Another Senseless Shooting in Florida

[crashhelmet]

Link From Alternet
Article from Huffington Post

A man and his girlfriend stops at a convenience store in Jacksonville, Florida to buy a bottle of wine. The man waits out side and gets into an argument with a group of teenagers in a truck parked beside them over the volume of their music. The man grabs his gun, fires into the truck, and then drives off. When they hear that one of them died as a result of the shooting, they drive back to their home 2 and a half hours away.

Points the media will have fun with:
Man was white, victims were black
Victims were unarmed, shooter claims they had a shotgun
Shooter did not call 911 at any point
Shooter is claiming "Stand your Ground" defense.

[Greenday]

And the only fact we have is that they argued over the volume of their music. We have no idea who said what, who initiated aggression, etc.

[crashhelmet]

And the only fact we have is that they argued over the volume of their music. We have no idea who said what, who initiated aggression, etc.

The shooter said he thought he saw a shotgun and felt threatened. He's the one that pulled his gun and fired multiple times as they were trying to drive away.

[Andara Bledin]

This case is going to go the same route as the incident where Raul Rodriguez shot and killed his neighbor Kelly Danaher over loud music.

In this case, the shooter fled the scene, didn't call police, and then fled the jurisdiction in an attempt to escape his own culpability. If not for a quick-thinking witness who memorized his car's plate, he would have gotten away with murder. If he really and truly believed he was in the right, he might have still fled, but he would also have called the authorities to report the incident and not left it to the victims and other potential witnesses.

Now, however, he's likely to suffer the same fate as Rodriguez, who had recorded proof that his chosen victims were actually being verbally threatening, but was found guilty of murder in June, after less than six hours of deliberation by the jury.

^-.-^

[Nekojin]

Dunn's claim that he "saw a shotgun" isn't really all that credible. If there was a shotgun in the car that wasn't pointed at him, then his drawing and firing was a severe and unjustified overreaction. If there was a shotgun that WAS pointed at him, then drawing and firing would have been suicidal - the fastest quick-draw champion in the world can't draw fast enough to beat someone who only has to pull the trigger.

I'm normally a pro-gun individual, but this guy's actions are indefensible.

[HYHYBT]

If they were trying to leave, there is no sane way shooting at them would qualify as self defense. Doesn't matter what they said.

Of course, as we all know, Florida law *isn't* entirely sane.

[Giggle Goose]

Dunn's claim that he "saw a shotgun" isn't really all that credible. If there was a shotgun in the car that wasn't pointed at him, then his drawing and firing was a severe and unjustified overreaction.

I agree. I don't know much about the stand-your-ground law, but it's my understanding that it's to be used when you feel threatened on your own property, like if someone breaks into your house. Unless the kids actually were trying to get into the guys car, then he's full of shit.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

I agree. I don't know much about the stand-your-ground law, but it's my understanding that it's to be used when you feel threatened on your own property, like if someone breaks into your house. Unless the kids actually were trying to get into the guys car, then he's full of shit.

No no, that's Castle Doctrine, stating that it's okay for you to use lethal force if someone is breaking into your house.

"Stand-your-ground" is supposed to be castle doctrine everywhere, basically it's supposed to say "If you feel threatened you don't have to wait for the person to actually attack you if you feel he is going to attack you, you can attack first."

Which had lead to a lot of problems because people are just saying "Oh well I felt threatened by him, even though he's running away and just holding a bag of skittles, so I shot him" and expecting to get off with no repercussions.

[lordlundar]

The best example of stand your ground and the abuse of it is in line with that hunter from South Park who screams "he's coming at me!" and open fires to be able to poach without getting arrested.

There's a lot of similarities between the two.

[Andara Bledin]

There are a lot of people who are attempting to use it as an excuse to be able to murder others.

As far as I can fathom, however, so far none of them have succeeded in abusing it. Yet. We'll see how the cases still in the system work out. Hopefully, with a little more publicity about their failures (which never equals the original publicity of the crimes, unfortunately), people should get it into their heads that they have to be able to prove that they had a right and reason to be there and that the other person was genuinely threatening enough for them to fear for their lives.

^-.-^

[Nekojin]

No no, that's Castle Doctrine, stating that it's okay for you to use lethal force if someone is breaking into your house.

"Stand-your-ground" is supposed to be castle doctrine everywhere, basically it's supposed to say "If you feel threatened you don't have to wait for the person to actually attack you if you feel he is going to attack you, you can attack first."

Actually, the reason that so many of these "Stand-your-ground" cases are getting so much attention is because of the difference between the actual law, and the public perception of the law. Although I will admit that there's an element of ambiguity, the deciding line is whether the average person would agree that the person's life was in danger. In this case, I don't think that many people would agree that a fleeing car posed much of a threat to Mr. Dunn, shotgun or no. And we only have Mr. Dunn's word on the existence of the shotgun.

[Panacea]

More importantly, this time we have surviving witnesses. It's not like the Trayvon Marin case where the shooter is the only one left to talk about what happened.

[crashhelmet]

Shooter Indicted on Charges of First Degree Murder

The Jury came back and indicted the shooter on charges of First Degree Murder yesterday. He goes back for arraignment on the new charges Monday, 12/17