just be clear... if he said something along the lines of "Oh, the heck with it, they're taking too long, I'm handling this myself..." and shots rang out 5 seconds later lol.... well, his goose is cooked and anyone who still defends that as a "tragic mistake", well... lol

[240 is Back]

Did he have a reasonable belief that he was under a physical threat?  I say yes.  He was new to the neighborhood.  He thinks someone is trying to break into his house.  It's 4 a.m.  The person is trying to open his door.  The person is on his property and fails to respond to commands while walking towards him, on his property.  Sounds like a physical threat to me. 

First let's eliminate stand your ground.  Completely nothing to do with this.
next let's eliminate castle doctrine.  Doesn't apply to yards.

The only defense here is "i feared for my life".  Good luck selling that one. 

[Dos Equis]

First let's eliminate stand your ground.  Completely nothing to do with this.
next let's eliminate castle doctrine.  Doesn't apply to yards.

The only defense here is "i feared for my life".  Good luck selling that one. 

He didn't have to fear for his life.  But don't let the facts get in the way.  You never do.   

[OzmO]

According to the first article I posted, "Georgia's self-defense law generally allows a person to use force when they have reason to believe they are under a physical threat."

Did he have a reasonable belief that he was under a physical threat?  I say yes.  He was new to the neighborhood.  He thinks someone is trying to break into his house.  It's 4 a.m.  The person is trying to open his door.  The person is on his property and fails to respond to commands while walking towards him, on his property.  Sounds like a physical threat to me.  

To use "Deadly Force" under physical threat?      I don't think so.    Its not that simple.     So if i push someone for bumping into me can he justifiably shoot me?

I don't think it been establish he was under any kind of physical threat:

He was new to the neighborhood

Irrelevant

He thinks someone is trying to break into his house.  The person is trying to open his door.

Other than ringing the door bell and turning the door knob what else was this guy doing?  
Was he trying to pick the lock?  NO.  
Was there attempted forced entry? NO.  
Was he trying to gain entrance else where like a window? NO.

It's 4 a.m.

Still irrelevant

The person is on his property and fails to respond to commands while walking towards him, on his property.

Was he aggressively coming at him?  did he have a weapon?  Were his hands in a fist?  where they raised?


Doesn't sound at all like a physical threat.


Also, he left the "safety" of his house that wasn't violated and shot the man who had NO weapon and wasn't coming at him in an aggressive fashion

[Dos Equis]

To use "Deadly Force" under physical threat?      I don't think so.   So if i push someone for bumping into me can he justifiably shoot him?  Its not simple.

I don't think it be establish he was under any kind of physical threat:Irrelevant
Other than ringing the door bell and turning the door knob what else was this guy doing?  
Was he trying to pick the lock?  NO.  
Was there attempted forced entry? NO.  
Was he trying to gain entrance else where like a window? NO.
Still irrelevant

Was he aggressively coming at him?  did he have a weapon?  Were his hands in a fist?  where they raised?


Doesn't sound at all like a physical threat.

Someone pushing you is irrelevant.  That's not what happened.

Being new to the neighborhood is relevant.  He probably didn't know all of his neighbors.  He probably didn't know there was someone with Alzheimer's living nearby.  I think there is much less of a comfort level about your surroundings when you move to a new place.  That all factors into his mindset.  

Someone trying to open your door at 4 a.m. sounds like forced entry to me.  

The fact it was 4 a.m. is relevant.  A person is much more likely to be fearful at 4 a.m., being woken from their sleep, than 9 a.m. or 4 p.m.

What does "aggressively coming at him mean"?  I think the fact someone who was trying to open your door at 4 a.m. is on your property walking towards you and not responding to commands is being "aggressive."  

All of the factors, when considered together, sound like a threat to me.

[240 is Back]

Being new to the neighborhood is relevant.  He probably didn't know all of his neighbors.

