With all the normal anti-gun chowderheads demanding the victim of assault who shot his assailant be charged with something, I have to say:
It's my opinion that, morally, once someone has done something like assault you, then their life is forfeit to you.
That's not legally true, I know it, and act accordingly.
I've heard varying opinions about this being a good shoot or not.
So far Andrew Branca's carries the most weight for me.
Something that gets drilled, over and over, is that 21' rule and how fast an assailant can close the gap.
Mr McGlockton was much closer than that when Mr Drejka shot him.
It doesn't look to me like McGlockton was retreating at all.
Click here to submit $0.00 US for a lifetime subscription
Posts
Comments
Having been in somewhat the same situation as Mr. Drejka was, albeit in Junior High and High School, just because the assailant has stopped forward motion does not mean that Mr. Assailant is backing off. My experience was that was just the calm before the total poop-storm unloaded upon me.
ReplyDeleteMr. Drejka was in the right in the shoot. And he will pay enough, if he is a moral person, for the rest of his life, over the actions he took that day. If he isn't a moral person, then 'legal' punishments won't work.
It's over. The mostly wrong person lost, and the other mostly wrong person (the driver) also lost.
But, as you pointed out, Mr. Drejka had other means to get his point across.
(Me? I'm that jerk who yells at people who park in Fire Lanes and my wife thinks I'm going to be shot or hit one of these days. But I'm over it. I am so tired of the professional victims getting their way because they are who they are. Tilting at windmills, just tilting at windmills.)
If he wasn't armed, and was beaten to death by his assailant, there would only be a short local news report. That's what's most bizarre. Irate, out of control people assaulting people is hardly news worthy, unless the victim fights back, and shoots the assailant.
ReplyDeleteYep, we live in a culture where the criminals have more status and rights than the victims.
DeleteHey Angus;
ReplyDeleteThank you for the link, I and several of my friends had different opinions on this shoot, I called it a "Good" shoot legally but morally it was *Meh*, there was a lot of dumbassery on all sides, although getting blindsided by the "Victim" was a huge factor. Unfortunately the talking heads used this to bludgeon the Florida "Stand your ground" law like it is an excuse for whitey to shoot helpless black people.
I wonder if Mr. Drejka said something in that pause that caused McGlockton to pull the trigger.
ReplyDelete