Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Kansas Happening
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="inactive" data-source="post: 788362" data-attributes="member: 7488"><p>The main point to emphasize here is the OP had opportunity to retreat, but rather 1) followed the other party to his destination, and 2) engaged said other party in a verbal agrument that escalated into a confrontation. In other words, he instigated the conflict in the first place.</p><p></p><p>It the OP shot and killed the person who opened his car door, he very well would be held civilly liable if not also criminally liable, despite the OK Stand Your Ground laws. The OP handled this situation very foolishly.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps we should <a href="http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8396343" target="_blank">review the story</a> of this driver, who <strong><u>was actually followed into a parking lot by angry driver</u></strong> but was tried and pled guilty for shooting the other driver. The subtle difference was that the deceased did not try to enter Mr Gumm's vehicle, but he was charged on the basis that he had the opportunity to flee and elected not to, which is <strong><u>the common denominator in both scenarios</u></strong>. </p><p></p><p>Again, while it may be within the OP's right to draw (although that is debatable as he began the verbal altercation), he would almost certainly lose a civil trial as there was nothing to be gained by his confrontation other than to incite an arguement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="inactive, post: 788362, member: 7488"] The main point to emphasize here is the OP had opportunity to retreat, but rather 1) followed the other party to his destination, and 2) engaged said other party in a verbal agrument that escalated into a confrontation. In other words, he instigated the conflict in the first place. It the OP shot and killed the person who opened his car door, he very well would be held civilly liable if not also criminally liable, despite the OK Stand Your Ground laws. The OP handled this situation very foolishly. Perhaps we should [URL="http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8396343"]review the story[/URL] of this driver, who [B][U]was actually followed into a parking lot by angry driver[/U][/B] but was tried and pled guilty for shooting the other driver. The subtle difference was that the deceased did not try to enter Mr Gumm's vehicle, but he was charged on the basis that he had the opportunity to flee and elected not to, which is [B][U]the common denominator in both scenarios[/U][/B]. Again, while it may be within the OP's right to draw (although that is debatable as he began the verbal altercation), he would almost certainly lose a civil trial as there was nothing to be gained by his confrontation other than to incite an arguement. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Kansas Happening
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom