Teenager shot dead after playing loud music

[rudeguy]

Do people every think before they post here?

Is there an App for that I can consult before I kill someone?

I can see it now, "Sirri can I kill this man?" Yes Spidey you may kill him, congratulations.

There are plenty of 2nd Amendment apps. I use this one:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ryan.ccw

Lol self defense classes aren't they for women? You must live in a world of fear.
You must live in a world of ignorance. Most states require many hours of classes and training before you can carry. But a self defense course is never a bad idea.

 

[Vic]

It really depends on the state. I don't get why, but it does.

I can only tell you about Michigan but ours are pretty common sense.

If someone has a deadly weapon and you fear for your life, if someone is trying to break into your house/car/business with you inside, if you fear for your life, if you feel you are in danger of being raped, if you feel you are in danger that could cause great bodily harm causing death, these are all times when a shooting would be justified. We don't have much case law, so there aren't nearly as many specifics as states like Florida and Texas where they have more shootings.

This is why its important to read up frequently on your state's laws and any rulings. Most state's Attorney Generals update definitions every so often. Sometimes a case will change what a law means. All of it can literally be life or death, so its very important to know your laws.

This is why I get so frustrated with certain users who pretend to be an expert on another state's laws. There is no way they could have read every law, ruling and decision. Instead they talk like some moron that Nancy Grace would even be embarrassed to have as a guest.

I'm just gonna take this opportunity to say that I really hate Nancy Grace.

 

[rudeguy]

Everyone should take self-defense classes. They are extremely beneficial. But unless they are an attorney that specializes in self-defense law (and they rarely are), I would never assume that the instructor is a legal expert.

My CPL (CCW in Michigan) class included an attorney who only handled gun related cases. He also sat on the board that advises the state on changes and updates. He was beyond knowledgeable.

 

[HumblePie]

* If some of these people critiquing the opinions of those of us with concealed carry permits actually sat through one of these courses, they might become better informed of their state's self defense statutes... So they wouldn't look like asses arguing their idealistic/emotional points of view when it comes to incidents like the Zimmerman/Dunn fiasco.

They don't want to. And they tend to argue the really bad media points, especially the fabricated media lies that are in direct conflict with the actual evidence presented in court. Which has happened in both this case and the Zimmerman case. Worse is they get pointed out that what they are arguing is completely bogus, then move on to the next bogus point, and the next after that, until finally they circle back around to the original bogus point. I don't know exactly what to call that form of logical fallacy argument, but it is a stupid one.

 

[Vic]

My CPL (CCW in Michigan) class included an attorney who only handled gun related cases. He also sat on the board that advises the state on changes and updates. He was beyond knowledgeable.

That must have been an awesome opportunity.

A CCW certification class is going to be different than your typical self-defense class.
I'm going to assume that the expert attorney provided far more conservative advice on when one should exercise self defense than what some posters are saying here, yes?

 

[MrPickins]

Weird, someone on here just said its not important that he didn't contact police and that it didn't matter. I guess you can be completely terrified of a black person one second, shoot and kill them, then just go about your day because you aren't scared anymore.

It's not important according to the law. That doesn't mean the jury isn't human and will make mistakes about the law as many in here have done. I said earlier that I believe the jury in the case is more than likely going to be swayed by opening and closing arguments more than any of the presented evidence.

Have you ever served on a jury for a felony trial?

I have, and we were specifically instructed by the judge to take into account our beliefs as to the credibility of each witness as we weighed their testimony.

 

[HumblePie]

Have you ever served on a jury for a felony trial?

I have, and we were specifically instructed by the judge to take into account our beliefs as to the credibility of each witness as we weighed their testimony.

You had a strange judge then.

Texas and Virgina are the only states without a standardized set of jury instructions for criminal cases. Other states have them, and most states standardized instructions had nothing like that if memory serves me.

 

[Vic]

* If some of these people critiquing the opinions of those of us with concealed carry permits actually sat through one of these courses, they might become better informed of their state's self defense statutes... So they wouldn't look like asses arguing their idealistic/emotional points of view when it comes to incidents like the Zimmerman/Dunn fiasco.

Quick question: have you ever in your whole life known an attorney who gave legal advice in absolutes and certainties like how spidey does?

Edit: I'd also like to point out that even Zimmermans attorney has gone on record stating that the Dunn case is not analogous.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/stor...ra-gives-his-take-on-the-dunn-trial/5448577/
"'The facts of this case do not seem to support self defense near as much as the Zimmerman case did,' said Mr. O'Mara."
Also, note the conservative verbiage. " Do not seem," "near as much, " etc. That's how attorneys speak. And for good reason.

 

[Exophase]

If Dunn said that I agree it is a game changer.

But remember that even Davis' friends admit he was the first one to get hostile and angry, and that he continued to get more so.

And remember that the person who says they heard Dunn say that wasn't paying attention until that point, it's what drew his attention. Did he hear it clearly? Or did he actually hear Dunn say "You aren't going to kill me you son of a bitch!" which Dunn says he said just as he grabbed his gun.

