Reply With Quote
Of course. Scotto could say he "felt threatened, WAS threatened with death", several witnesses and youtube video, and shoot the asshole. The only good Repug politician is a dead Repug politician.
Should reporter Michael Scotto have pulled out his gun and shot Repug congressman Michael Grimm when he collared him and threatened to throw him off that balcony on live TV? If you were on Scotto's jury would you convict?
Of course. Scotto could say he "felt threatened, WAS threatened with death", several witnesses and youtube video
The guy is an ass, but it was just words. I don't think you should get stand your ground protection over just words.
In Texas, Scotto could press terroristic threat charges and have him arrested. I'd convict Grimm of that for sure.
Even though dude is right up in his face, grabbing his collar and threatening to throw him off? Are you supposed to only fear for your life on the way down after you're thrown?
words? If some raging asshole right next to you threatens you with death, then SYG's "I FELT threatened so I shot and killed" certainly is a SYG application.
He could have just unholstered his gun and watched Grimm his pants.
I'm sure if not for the Capitol being a gun-free zone, this whole thing would have never happened.
he said "if you do this again, I'll throw you off the roof", right?
I dunno, I'd prefer our society not to allow thin skinned people to start firing away over heat of the moment verbal threats.
That said, I only saw one video on it. Was there something more physical to the threat than that?
Not from what I saw. I only saw one video as well and I didn't see anything physical about it.
No Skittles... nothing to be scared of, tbh
So you s would convict?
So if I walked into LAX and said "I have a bomb" no one should feel threatened because it's just words.
hm.
I don't think I'd convict shooter there because the dude made it clear he has a weapon of deadly force that he is going to use.
What's the cut off for you guys?
The threat for Scotto is still there. Do you think he still has the right to go to his house and kill Grimm?
Or is it too late because he already accepted the apology?
So if he's made clear he's going to throw you off the roof and he's bigger than you.... you only die once either way.
No I wouldn't pull a gun on the dude for threatening me, but depending on his proximity to me, time is of the essence and you don't have a lot of recovery time to change your mind. It would be a fluid situation and could come off different on two different iterations of the same event.
Do you understand the term "stand your ground"?
I agree with that. But in this situation, it was a conditional threat, saying "if you ever do it again, I'll toss you off the balcony?"
It's tougher for me to give the ok to shoot him over that than if he said "I'm throwing you off this balcony (now)"
Yeah, I failed there pretty horribly.
But I'd still like to know where the cut off is. What if he said "I'm gonna break your knee caps"
kill-the-n!gg@s SYG defense appears to be wide open, completely subjective, one on has to believe to be threatened (aka faith-based killing).
And if you shoot dead black or brown, OBVIOUSLY to any red-state jury, you were being threatened.
I suppose if Grimm broke his nose and started smashing Scotto's head in the pavement, he would have been justified in defending himself. If I was on the jury I would have to know what the state statute says as well as review all the evidence before I could make a conviction.
If this was in Florida, then yes he should have and he probably gets off.
Grimm is Catholic, was a Marine, was an FBI agent, now corrupt Repug politician. quadrifecta of assholiness
You're being unclear about just what cutoff you're referring to. Do you mean the legal one or the moral one?
You're like this forum clown that everyone just talks around. Nothing you say means a ing thing in the realm of the rational.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