Disagree... you can drop most in the middle of Georgia or Alaska or China... and they'll have the common sense not to leave safety for an ELECTIVE confrontation, and shooting into an unknown shadow.

I want the 911 tapes... leaving safety with a gun to face down an unknown - when police were en route - is just asinine.  Dude wanted trigger time.  I bet there's anger in his voice as he heads out - and yeah, I'm sure just like with zimmerman, ppl will defend it, saying the anger had nothing to do with his mindset lol...

[OzmO]

Someone pushing you is irrelevant.  That's not what happened.

Being new to the neighborhood is relevant.  He probably didn't know all of his neighbors.  He probably didn't know there was someone with Alzheimer's living nearby.  I think there is much less of a comfort level about your surroundings when you move to a new place.  That all factors into his mindset. 

So a person's mind set is a factor?

So new people in neighborhoods have more justification for shooting people than a person who has lived there a while?

I don't think so.

Someone trying to open your door at 4 a.m. sounds like forced entry to me. 

There is a difference between turning a door knob to gain entry versus turning a knob to force entry.  If i knock on your door and turn your door knob am i guilty of attempted B & E?  I don't think so in ANY state in the US.
 

What does "aggressively coming at him mean"?  I think the fact someone who was trying to open your door at 4 a.m. is on your property walking towards you and not responding to commands is being "aggressive." 

All of the factors, when considered together, sound like a threat to me.

You seem to be arguing that he "felt" physically threatened.   Feelings don't determine danger when it comes to justifiable cause to use deadly force in defense of being physically threatened.  If so, I can go to Georgia, walk down a street and if someone threatens me i can shoot them justifiably? 

I am no lawyer, but it would seem to me they would have to prove that he was in fact physically threaten NOT the he felt threatened.

Here are the facts:

1.  NO forced attempted entry  (unless of course the law says turning a door knob is attempted B&E)
2.  No weapon on victim, nor any statement be shooter that he thought victim had weapon
3.  NO aggressive behavior (unless of course walking towards someone in any situation is considered aggressive)
4.  He left his house (where he was safe at that moment) and shot the guy. 

No case what so ever here for being physically threatened.

[Dos Equis]

So a person's mind set is a factor?

So new people in neighborhoods have more justification for shooting people than a person who has lived there a while?

I don't think so.

There is a difference between turning a door knob to gain entry versus turning a knob to force entry.  If i knock on your door and turn your door knob am i guilty of attempted B & E?  I don't think so in ANY state in the US.
 
You seem to be arguing that he "felt" physically threatened.   Feelings don't determine danger when it comes to justifiable cause to use deadly force in defense of being physically threatened.  If so, I can go to Georgia, walk down a street and if someone threatens me i can shoot them justifiably? 

I am no lawyer, but it would seem to me they would have to prove that he was in fact physically threaten NOT the he felt threatened.

Here are the facts:

1.  NO forced attempted entry  (unless of course the law says turning a door knob is attempted B&E)
2.  No weapon on victim, nor any statement be shooter that he thought victim had weapon
3.  NO aggressive behavior (unless of course walking towards someone in any situation is considered aggressive)
4.  He left his house (where he was safe at that moment) and shot the guy. 

No case what so ever here for being physically threatened.

His mindset/feeling is all that matters at the end of the day.  Fear is a mindset/feeling.  To determine whether his fear was reasonable requires looking at all of the other facts, which I've already mentioned.  We just disagree on how those facts are characterized and what they mean.  

What you're doing is trying to isolate each individual fact to see whether that fact alone resulted in a reasonable belief that he was under a physical threat.  I don't think that's the proper way to look at the situation.  You have to look at the facts as a whole and form an opinion.  At least that's the way I do it.  

I didn't say new people have more of a justification to shoot people.  I said they're less likely to be familiar with their surroundings.  If he lived in the neighborhood for several years, and the old guy was a wanderer, it's more likely he would have known that.  Also, being new to the neighborhood makes you less uncertain about things like safety.  That fact alone doesn't justify a shooting.  It's just part of the analysis.