Or did he conflate it with Dunn saying shortly before that "are you talking about ME?" incredulously but not in a hostile fashion.

I wish more than anything the gas station had had a friggin' camera pointing to this area... unfortunately it did not.

I feel like since Jordan can't be resurrected by putting Dunn in prison, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and acquit.

Okay, again speculating on motivation here, but in this scenario Dunn heard some things that he couldn't make out but sounded pretty aggressive and negative.

Do you really think that it's a normal reaction to calmly and objectively ask them to clarify whether or not they said those things? And that that could so quickly turn into a situation where he's firing and them?

This just doesn't sound like a normal reaction to me. Why engage with these strangers further? When he thought Davis got a shotgun did he stop and ask "are you pointing a gun at me?" Would that sound reasonable instead? If they actually were yelling obscenities at him then they're not just going to calmly say "yes, we were talking about you", it's obvious that even asking would escalate things. I'm more inclined to believe that he reacted in a way that did serve as a way to deliberately verbally retaliate in some form.

My understanding is that Dunn would have been in the same position legally before SYG was put on the books.

Neither he nor Zimmerman invoked SYG in their trials.

Isn't SYG implicit though? AFAIK the defense isn't making an argument that Dunn could have fled or that a reasonable person would have (which they could very easily leverage) and the prosecution isn't arguing that Dunn couldn't have.

 

[rudeguy]

That must have been an awesome opportunity.

A CCW certification class is going to be different than your typical self-defense class.
I'm going to assume that the expert attorney provided far more conservative advice on when one should exercise self defense than what some posters are saying here, yes?

Yes, and real world cases.

For instance, a rapper was in a club with a body guard. Some guy decides to attack the rapper so the body guard acts. He fires a warning shot into the ceiling to try to get the guy to stop but he doesn't. He then shoots and kills the guy. Was not even charged for shooting the guy. He did get charged for firing the warning shot.

Then he had a client who was driving down the highway and someone road raged him, so he picked up his gun and was waiving it around. Of course the cops were called and the guy gets arrested. The guy calls the lawyer and explains it but keeps saying "I didn't brandish it though. I never pointed it at anyone. I just waived it around!" Guess the lawyer didn't take his case 🙂

It was one of those things where I wished he could have stayed for more than 2 hours.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Quick question: have you ever in your whole life known an attorney who gave legal advice in absolutes and certainties like how spidey does?

Edit: I'd also like to point out that even Zimmermans attorney has gone on record stating that the Dunn case is not analogous.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/stor...ra-gives-his-take-on-the-dunn-trial/5448577/
"'The facts of this case do not seem to support self defense near as much as the Zimmerman case did,' said Mr. O'Mara."
Also, note the conservative verbiage. " Do not seem," "near as much, " etc. That's how attorneys speak. And for good reason.

People do it in sales too. Just so you can't hold them to something when it doesnt pan out.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I think there should be high school classes to teach teens the laws on self defense in their state of residence and the importance of reviewing the law in any state they plan to visit before going to the state. This would help them understand how verbal threats with actions that could be interpreted as intent to carry said threats or any assaults against the person could potentially lead to them being legally shot/killed by the that person. As well as always expecting the other person is carrying concealed and has no issues with using the weapon in self defense.

 

[soundforbjt]

For the people claiming the door could have been open when Dunn shot, where's the evidence on the ground of the broken plastic that the bullets passed through?

 

[surfsatwerk]

I think there should be high school classes to teach teens the laws on self defense in their state of residence and the importance of reviewing the law in any state they plan to visit before going to the state. This would help them understand how verbal threats with actions that could be interpreted as intent to carry said threats or any assaults against the person could potentially lead to them being legally shot/killed by the that person. As well as always expecting the other person is carrying concealed and has no issues with using the weapon in self defense.

This is one of the most sane and rational post I have ever read in P/N.

 

[Geosurface]

I think there should be high school classes to teach teens the laws on self defense in their state of residence and the importance of reviewing the law in any state they plan to visit before going to the state. This would help them understand how verbal threats with actions that could be interpreted as intent to carry said threats or any assaults against the person could potentially lead to them being legally shot/killed by the that person. As well as always expecting the other person is carrying concealed and has no issues with using the weapon in self defense.

Agreed.

 

[MrPickins]

You had a strange judge then.

Texas and Virgina are the only states without a standardized set of jury instructions for criminal cases. Other states have them, and most states standardized instructions had nothing like that if memory serves me.

This is why you're not a lawyer, and shouldn't be acting like one here.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=jury+instructions+credibility+of+witnesses

 

[WackyDan]

Quick question: have you ever in your whole life known an attorney who gave legal advice in absolutes and certainties like how spidey does?

Edit: I'd also like to point out that even Zimmermans attorney has gone on record stating that the Dunn case is not analogous.

