Black man attacked by racists, shoots them with 9mm pistol

[Nebor]

http://www.miamiherald.com/466/story/349532.html

Sounds like a good shoot. A lot of people don't know, but pounding on someone's car while they're in it justifies deadly force under the Castle Doctrine. Apparently these goons also brought a knife to the gunfight.

I think Martin Luther King would be proud to see the day when a black man could legally defend himself against white men with deadly force.

 

[BeauJangles]

Excuse the ignorance on my part, but are deadly force laws determined by the state or the federal government? (I'm assuming the state)

 

[manowar821]

:thumbsup:

Good!

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
Excuse the ignorance on my part, but are deadly force laws determined by the state or the federal government? (I'm assuming the state)

Unfortunately by state.

There are many people in jail for defending themselves simply because they lived in the wrong state.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: manowar821
:thumbsup:

Good!

Also good that this guy had a CCW :thumbsup:

 

[KB]

Good for this guy! 2nd Amendment FTW!

 

[StageLeft]

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Sounds like this guy was in the right according to the info in the article.

I do find one thing pretty disturbing about the story though. It was the way that the press, in their ever-salivating desperation to get "the scoop" that no one else has goes after the suspect's family:

Tuesday night, the upstairs lights were on in Lonzisero's home in Flamingo Townhomes Phase V. No one answered the door outside the townhome, which had Christmas bells on the door.

Neighbors, who asked that their names not be used, said Lonzisero rented the unit and lived there with his three children and their mother, while Borowsky lived downstairs.

Lonzisero was in and out of the family's lives, they said.

WTF!? He is the criminal not the rest of the family. The press should be ashamed for harassing the guy's family to get some tidbit that probably won't amount to anything other than a claim of "A News 9 exclusive....You heard it here first".

There are now 3 fatherless kids thanks to this guy's inability to earn an honest living like the majority of us and yet the press still feels the need to go after them like they were complicit in committing the crime.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

I guess you won't be bringing a friend along when you go to terrorize someone?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

Most states have laws like this now. I think the argument is that if you hadn't attacked me, your friend would still be alive.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

I guess you won't be bringing a friend along when you go to terrorize someone?

Definitely not!

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

I guess you won't be bringing a friend along when you go to terrorize someone?

Definitely not!

It's a reasonable law. The same thing applies to Sean Taylor's murder. The guys think that only the one who shot taylor will get the big charge. However, since *all* were involved in a crime to commit murder they *all* will be charged with felony murder.

I like the law personally, nobody gets off for just being there, it makes you more responsible for your actions.

I am glad there are reasonable people who can defend themselves. As far as MLK being "proud" a black guy could defend himself from white guys using deadly force, I'd say that MLK would be very sad that anybody had to die, but would be proud that a black guy won't go to jail due to prejudices.

 

[FoBoT]

felony murder laws are reasonable in my view
the more scumbags you can lock away the better

 

[StageLeft]

It's a dumblaw LegendKiller, because his murder by virtue of its being self-defense is not a crime, so why charge somebody else with his death if we are already legally in agreement that his death was not a crime? Being complicit in a criminal murder (e.g. shooting an innocent) is different than committing a crime and one of your crew is shot and you get hit with it. It's silly, in part because there are LOTS of felonies.

Answer this: I commit a robbery with somebody and you as a cop catch us and pin us both on the ground and we're totally not gonna run. You then just for fun shoot my partner in the head. What you did was illegal and you'll get in trouble. Will I also since I committed the initial felony with him? It's like a hate crime--arbitrarily trying to increase punishment.

 

[piasabird]

I think when you attack a person with a weapon your are the problem. I have been thinking anytime a gun is used in the commission of a crime that you should get the death penalty automaticlally.

 

[Estrella]

good for him. I am glad he defended himself

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Sounds like this guy was in the right according to the info in the article.

I do find one thing pretty disturbing about the story though. It was the way that the press, in their ever-salivating desperation to get "the scoop" that no one else has goes after the suspect's family:

Tuesday night, the upstairs lights were on in Lonzisero's home in Flamingo Townhomes Phase V. No one answered the door outside the townhome, which had Christmas bells on the door.

Neighbors, who asked that their names not be used, said Lonzisero rented the unit and lived there with his three children and their mother, while Borowsky lived downstairs.

Lonzisero was in and out of the family's lives, they said.

WTF!? He is the criminal not the rest of the family. The press should be ashamed for harassing the guy's family to get some tidbit that probably won't amount to anything other than a claim of "A News 9 exclusive....You heard it here first".

There are now 3 fatherless kids thanks to this guy's inability to earn an honest living like the majority of us and yet the press still feels the need to go after them like they were complicit in committing the crime.

the press in nothing more than an evil attention whore...they would pimp their own mother if it mean't a chance to sell a story

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
It's a dumblaw LegendKiller, because his murder by virtue of its being self-defense is not a crime, so why charge somebody else with his death if we are already legally in agreement that his death was not a crime? Being complicit in a criminal murder (e.g. shooting an innocent) is different than committing a crime and one of your crew is shot and you get hit with it. It's silly, in part because there are LOTS of felonies.