Whether the elderly man was actually guilty of breaking and entering isn't the issue.  It's the fact he was trying to open someone's door at 4 a.m.  I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to call 911 and sit back and do nothing at 4 in the morning when someone is trying to enter your home.  Sounds like he was trying to protect his fiancee.    

But here are the facts as I've read them:

1.  Someone was awoken at 4 a.m. by someone trying to illegally enter his home.  Whether it was actually illegal is irrelevant, because the homeowner (or renter, whatever he was) had no idea the man trying to enter his home at that hour was ill.  I think most reasonable people would believe someone trying to enter your home at 4 a.m. has bad intentions.    

2.  He called 911, which was the right thing to do.

3.  He opened his door and exited.  Putting on my MMQB hat, I say he should have stayed in the house.  But as the police said:  "In my personal opinion, I believe that he should have stayed inside the house," he said. "Did he violate any laws by exiting the house? No."

4.  He didn't immediately shoot the guy.  He gave several commands.  Not sure what those were, but I suspect they were in the nature of "get off my property" and "stop."  The guy continued to walk towards him.    

5.  "Walker County Sheriff Steve Wilson has said he had no doubts that Hendrix felt threatened during the encounter."  I agree, for the reasons I've already stated.  

[24KT]

It wasn't earlier in the day.  It was 2:30 a.m.  

The shooting occured at 2:30am, HOWEVER, it was earlier in the day that the elderly man had his encounter with the police officer who suggested he go home because he was dressed inappropriately for the weather.

Not that I'm casting blame on the officer he encountered earlier in the day, ...but if you see an elderly man, shuffling around ON FOOT, not dressed properly for the weather, carrying a bunch of mail, and stating he lived 5 miles away, ...wouldn't that be a bit of a clue that something was askew?

I can recall another guy who encountered police while carrying 2 pieces of mail (in his possessions) belonging to someone else, and he ended up beaten, tasered, and crying for his Daddy before his life was ended, ...but then again, he didn't belong to a certain demographic that gets treated with kindness & courtesy by police officers.

It's too bad Mr. Westbrook was an elderly white middle class man from the suburbs. If he wasn't, the cop he encountered might have done a stop & frisk, detained him and inadvertently saved his life.  

Where are you getting the information that he has already been charged?  

Georgia prosecutors say they are trying to determine whether to charge a homeowner with a crime after he shot an elderly Alzheimers patient as the man was trying to get into his house during the middle of the night.

The man who fired the shot had moved into the neighborhood just days earlier, police said. The victim had been wandering in the cold for hours with his two dogs, and after he was shot one of his dogs laid across his body protectively and had to be pried away by animal control.

In the coming weeks, authorities from the Walker County District Attorney's and sheriff's offices will meet to determine whether to file charges against Joe Hendrix, 34, who fatally shot Ronald Westbrook, 72, on Nov. 27.

. . .

http://abcnews.go.com/US/da-mulls-shooting-alzheimers-patient-enter-home/story?id=21080904

I do not remember exactly which source it was, however, it stated that he was indeed being charged. It was a delayed decision to lay the charges, however, they finally concluded it was appropriate.

The widow has stated she didn't think charges were warranted, however, it was not her call to make.

[24KT]

that 911 call will tell it all.   I'm betting it's not "I'm so scared, I'd better confront him!"

it's more likely (in my guess), "Fck that, if they're gonna take all night, I'm gonna go get this guy myself..." before heading outside.

The police stated they definitely believed the girlfriend was in fear for her life, ...but she wasn't the one who pulled the trigger.

He had waited 10 mins already... all the while there was constant contact with 911 operators.
The police were approx. 6 minutes out. 

For me, what I can't get past is the fact that he shot at a shadow. A freaking silhouette!!! ?!

