Teenager shot dead after playing loud music

[Vic]

Not according to self defense laws it doesn't. It's not an argument I'm making, it's fact and supported by many, many self defense shooting and taught in CCW classes.

So if I'm alone inside my car and I see 4 guys inside the car next to me, I can just open fire?
You're full of shit.

 

[hal2kilo]

The threat has to meet the "reasonable person" standard.

Case law has set precident that disparity of force via outnumbered along with verbal threats meets that standard. There are other cases where the shooter isn't even arrested because he was verbally threatened along with disparity of force. It's not difficult to understand if you have any knowledge of self defense laws.

Oh shit they must have dist his mom.

 

[mugs]

4-1. That meets disparity of force and represents a credible threat if there was verbal threatening.

Jordan Davis was the only one who was interacting with Dunn-goofed. His friends were not involved in the verbal dispute.

Plus age difference has also been proven in previous cases to meet disparity of force requirements. No weapon is needed to shoot.

What you skittles are failing to understand is lawfully this meets the standards for self defense. Especially because Mr. Dunn was in his occupied vehicle when the threat was present and clearly credible.

It's too bad for Dunn that no one other than him heard the alleged threats. Since we already know he lied about the shotgun, it's kind of hard to believe him about the threats. He also claims that Jordan was advancing on him, but strangely none of the other witnesses saw him get out of the vehicle (and how did he end up back in the SUV when he was shot anyway?).

When Dunn-goofed claims all of these things that can't be proven, and no one else who observed the argument corroborates what he says, does it make you wonder if maybe he's lying? Don't bother answering, I have this one for you - "Dunn is an honorable businessman something something thugs."

 

[spidey07]

So if I'm alone inside my car and I see 4 guys inside the car next to me, I can just open fire?
You're full of shit.

If they make verbal threats to your life and are capable of carrying out that threat (especially through disparity of force), then absolutely you are allowed to open fire.

I'm not full of shit, I just know the law much better than you.

 

[spidey07]

Jordan Davis was the only one who was interacting with Dunn-goofed. His friends were not involved in the verbal dispute.



It's too bad for Dunn that no one other than him heard the alleged threats. Since we already know he lied about the shotgun, it's kind of hard to believe him about the threats. He also claims that Jordan was advancing on him, but strangely none of the other witnesses saw him get out of the vehicle (and how did he end up back in the SUV when he was shot anyway?).

When Dunn-goofed claims all of these things that can't be proven, and no one else who observed the argument corroborates what he says, does it make you wonder if maybe he's lying? Don't bother answering, I have this one for you - "Dunn is an honorable businessman something something thugs."

It is up to you and prosecution to PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt there WERE NO threats made. That the young felon crew were NOT a clear and imminent threat. Not the other way around. The person who shoots in self defense doesn't have to prove anything. It's not an affirmative defense in Florida.

 

[Exophase]

Disparity of force isn't a defined legal standing (at least not in Florida), so I couldn't find any actual list of what does and doesn't constitute as this. Meaning it comes down to a justification in court, where the defense has to convince the jury that 4 younger people could, without additional weapons, overpower a man in a vehicle.

Good luck with that.

Florida castle doctrine law is actually defined and, in this case, easy to dismiss.

http://www.gunlaws.com/FloridaCastleDoctrine.htm

Seems like it requires someone actually to be in the process of intruding your so-called castle, which neither side is claiming here.

 

[Exophase]

It is up to you and prosecution to PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt there WERE NO threats made. That the young felon crew were NOT a clear and imminent threat. Not the other way around. The person who shoots in self defense doesn't have to prove anything. It's not an affirmative defense in Florida.

So basically, you're saying that if I go find you somewhere where there are no witnesses - and let's say for the sake of argument that you're a lot bigger and more physically fit than me - I can shoot you several times and say you made verbal threats that you'd kill me? And the onus would be on the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you didn't make those claims?

Sounds convenient.

 

[Vic]

If they make verbal threats to your life and are capable of carrying out that threat (especially through disparity of force), then absolutely you are allowed to open fire.

I'm not full of shit, I just know the law much better than you.

Oh I see, you're just discussing a hypothetical situation and not something that applies to this specific case.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

It is up to you and prosecution to PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt there WERE NO threats made. That the young felon crew were NOT a clear and imminent threat. Not the other way around. The person who shoots in self defense doesn't have to prove anything. It's not an affirmative defense in Florida.

And keep in mind that this area of florida has had MAJOR problems with thugs going around dishing out random beatings and assaults. The law-abiding community is sick and tired of their behaviour.


If anyone on that jury has seen or heard of these problems with thug violence... Dunn will walk.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Oh I see, you're just discussing a hypothetical situation and not something that applies to this specific case.

It's not hypothetical. This is what dunn is claiming, that he feared for his life. The disparity of force issue is WELL met with 4 young bucks with at least 3 felony convictions total versus 1 old man. In that scenario ANY verbal threat on life = good shoot.



As much as you hate it, that's the way the majority of our country works. The system works really well.... Don't run around with your crew threatening old men and you won't get shot. It's as simple as that.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

The defense is building plenty of doubt in the prosecutions case. Witnesses talking with each other prior to giving statements. Corey lost or destroyed a memo concerning a witnesses statement. Prosecution making an outstanding warrant for a witness disappear.

 

[spidey07]

So basically, you're saying that if I go find you somewhere where there are no witnesses - and let's say for the sake of argument that you're a lot bigger and more physically fit than me - I can shoot you several times and say you made verbal threats that you'd kill me? And the onus would be on the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you didn't make those claims?

Sounds convenient.

Absolutely correct.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

So basically, you're saying that if I go find you somewhere where there are no witnesses - and let's say for the sake of argument that you're a lot bigger and more physically fit than me - I can shoot you several times and say you made verbal threats that you'd kill me? And the onus would be on the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you didn't make those claims?