No. My last CCW course here in NC was taught by a currently active police officer who also works their rapid response team. He was very careful to note that every self defense scenario isn't absolute. In other words, he couldn't give you absolute advice on how a perceived valid use of deadly force event would turn out once it went through the DA, a Grand Jury, or trial if it got that far... Much less the case of public opinion like we argue over here on AT. The advice was, that if you follow the guidelines of what constitutes legitimate use of deadly force, you'd probably in most circumstances not be defending your actions in a criminal trial. That said, NC's statutes regarding use of deadly force are pretty clear in regard to knowing the boundaries of what could get you in trouble.

...And there is the rub. CCW holders aren't out there looking for trouble. I carry pretty much anytime I can. I'm well aware that I have my firearm and quite honestly that has a net affect of my avoiding confrontation even more so than I ever did before carrying concealed. If you talk to many CCW holders you'll find that statement to be echoed quite commonly. It's not that I was some sort of hot head before I got my first CCW permit in NYS, but I tend to be more polite while carrying recognizing how fast things can escalate over stupid shit... driving, etc. It just isn't worth the aggravation.

Then why carry if we can all just be polite? ...Because not everyone is capable of that... *And was reinforced to me on Sept 29th 2012, you never know when the neighborhood nusance substance abuser shows up in front of your house carrying a baseball bat and threatens your life twice in front of witnesses. - Then harasses and stalks you and your family for two weeks after you have him arrested. He was only arrested due to my not having my daily carry on me at the time of the threat. The police knew where he lived and yet could not immediately arrest him. I had to go down to the county magistrate's office and file charges... they then took 5 days to arrest him. While down there I filed for a restraining order which the judge threw out because he had only threatened my life twice while brandishing a deadly weapon in one instance (NC requires more than one). This is a classic example of why people like me carry and feel we need to carry. I am glad in some ways I didn't have my daily carry on me as I would have felt bad in ending the life of a 20 year old... and equally important, I would have been pissed at having to retain a lawyer just to cover my ass no matter how justified I would have been.

I digress...

 

[spidey07]

I said CAN be construed. Not will.

This argument is moot anyway because still no evidence besides Dunn's testimony has been presented that Davis threatened Dunn in a manner that warranted his lethal response.

And again, innocent until proven guilty. The state must disprove self defense.

There has been no evidence that Davis did not threaten him.

 

[rudeguy]

I think there should be high school classes to teach teens the laws on self defense in their state of residence and the importance of reviewing the law in any state they plan to visit before going to the state. This would help them understand how verbal threats with actions that could be interpreted as intent to carry said threats or any assaults against the person could potentially lead to them being legally shot/killed by the that person. As well as always expecting the other person is carrying concealed and has no issues with using the weapon in self defense.

its sad that we may be to that point

In the old days parents did this. But I guess we are past that now....

🙁

 

[Londo_Jowo]

its sad that we may be to that point

In the old days parents did this. But I guess we are past that now....

🙁

My father gave me that talk by the time I was 12 and reminded me at least one or twice a year until I went off to Navy bootcamp. It's hard to believe how things are today, we used to hunt before and after school during all the various seasons so there would be close to 40% to 50% of the cars in the parking lot that had high powered rifles or shotguns in them. No one ever thought of threatening anyone with a gun. It was rare that a knife would be brandished or used in a fight, just fists.

 

[Vic]

And again, innocent until proven guilty. The state must disprove self defense.

There has been no evidence that Davis did not threaten him.

So youre saying that the absence of evidence of a threat cannot be considered reasonable doubt of self defense?

 

[WHAMPOM]

Dunn claims he was coming out of the truck.

Officer: "Maybe he wasn't coming out of the truck."
Dunn: "Oh absolutely he was" (said rapidly and with zero hesitation)

That's from Dunn's first police interview. He affirmed this again on the stand. He said Davis was absolutely coming out and had landed at least one foot possibly both on the pavement.

This seems too much of a coincidence given that Brunson admitted Davis was working the door handle, and given that the child locks not only were found disengaged but that the notion of teenagers out trying to impress girls locking 2 out of 4 of them in the back of the truck like children makes no sense.

And then there's the fact that the shot trajectories seem to make more sense if the door was open:

(Second image edited to show how far, approximately, door would need to be open to make the trajectory angles match.

What your image does show is shots into a stationary vehicle rear door in a vehicle parked parallel with Dunn followed by shots into the front door while pulling out. Or does your simple common sense fail you again?

 

[emperus]

You had a strange judge then.

Texas and Virgina are the only states without a standardized set of jury instructions for criminal cases. Other states have them, and most states standardized instructions had nothing like that if memory serves me.

Please stop. Mostly everything you say regarding legal issues is wrong.

 

[Pens1566]

And again, innocent until proven guilty. The state must disprove self defense.

There has been no evidence that Davis did not threaten him.

It's a shame you can't seem to apply this consistently.

 

[Vic]

its sad that we may be to that point

In the old days parents did this. But I guess we are past that now....

🙁

My dad served in the Korean War (he's in his 80s mow) and taught me how to shoot when I was about 9. He was insanely strict about gun safety. He would probably consider the fact that Dunn had to chamber a round as evidence of premeditation. But then again, he's a bleeding heart liberal who carries everywhere even though my stepmother supports gun control.