Whatever happened to "Don't fire until you can see the whites of their eyes?"   so sad. 

[OzmO]

His mindset/feeling is all that matters at the end of the day.  Fear is a mindset/feeling.  

Feelings are subjective.  Just because a person "feels" they are threatened doesn't mean they are and if you use "feeling" as the basis of determining fear as justification for using deadly force you are opening the door to justifiable violence for all kinds of crazy unnecessary killing.  

To determine whether his fear was reasonable requires looking at all of the other facts, which I've already mentioned.  We just disagree on how those facts are characterized and what they mean.  

The difference is you are using "feeling" and or "perception" as the basis for your conclusions.  Which is faulty because it can't be applied universally to other similar or dissimilar situations.  I am using logic and facts.  For example:  A man walks up to a door knocks on it and turns the handle.  Is that attempted B & E?  No.  Not in any state.  But if a man knocks on the door then proceeds to try and pick the lock it is Attempted B & E in any state.  Its doesn't matter if the occupants of that house are home or not, 4am in the morning or new tot he neighbor hood.  Nor does it matter whether or not the occupants felt their house was being broken into.  If he uses a tool to B & E it is, if he simply turns the knob its not.  Logic:  the line of attempted B & E, Fact:  He only turned the knob.

What you're doing is trying to isolate each individual fact to see whether that fact alone resulted in a reasonable belief that he was under a physical threat.  I don't think that's the proper way to look at the situation.  You have to look at the facts as a whole and form an opinion.  At least that's the way I do it.  

I am and I am not.  Each part leads to another.  If one part does not indicate he was in danger and then next part doesn't and then part after that doesn't and so on, how can you ever say he was in danger?

I didn't say new people have more of a justification to shoot people.  I said they're less likely to be familiar with their surroundings.  If he lived in the neighborhood for several years, and the old guy was a wanderer, it's more likely he would have known that.  Also, being new to the neighborhood makes you less uncertain about things like safety.  That fact alone doesn't justify a shooting.  It's just part of the analysis.

 Its only becomes part of it if you are using a "feeling" as the basis for justification instead of the actual fact of whether or not  he was at anytime in physical danger based on what was known to him which he never was.

Whether the elderly man was actually guilty of breaking and entering isn't the issue.  It's the fact he was trying to open someone's door at 4 a.m.  I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to call 911 and sit back and do nothing at 4 in the morning when someone is trying to enter your home.  Sounds like he was trying to protect his fiancee.  

 

It is an issue because at some point the man stopped trying to open the door and did not continue and or evolve his attempts by using other means such as a crow bar to gain entry.  Therefore it is what it is.  A man walking up to a door, and turning the knob and some point he stops and walks away into the yard where the man inside comes out and murders him. (That will be in my dramatic prosecution opening statements  )

But here are the facts as I've read them:
1.  Someone was awoken at 4 a.m. by someone trying to illegally enter his home.  Whether it was actually illegal is irrelevant, because the homeowner (or renter, whatever he was) had no idea the man trying to enter his home at that hour was ill.  I think most reasonable people would believe someone trying to enter your home at 4 a.m. has bad intentions.    

2.  He called 911, which was the right thing to do.

3.  He opened his door and exited.  Putting on my MMQB hat, I say he should have stayed in the house.  But as the police said:  "In my personal opinion, I believe that he should have stayed inside the house," he said. "Did he violate any laws by exiting the house? No."

I don't know why everyone keeps replaying this comment:  "Did he violate any laws by exiting the house? No."   That's not the issue here.  Him shooting him is.  Strange.

4.  He didn't immediately shoot the guy.  He gave several commands.  Not sure what those were, but I suspect they were in the nature of "get off my property" and "stop."  The guy continued to walk towards him.  

He could have fired warning shoots.  Instead, he, without reasonable cause and or without impending physical harm shot and murdered the man in cold blood. (opening comments  )

5.  "Walker County Sheriff Steve Wilson has said he had no doubts that Hendrix felt threatened during the encounter."  I agree, for the reasons I've already stated.  

