re: VIDEO: Florida woman kills man. . .over WalMart parking space. NSFW Could be SYG or murder

quote:

---

The first aggressive action was road rage.

---

I must’ve missed road rage.

What happened other than he was parked across multiple spots and they argued about it?

quote:

---

The second aggressive action was him approaching her afterwards.

---

It looks to me like he approached her after she pulled a gun. Is that not correct?

quote:

---

And you argue that he has a legal right to aggressively approach her.

---

If she pulled a gun after a simple disagreement over a parking spot? Absolutely. He has a right to protect himself.

Maybe he threatened her first and then she pulled the gun? For her sake, I hope so.

There was a road rage incident in the parking lot.

He left the spot and parked far away. After parking, he approached her spot.

You may have never heard of violence after road rage. It occurs when one person leaves their car and walks to the other person. Even though the incident was done (she was in 1 spot and he was in a separate one).

I have a firearm in my vehicle. It isnt so I can take it inside stores. It is in the event that someone approaches my vehicle. There is a pattern of violence in America that starts with road rage and escalates when someone "aggressively approaches" afterward.

When he approached, she didn't shoot him. As a matter of fact, she retreated around a car. And he continued pursuit.

Is there a reason why you either ignore or debate anything above?

If she was malicious, she would have shot him at the first approach.
That isn't what happened. He literally (and in your terms) aggressively pursued her.

Maybe he is a dumb arse like you and thought he had a legal right to assault her like that.
He got shot because he fricked around and found out.

quote:

---

He left the spot and parked far away. After parking, he approached her spot.

---

If true, and there’s a legit road rage incident prior, then she’s justified.

Not guilty.

quote:

---

In fact, she is likely the initial aggressor because she stepped out of her vehicle openly displaying a gun.

---

He can’t seem to comprehend that possibility.

quote:

---

There was a road rage incident in the parking lot.

---

Are you talking about the parking spot dispute? Or was there something earlier and the parking spot was a continuation?

During the road rage incident who was raging?Do you have link to this?

quote:

---

He left the spot and parked far away. After parking, he approached her spot.

---

Others have said he actually parked nearby and just out of view of the original camera view most have seen? If he parked far away it would make even less sense that she would exit vehicle with gun drawn for purely self defense purposes as she was close to the building (which was likely part of the dispute over the parking spot).

quote:

---

Everybody is a lawyer, but typically 90% of internet lawyers get the basic definition of assault mixed up with battery.

---

When was the last time you read about someone being charged with assault because of words? It's rare because of free speech concerns.

Assault and battery are charged together so much that in layman's terms most people think of assault as battery.

quote:

---

When was the last time you read about someone being charged with assault because of words? It's rare because of free speech concerns.

---

It’s not just about words. Brandishing a gun can be a form of assault

quote:

---

There was a road rage incident in the parking lot.

---

We still don't know all of the facts except that he blocked her and then moved. We don't know if there was anything happening before the clips we see. She could be the one raging.

quote:

---

He left the spot and parked far away. After parking, he approached her spot.

---

He had to approach her spot to get to the store from where he parked. Also, she exited the vehicle with the weapon before he arrived. He also seemed to be going past her, but she is saying something to him and then takes steps towards him with the weapon drawn.

quote:

---

I have a firearm in my vehicle. It isnt so I can take it inside stores. It is in the event that someone approaches my vehicle. There is a pattern of violence in America that starts with road rage and escalates when someone "aggressively approaches" afterward.

---

Then you had better be smart about using it. She did not have to exit the vehicle with weapon drawn if she was afraid of what you speak of.

quote:

---

When he approached, she didn't shoot him. As a matter of fact, she retreated around a car. And he continued pursuit.

---

Means nothing at all, especially if she can't articulate why she exited the vehicle with the weapon drawn. She could be considered the aggressor from the point she left the vehicle with the weapon.

quote:

---

If she was malicious, she would have shot him at the first approach.

---

Not necessarily, she could have been working her nerve up, trying to bait him etc.

Remember, this is in a public space, and they both have a right to be there no matter which was in the right over the parking spot dispute. You can't just pull a firearm and claim a certain amount of space because you had an argument over a parking space. Involving a firearm in a verbal dispute that had ended, remember he went and parked elsewhere and she pulled the weapon while he wasn't there, is escalation and she may be able to explain why she exited the vehicle with the gun but maybe not, we need to know more details and audio or witness accounts of what was said.

quote:

---

In law, words have meaning

---

Again, you can be charged with verbal assault, but courts have made it clear that verbal assault by itself requires a very high bar to convict because of free speech concerns. It's why verbal assault often times never makes it to a jury.

He was unarmed, so if he verbally threatened her (which we don't know), he was unarmed and did not have the ability to immediately follow through and act on the threat.

In Florida, it doesn't meet the requirements for SYG. She was in her car and had the ability to avoid the incident altogether by staying in or car or driving away and calling the cops. Instead, she stepped out of her car with a gun. When he walked towards her, she retreated. But when he retreated she moved towards him.

If she felt there was imminent bodily harm that required deadly force, why exit your vehicle? Why advance on him when he retreated?

She's going to have to answer these questions.