Stand Your Ground Law's Latest Victim

[240 is Back]

I am a reasonable man.  I don't know what I would have done. 

You dont know if you would have opened the door to venture into the darkness with a gun to face  a stranger, knowing full well the police were minutes away and the person would have to break a door to reach you?

LOL... you may want to rethink strategies and prepare.  We should always have a pretty good idea of what we would do in situation A or B or C.  Just winging it when it comes to life or death things like this is how people get shot.  Stay safe FIRST.  Worry about some dude and his barking dogs stealing the garden hose second. 

Seriously, everyone here should think what they'd do in these various scenarios.  If anyone here looks at the clusterfck that became Joe Hendrix' night and still says "Hey, if it happened to me, I might leave safety, ignore police coming and just fire 4 bullets into the silhouette" then, well, lol...

[Dos Equis]

You dont know if you would have opened the door to venture into the darkness with a gun to face  a stranger, knowing full well the police were minutes away and the person would have to break a door to reach you?

LOL... you may want to rethink strategies and prepare.  We should always have a pretty good idea of what we would do in situation A or B or C.  Just winging it when it comes to life or death things like this is how people get shot.  Stay safe FIRST.  Worry about some dude and his barking dogs stealing the garden hose second. 

Seriously, everyone here should think what they'd do in these various scenarios.  If anyone here looks at the clusterfck that became Joe Hendrix' night and still says "Hey, if it happened to me, I might leave safety, ignore police coming and just fire 4 bullets into the silhouette" then, well, lol...

   We can't all be dummies walking through neighborhoods with loaded weapons harassing strangers.

[Jack T. Cross]

I do wonder what the guy's said about his yard lights, and whether or not it occurred to him to use them, as you can be sure he was asked.

[240 is Back]

  We can't all be dummies walking through neighborhoods with loaded weapons harassing strangers.

hey, some of us are built for this shit, and some of us are not. 

be thankful that men like me & zimmerman are keeping the streets safe. 

[Dos Equis]

hey, some of us are built for this shit, and some of us are not. 

be thankful that men like me & zimmerman are keeping the streets safe. 

Yes, some people like you are built to be a menace (which is exactly how I'd describe a gang of punks with guns harassing people).  Glad I don't live in your neighborhood.

[240 is Back]

Yes, some people like you are built to be a menace (which is exactly how I'd describe a gang of punks with guns harassing people).  Glad I don't live in your neighborhood.

the gang of punks was actually mostly veterans protecting their property - much like Hendrix.

But we didn't shoot - we let the police handle people.  We didn't make tragic mistakes like firing blindly into bushes.

[OzmO]

I think a good question for this thread would be who would do exactly what Hendrix did?

[tonymctones]

I think a good question for this thread would be who would do exactly what Hendrix did?

and thus the problem you have with reconciling your opinion with the law.

hendrix's actions prior to encountering the old man dont weigh on the reasonable man standard...but you for whatever reason believe it does.

Id like to see your citations to show why you believe the way you do.

[Dos Equis]

the gang of punks was actually mostly veterans protecting their property - much like Hendrix.

But we didn't shoot - we let the police handle people.  We didn't make tragic mistakes like firing blindly into bushes.

Embellishing again?  Now it was "mostly" veterans.  Right. 

[Dos Equis]

I think a good question for this thread would be who would do exactly what Hendrix did?

I'm not sure how helpful that is.  We all have the benefit of hindsight.  Completely different analysis when you're looking at a situation after the fact.  That's why I say I don't know what I would have done.  Nobody really knows because there are so many variables. 

[blacken700]

I think a good question for this thread would be who would do exactly what Hendrix did?

that's a great question
i'll go first,      would have called 911 then would have waited in the house for the police with my gun and if he broke in i'd probably shoot  him

[240 is Back]

Embellishing again?  Now it was "mostly" veterans.  Right. 

dude, it was a 55+ park.  Me and my brother were the only ones that young. 

And never fear, there are people like me - willing to confront bad guys but with the self control not to blast them - that keep others safe.

[Dos Equis]

dude, it was a 55+ park.  Me and my brother were the only ones that young. 

And never fear, there are people like me - willing to confront bad guys but with the self control not to blast them - that keep others safe.

No thank you.  Like I said, a menace. 

[OzmO]

and thus the problem you have with reconciling your opinion with the law.

hendrix's actions prior to encountering the old man dont weigh on the reasonable man standard...but you for whatever reason believe it does.

Id like to see your citations to show why you believe the way you do.