This is why i bring comparisons like walking down the street and someone pushing me.  It's about the "degree" of being threatened based on facts not feelings.  

I should add:  No way a jury is not going to convict him of at least involuntary manslaughter, probably voluntary maybe 2nd degree. 

[Jack T. Cross]

It really breaks my heart to think this guy was walking around with his dogs, acting as though he was in a time from the past, trying to go to old addresses as though he still lived there, etc., and no one had his back.

[240 is Back]

Yeah, this prick had very much chance to step back into his house and let the police deal with him.

There was no immanent threat.  He was pissed this silhouette wasn't obeying him.

I hope he gets charged with enough to lose his guns - Because he isn't responsible enough for them.  You don't fire because a silhouette disobeys you - You take cover (back in house) and let police deal with it.

Can't wait for the 911 tape... this prick all puffed up demanding the old mute man obey him.  What a fckstick.  I hope none of you supporting him are ever old and lost and unable to communicate, cause some hotshot may come out blasting becase you're in his yard and won't respect his authoritah.

[Dos Equis]

The shooting occured at 2:30am, HOWEVER, it was earlier in the day that the elderly man had his encounter with the police officer who suggested he go home because he was dressed inappropriately for the weather.

Not that I'm casting blame on the officer he encountered earlier in the day, ...but if you see an elderly man, shuffling around ON FOOT, not dressed properly for the weather, carrying a bunch of mail, and stating he lived 5 miles away, ...wouldn't that be a bit of a clue that something was askew?

I can recall another guy who encountered police while carrying 2 pieces of mail (in his possessions) belonging to someone else, and he ended up beaten, tasered, and crying for his Daddy before his life was ended, ...but then again, he didn't belong to a certain demographic that gets treated with kindness & courtesy by police officers.

It's too bad Mr. Westbrook was an elderly white middle class man from the suburbs. If he wasn't, the cop he encountered might have done a stop & frisk, detained him and inadvertently saved his life.  

I do not remember exactly which source it was, however, it stated that he was indeed being charged. It was a delayed decision to lay the charges, however, they finally concluded it was appropriate.

The widow has stated she didn't think charges were warranted, however, it was not her call to make.

Where are you getting this information?  Link?

The encounter with the cop was at 2 a.m., the shooting was around 4 a.m.

Around 2 a.m., the sheriff said a police officer found Westbrook by a mailbox and asked him what he was doing.

Westbrook replied that he was getting his mail. When the officer asked where he lived, the sheriff said Westbrook pointed to a well-lit house at the top of a hill where people were sitting on the porch.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/da-mulls-shooting-alzheimers-patient-enter-home/story?id=21080904

In this same link, it says no charges have been filed.

[Dos Equis]

Feelings are subjective.  Just because a person "feels" they are threatened doesn't mean they are and if you use "feeling" as the basis of determining fear as justification for using deadly force you are opening the door to justifiable violence for all kinds of crazy unnecessary killing.  

The difference is you are using "feeling" and or "perception" as the basis for your conclusions.  Which is faulty because it can't be applied universally to other similar or dissimilar situations.  I am using logic and facts.  For example:  A man walks up to a door knocks on it and turns the handle.  Is that attempted B & E?  No.  Not in any state.  But if a man knocks on the door then proceeds to try and pick the lock it is Attempted B & E in any state.  Its doesn't matter if the occupants of that house are home or not, 4am in the morning or new tot he neighbor hood.  Nor does it matter whether or not the occupants felt their house was being broken into.  If he uses a tool to B & E it is, if he simply turns the knob its not.  Logic:  the line of attempted B & E, Fact:  He only turned the knob.