Sounds convenient.

Absolutely correct.


You know what else could happen? You could beat the other person to death (rather than shoot them) and claim they made verbal threats, and the onus would still be on the prosecution to prove the claims were not made.


This is how self defense laws work in the majority of this country. I STRONGLY suggest that anyone reading this thread gets familiar with these laws before they go around threatening innocent people.

 

[mugs]

It is up to you and prosecution to PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt there WERE NO threats made. That the young felon crew were NOT a clear and imminent threat. Not the other way around. The person who shoots in self defense doesn't have to prove anything. It's not an affirmative defense in Florida.

Yes, self-defense is an affirmative defense in Florida. The defendant's own lawyer said, "We are relying on Justifiable Use of Deadly Force as an affirmative defense." I don't think you actually know what affirmative defense means.

I'm not seeing how the castle doctrine applies here. The law says Dunn-goofed is presumed to have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm if someone attempts to enter his "occupied vehicle," but Jordan Davis never left the SUV.

 

[Exophase]

Absolutely correct.

You know what else could happen? You could beat the other person to death (rather than shoot them) and claim they made verbal threats, and the onus would still be on the prosecution to prove the claims were not made.

This is how self defense laws work in the majority of this country.

Wow, so you're saying a disparity of force argument would convince a jury in the case where the person claimed to be at a force disadvantage beat the other person to death?

Please, show me these disparity of force laws, I'd really like to see how this works. It seems like the phrase largely just comes up on gun forums.

I STRONGLY suggest that anyone reading this thread gets familiar with these laws before they go around threatening innocent people.

And if this alleged defense would actually work I strongly suggest that people realize this before they go around murdering innocent people, so they can learn how to avoid punishment. Since the scenario I gave is one of such obvious and accessible abuse.

 

[Catriona]

Oh I see, you're just discussing a hypothetical situation and not something that applies to this specific case.

If you, or anyone else for that matter, are expecting Spatial and Spidey to acknowledge rational arguments, you will be disappointed, I'm afraid. Another white man has killed another black teenager. Their fantasy has been vicariously fulfilled and their bloodlust is raging.

 

[Vic]

I used to have a good friend who would talk exactly like spidey does. He ended up doing 6 months for brandishing. A car cut him off on the road, so he caught up with them at the next light and held the driver at gunpoint. At his trial, he claimed that the people in the car flipping him off represented a credible threat. Jury deliberated for less than half an hour.

 

[Catriona]

I used to have a good friend who would talk exactly like spidey does. He ended up doing 6 months for brandishing. A car cut him off on the road, so he caught up with them at the next light and held the driver at gunpoint. At his trial, he claimed that the people in the car flipping him off represented a credible threat. Jury deliberated for less than half an hour.

Well, I think the difference is that Spidey does his brandishing here, where it's safe.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

<snip>

In addition how many crimes did you attribute to Trayvon despite him having exactly zero criminal convictions?


<snip>

Every single solitary thing that was said about trayvon was backed up by fact and proven 100% true. It was all clearly laid out on his date/timestamped social media postings. It was all verified as the case and trial went on.

Just like in this case, I am only making statements based on currently known facts. You might not like the facts, but I can't help you with that.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I used to have a good friend who would talk exactly like spidey does. He ended up doing 6 months for brandishing. A car cut him off on the road, so he caught up with them at the next light and held the driver at gunpoint. At his trial, he claimed that the people in the car flipping him off represented a credible threat. Jury deliberated for less than half an hour.

I have no doubt that spidey, like any responsible CCW holder, knows his laws well enough to know flipping someone off is not any credible threat.


Even if you don't CCW you all NEED to read up on these laws. Many of you clearly have no idea what can get you killed. Most people in that camp seem awfully hotheaded. That's not a great combination.....

 

[SpatiallyAware]

If you, or anyone else for that matter, are expecting Spatial and Spidey to acknowledge rational arguments, you will be disappointed, I'm afraid. Another white man has killed another black teenager. Their fantasy has been vicariously fulfilled and their bloodlust is raging.

Honey, the only reason we like to see these cases is it helps make the law abundantly clear. It helps reinforces our natural right to self-defense. It helps make people know that they need to teach their kids not to be thugs.


Jordan davis losing his life is a sad thing, but it won't happen for no reason.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

How do you know they were stashing something?

A 911 witness was recorded saying it looked like they might be stashing something. A gun, he didn't know. It will be portrayed exactly the same as zimmermans "he's up to no good" comment...... Won't look great for the prosecution when this is all laid out to the florida jury.

 

[spidey07]

Oh I see, you're just discussing a hypothetical situation and not something that applies to this specific case.

It was your hypothetical I was explaining. And what I stated does have everything to do with this case. That you can't understand why this could be a good shoot just shows ignorance of the law.

 

[Catriona]

I have no doubt that spidey, like any responsible CCW holder, knows his laws well enough to know flipping someone off is not any credible threat.


Even if you don't CCW you all NEED to read up on these laws. Many of you clearly have no idea what can get you killed. Most people in that camp seem awfully hotheaded. That's not a great combination.....

I have my CCP. And my instructor emphasized very strongly that, if you discharge your gun in self defense, the first thing you do is call it in to LE. Major fail for Dunn.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I have my CCP. And my instructor emphasized very strongly that, if you discharge your gun in self defense, the first thing you do is call it in to LE. Major fail for Dunn.

Sweetheart, you need to understand that what you SHOULD do and what you HAVE to do are two totally different things.


You didn't answer me last time; were you a-ok with gucci mane unloading a magazine into some guy and not calling the police? They ended up finding that guy's body in a field somewhere..... And gucci walked.