It's not my opinion.  It's a simple set of questions.  What would a reasonable man do?  For example of a man believes he is facing imminent danger or death why would he leave the safety of his home, when there is no forced entry, he has a gun and the police a on the way?   Point is a reasonable man wouldnt feel like he is imminent danger given the facts he knew at the time otherwise he would have never left his wife undefended  alone A house were some is trying to get in. 

So answer the question, would you have done exactly what he did?

[OzmO]

I'm not sure how helpful that is.  We all have the benefit of hindsight.  Completely different analysis when you're looking at a situation after the fact.  That's why I say I don't know what I would have done.  Nobody really knows because there are so many variables.  

It's not a hard thing to do.  You simply put yourself in his situation only taking in account the facts he knew at the time.

Would You have done exactly what he did?

[OzmO]

I think a good question for this thread would be who would do exactly what Hendrix did?

Bump

[tonymctones]

It's not my opinion.  It's a simple set of questions.  What would a reasonable man do?  For example of a man believes he is facing imminent danger or death why would he leave the safety of his home, when there is no forced entry, he has a gun and the police a on the way?   Point is a reasonable man wouldnt feel like he is imminent danger given the facts he knew at the time otherwise he would have never left his wife under ended alone Ina safe house.

So answer the question, would you have done exactly what he did?

and again you seem to have a problem understanding that HE DIDNT NEED TO BE IN DANGER OF BODILY HARM WHEN HE LEFT THE HOUSE.

you keep bringing up him leaving the home as proof he couldnt have believe he was in danger of imminent of bodily harm, the issue is he DIDNT HAVE TO!!!!

[tonymctones]

Oz youre a creating your OWN standard and then saying that b/c he doesnt pass it he is guilty.

The issue is your standard and the standard of law are different!!!!

[Dos Equis]

It's not a hard thing to do.  You simply put yourself in his situation only taking in account the facts he knew at the time.

Would You have done exactly what he did?

I don't know.  I probably would have stayed in the house, but I'm not certain.  And again, even if I said I would have stayed in the house (or ten people say so), that doesn't make staying in the house the only reasonable response.

[OzmO]

and again you seem to have a problem understanding that HE DIDNT NEED TO BE IN DANGER OF BODILY HARM WHEN HE LEFT THE HOUSE.

you keep bringing up him leaving the home as proof he couldnt have believe he was in danger of imminent of bodily harm, the issue is he DIDNT HAVE TO!!!!

When did you think he  needed to feel he was in danger to justify his action of killing a man?  Or are you saying he didn't need to feel that either,  he can kill when ever for what ever reason?

What are you saying?

[OzmO]

Oz youre a creating your OWN standard and then saying that b/c he doesnt pass it he is guilty.

The issue is your standard and the standard of law are different!!!!

I am talking about what a reasonable man would do.  Would you leave your wife if you felt there was imminent danger upon her?

[tonymctones]

When did you think he  needed to feel he was in danger to justify his action of killing a man?  Or are you saying he didn't need to feel that either,  he can kill when ever for what ever reason?

What are you saying?

at the moment the shooting happend Oz

[Dos Equis]

I am talking about what a reasonable man would do.  Would you leave your wife if you felt there was imminent danger upon her?

Yes if leaving her meant confronting and disabling the threat. 

[tonymctones]

I am talking about what a reasonable man would do.  Would you leave your wife if you felt there was imminent danger upon her?

agreed but the law isnt going to look at the entire situation from the moment he heard the dogs barking and someone trying to open his door at 4am to the shooting and ask if he acted reasonably throughout the entire ordeal.

What they are going to ask is once he was in the situation of being face to face with him did he act reasonably?

Would you leave your wife if you felt there was imminent danger upon her?

you see there you go again, you think that simply b/c you and others wouldnt have done this it shows he didnt act reasonably...

but this will not be at part of what the standard of law measures....

[OzmO]

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+person+standardhttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+person+standard

Reasonable Person
A phrase frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.
 
The decision whether an accused is guilty of a given offense might involve the application of an objective test in which the conduct of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. In most cases, persons with greater than average skills, or with special duties to society, are held to a higher standard of care. For example, a physician who aids a person in distress is held to a higher standard of care than is an ordinary person.
 

This is not correct?   Does a reasonable man who feels he and his wife is in imminent danger leave her a alone?  Does he feel in imminent danger when there is no forced entry and the police are otheir way and he has a gun?

Point is a reasonalble man wouldnt feel he is in imminent danger.  Hendrix didn't feel he was in imminent danger of death or injury.  He left his home and irresponsibly murdered someone.