I am and I am not.  Each part leads to another.  If one part does not indicate he was in danger and then next part doesn't and then part after that doesn't and so on, how can you ever say he was in danger?
  Its only becomes part of it if you are using a "feeling" as the basis for justification instead of the actual fact of whether or not  he was at anytime in physical danger based on what was known to him which he never was.
  

It is an issue because at some point the man stopped trying to open the door and did not continue and or evolve his attempts by using other means such as a crow bar to gain entry.  Therefore it is what it is.  A man walking up to a door, and turning the knob and some point he stops and walks away into the yard where the man inside comes out and murders him. (That will be in my dramatic prosecution opening statements  )

I don't know why everyone keeps replaying this comment:  "Did he violate any laws by exiting the house? No."   That's not the issue here.  Him shooting him is.  Strange.

He could have fired warning shoots.  Instead, he, without reasonable cause and or without impending physical harm shot and murdered the man in cold blood. (opening comments  )

This is why i bring comparisons like walking down the street and someone pushing me.  It's about the "degree" of being threatened based on facts not feelings.  

I should add:  No way a jury is not going to convict him of at least involuntary manslaughter, probably voluntary maybe 2nd degree.  

Are you saying fear is not a feeling?  Then what is it?

Yes, fear is subjective, but it can be measured objectively.  For example, most reasonable people would be fearful if someone pointed a loaded gun in their face.  And most reasonable people would not be fearful if a kid pointed a water gun (that looks like a water gun) in their face.

I think most people would be fearful if someone tried to open their front door at 4 a.m.  

You’re not using logic or facts any more than I am.  We simply disagree.  I think it’s illogical and unreasonable to say a homeowner would not be fearful if someone starts trying to open their front door at 4 a.m.    
 
People keep mentioning the fact he went out of his own house into his yard, because the implication by some is that by doing so he committed a crime or at least a bad act.  

Warning shots are unreasonable.   Nobody is trained to shoot warning shots.  Not the police, military, etc.  If you’re going to use deadly force by firing a weapon, you aim for center mass, fire, and keep firing until the threat is gone.  That’s what any credible use of force expert would say.

Good luck guaranteeing that he will not only be charged, but convicted.  I’m not smart enough to know what the prosecutors or a jury, if any, will ultimately do.  

[240 is Back]

"People keep mentioning the fact he went out of his own house into his yard, because the implication by some is that by doing so he committed a crime or at least a bad act.  "

It's just that he KNEW it was a person up to something, he KNEW the police were on the way, he KNEW he was safe inside the house, he KNEW there may be danger to encounter.

He had every reason to stay in the house.   People walk into elective gun battles - completely optional - for no reason other than they're pissed someone is out there and "won't obey my commands".  There are a million reasons why a person in the yard might not understand him giving orders.  Heck, it could be a foreigner.  Or someone injured.  Or a 72 year old mute veteran. 

He was mad they were taking so long and took the law into his own hands.  He gave an order then shot bullets at someone who wasn't capable of response.   I can't believe anyone would be so fcuking liberal to try to excuse this kind of reckless use of a gun.  Any TRUE gun enthusiast knows the responsibility that comes with the weapon.  If he's scared, he should step back into his house and wait for police, not issue shots.

[Dos Equis]

Every reasonable, responsible gun owner patrols their neighborhood and approaches suspicious cars and people, with hand on gun.   

[Dos Equis]

hahah yup 240 used to brag about how him and his merry band of trailer park militia men would chase out unwanted individuals armed to the teeth.

Now he supposedly was a scared little shit who wouldnt leave his trailer....

So it was actually a group of armed men patrolling the neighborhood?  Geeze. 

[240 is Back]

So it was actually a group of armed men patrolling the neighborhood?  Geeze.  

Big difference - We would all come out at once (if someone blew the whistle) and we'd call police and take down license plate numbers and ask people what they were doing there.  Many were there for drugs, prostitutes, etc that were just a few blocks over.  Others just there to steal shit off porches, etc.  