Answer this: I commit a robbery with somebody and you as a cop catch us and pin us both on the ground and we're totally not gonna run. You then just for fun shoot my partner in the head. What you did was illegal and you'll get in trouble. Will I also since I committed the initial felony with him? It's like a hate crime--arbitrarily trying to increase punishment.

Well there's two things wrong with your situation here. First, the death did not occur during the commiting of a crime. The crime had been disrupted and you were in custody. Second, police are often held responsible for anything bad that happens to criminals in their custody.

How about this as a better example. You and your buddy rob a bank. You have no intention of killing anyone. While robbing the bank someone in the bank who is armed gets overzealous and tries to stop you. He messes up and instead shoots and kills an innocent bystander. Who should be held accountable for that bystander's death? The man who was simply trying to stop two felons or the felons who put the man in the situation where he accidentally killed someone? Or do you think that those felons should just get a couple years for armed robbery and no one should be held accountable for an innocent person's death?

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
It's a dumblaw LegendKiller, because his murder by virtue of its being self-defense is not a crime, so why charge somebody else with his death if we are already legally in agreement that his death was not a crime? Being complicit in a criminal murder (e.g. shooting an innocent) is different than committing a crime and one of your crew is shot and you get hit with it. It's silly, in part because there are LOTS of felonies.

Answer this: I commit a robbery with somebody and you as a cop catch us and pin us both on the ground and we're totally not gonna run. You then just for fun shoot my partner in the head. What you did was illegal and you'll get in trouble. Will I also since I committed the initial felony with him? It's like a hate crime--arbitrarily trying to increase punishment.

Got them apples & oranges confused again. You and your partner burgle a house and then the home owner shoots your pal dead. You get homicide added to your charges, right?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

it's called the felony murder rule, and it's one we imported from england along with the rest of the common law.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

I think it's brilliant. The responsibility lies in who starts a confrontation, not in who ends it.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

I guess you won't be bringing a friend along when you go to terrorize someone?

Definitely not!

It's a reasonable law. The same thing applies to Sean Taylor's murder. The guys think that only the one who shot taylor will get the big charge. However, since *all* were involved in a crime to commit murder they *all* will be charged with felony murder.

I like the law personally, nobody gets off for just being there, it makes you more responsible for your actions.

I am glad there are reasonable people who can defend themselves. As far as MLK being "proud" a black guy could defend himself from white guys using deadly force, I'd say that MLK would be very sad that anybody had to die, but would be proud that a black guy won't go to jail due to prejudices.

Wouldn't it be more to prevent the "well 6 people were punching this guy in the head, we can't prove who delivered the killing blow so who do we charge" type defense?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Skoorb

charged with murder during the commission of a crime. Even though he didn't pull the trigger, under Florida law, a person can be charged with murder if someone dies while the accused is committing a felony.

Man, now that is a stupid $**king law. I attack you with my friend, you kill my friend and _I_ get charged with murder? Retarded.

I think it's brilliant. The responsibility lies in who starts a confrontation, not in who ends it.

Kindergarten policy upheld as a law?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: thraashman
How about this as a better example. You and your buddy rob a bank. You have no intention of killing anyone. While robbing the bank someone in the bank who is armed gets overzealous and tries to stop you. He messes up and instead shoots and kills an innocent bystander. Who should be held accountable for that bystander's death? The man who was simply trying to stop two felons or the felons who put the man in the situation where he accidentally killed someone? Or do you think that those felons should just get a couple years for armed robbery and no one should be held accountable for an innocent person's death?

That is better and is impossible to answer unequivocally. It's no different than arguing who's at fault if a cop in a high speed chase kills somebody. Was there merit for the chase? Was he the force's best driver or did he already have a history of getting in car accidents all the time?

Or do you think that those felons should just get a couple years for armed robbery and no one should be held accountable for an innocent person's death?

One felon already died, so he was held accountable. The other one should be punished in no way separate than if his friend wasn't there, so whatever punishment normally comes along with whatever the heck he was doing.

If I'm with my buddy and we both decide it's a good idea to steal gas, but the gas station owner runs out and before I can say anything my buddy plows him over and kills him, should I really be held accountable? It's not like this guy could necessarily control what hisf riend was doing.

We could come up with examples alllllllll day long, though

You and your partner burgle a house and then the home owner shoots your pal dead. You get homicide added to your charges, right?

Apparently, though you shouldn't, for you never intended to kill anybody and you may never even have attacked anybody or even had a weapon with you, so it's a bit stupid to charge you with homicide.

it's called the felony murder rule, and it's one we imported from england along with the rest of the common law.

I thought you guys fought a war a couple hundred years ago so you'd not have to live under the crown's guidance.

I think it's brilliant. The responsibility lies in who starts a confrontation, not in who ends it.

It's still dumb. I am at a firing range with my legal machine gun and you and your friend pick a fight. I legally defend myself from you and your friend dies plus I end up accidentally shooting a bus of kids driving by and hit a gas tank on a truck and another 30 people die. That was your fault?

OK, I have to stop. I'm getting stupider even writing these scenarios.

 

[Excelsior]

:thumbsup: