The shooter didn’t initiate the confrontation. He was speaking to a 3rd party when the shootee approached from the side and physically attacked him. The actions of the shootee, just prior to the shot, make me dislike this shooting...but I’m not sure it should be illegal.
but the thing is, we've got a situation where guy X JUST INITIATED A FIGHT guy Y is responding to that the rule is not "guy Y only fires if he's 1,600% certain he's under attack". by initiating the fight, guy X lost the benefit of the doubt for questionable edge cases
-
-
I keep going back to the law & reasonably believe & imminent bodily harm or death. I see the McGlockton surrender at the sight of the gun. He backed off. You have battery at that point. I don't see where it's reasonable to shoot him at that point. My opinion.
-
McGlockton made it a physical altercation. The shove wasn't gentle. If Drejka reasonably believed McGlockton was going to resume the attack there's his reason to use deadly force. I don't think the video supports that but I wasn't there & Drejka was so there's that, too.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.