We didn't shoot our guns at shadows because we felt scared lol.  We just made a presence known.  We didn't pull guns.  Never initiated anything.  

I use my gun as a VERY LAST RESORT.   This moron didn't.   The fact you take the position "well, maybe he was scared" tells me you haven't mentally prepared yourself for how you'd react in a situation like this.  beach, it's important that you think about it ahead of time.  You don't step into a dangerous situation knowingly.  You hit the floor, aim your weapon, and call 911.  This clown wanted trigger time, and if he'd been shot for his horrible choice in tactics, everyone would be saying "oh, the poor guy".... um, this guy wanted a confrontation.  The fact he gave orders and the old man didn't listen - wow, he totally chose to shoot.  it was punitive for not listening to him.  This guy should go to prison.  

[OzmO]

Are you saying fear is not a feeling?  Then what is it?

Yes, fear is subjective, but it can be measured objectively.  For example, most reasonable people would be fearful if someone pointed a loaded gun in their face.  And most reasonable people would not be fearful if a kid pointed a water gun (that looks like a water gun) in their face.

I think most people would be fearful if someone tried to open their front door at 4 a.m.  

You’re not using logic or facts any more than I am.  We simply disagree.  I think it’s illogical and unreasonable to say a homeowner would not be fearful if someone starts trying to open their front door at 4 a.m.    
 
People keep mentioning the fact he went out of his own house into his yard, because the implication by some is that by doing so he committed a crime or at least a bad act.  

Warning shots are unreasonable.   Nobody is trained to shoot warning shots.  Not the police, military, etc.  If you’re going to use deadly force by firing a weapon, you aim for center mass, fire, and keep firing until the threat is gone.  That’s what any credible use of force expert would say.

Good luck guaranteeing that he will not only be charged, but convicted.  I’m not smart enough to know what the prosecutors or a jury, if any, will ultimately do.  

?  How did you conclude i was saying fear isn't a feeling?

I am not saying they weren't in fear.  And i am not saying that they didn't have reason to be in fear.  

And i am using logic and facts while you are using "feeling" as justification.  I am using facts to show there was none.

He had no justification to shoot the man.

And he should have fired a warning shot.  Point gun up in the air.  Pull trigger.  

You don't have to be smart to know that at the end of the day we have a person who shot and killed a 72 year old unarmed man with Alhztimers who didn't break any laws other than maybe trespassing, Who didn't verbally or physically threaten anyone.  

[Dos Equis]

?  How did you conclude i was saying fear isn't a feeling?

I am not saying they weren't in fear.  And i am not saying that they didn't have reason to be in fear.  

And i am using logic and facts while you are using "feeling" as justification.  I am using facts to show there was none.

He had no justification to shoot the man.

And he should have fired a warning shot.  Point gun up in the air.  Pull trigger.  

You don't have to be smart to know that at the end of the day we have a person who shot and killed a 72 year old unarmed man with Alhztimers who didn't break any laws other than maybe trespassing, Who didn't verbally or physically threaten anyone.  

You're losing me a bit.  Is fear a feeling? 

[tonymctones]

Big difference - We would all come out at once (if someone blew the whistle) and we'd call police and take down license plate numbers and ask people what they were doing there.  Many were there for drugs, prostitutes, etc that were just a few blocks over.  Others just there to steal shit off porches, etc.  

We didn't shoot our guns at shadows because we felt scared lol.  We just made a presence known.  We didn't pull guns.  Never initiated anything.  

yet youre the same ignorant dumb ass condeming zimmerman for checking up on trayvon after a bunch of break ins by someone matching his description had happened?

hahahah what a fucking hypocrite

[Dos Equis]

yet youre the same ignorant dumb ass condeming zimmerman for checking up on trayvon after a bunch of break ins by someone matching his description had happened?

hahahah what a fucking hypocrite

Bwahahahahaha! A gang of gun-toting neighbors?  LOL!