When is Self Defense, Self Defense?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Self defense and stand your ground being applied disparately is pretty political.

In order to determine if it's "being applied disparately", we would need to compare this incident to others with similar circumstances.

Yet when nevergaveitathought tried to compare it with the killing of Ashli Babbitt, you rejected this as whataboutism.

So how in the fuck do you conclude something is "being applied disparately" - when you provide no data on comparable cases, and reject any attempt to bring one up?

[JohnnyGleet]

Some one in a truck, prolly drunk, cut's into your lane.
Slow down and let them go on.
If they decide to slow and wait to hassle you some more, pull off the road, preferable at an exit. If they pursue, pull over and stop.
If they continue being tacky, THEN point the gun at them as they approach your vehicle. If they don't split, shoot.
Judging by the scenario as presented by 1BM, the events as described are like shooting someone in the back as they run away.
And we know he doesn't approve of that.
Does he?

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by JohnnyGleet

Some one in a truck, prolly drunk, cut's into your lane.
Slow down and let them go on.
If they decide to slow and wait to hassle you some more, pull off the road, preferable at an exit. If they pursue, pull over and stop.
If they continue being tacky, THEN point the gun at them as they approach your vehicle. If they don't split, shoot.
Judging by the scenario as presented by 1BM, the events as described are like shooting someone in the back as they run away.
And we know he doesn't approve of that.
Does he?

That would have been the best thing for Wilson to do. Some aspects of this case don't make a whole lot of sense. Supposedly in another article it stated Wilson Fired a warning shot towards the pavement. How do you fire a warning shot and claim Self Defense? Hutchinson was seated in the back seat between two other passengers somehow the stray bullet fired from Wilson's gun struck her in the back of her head, causing her death. I think Wilson was appropriately charged but the driver of the Truck should be charged with a few things too.

[1blackman1]

You’re all focusing on how he could have avoided the situation. But that’s not how self defense and “stand your ground” works. Stand your ground means you don’t have to retreat and be cornered without options to defend yourself. So whether he could have taken better options is irrelevant.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by lustylad

In order to determine if it's "being applied disparately", we would need to compare this incident to others with similar circumstances.

Yet when nevergaveitathought tried to compare it with the killing of Ashli Babbitt, you rejected this as whataboutism.

So how in the fuck do you conclude something is "being applied disparately" - when you provide no data on comparable cases, and reject any attempt to bring one up?

when he more than broadly hints the decision was due to race

that can only be due to his "knowledge" of similar cases being decided differently when the race of the actor is different, which is a whataboutism,

and when he uses the phrase that is dragged out when there is nothing but perhaps statistical differences as among citizens in the enforcement of some law, often without real acknowledgement that we are individuals and are responsible for our individual actions, which phrase is "being applied disparately", he is in effect doing a whataboutism

when all is a comparison to another

but then he claims he isn't mr. whataboutism

[1blackman1]

I haven’t made the disparate treatment argument as yet. The first discussion has to be on application of the law in general. Nothing I’ve said as yet has anything to with whataboutism. Nice try though.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Self defense and stand your ground being applied disparately is pretty political.

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

I haven’t made the disparate treatment argument as yet. The first discussion has to be on application of the law in general. Nothing I’ve said as yet has anything to with whataboutism. Nice try though.

?

also there is whataboutism in your racial cast to the decision

[1blackman1]

Where did I mention race in anything I wrote? His race was mentioned only in the snippet from the article. I have yet to mention race at all.

[offshoredrilling]

Not sure of GA law. In NY its murder

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

You’re all focusing on how he could have avoided the situation. But that’s not how self defense and “stand your ground” works. Stand your ground means you don’t have to retreat and be cornered without options to defend yourself. So whether he could have taken better options is irrelevant.

Although the "Stand Your Ground Law" states there is no duty to retreat, the force used must still be reasonable under the circumstances. The Georgia Court may have viewed the firing of a Firearm in a Traffic situation was not reasonable action by Wilson under the circumstances to protect him under Georgia's Stand Your Ground Law.

[Anonymous01]

Blah, blah, blah...


To cut to the real issue, if it were a pickup truck of intoxicated Black men swerving into the lane of a car with a white couple, would it even make the evening news?


Not in Georgia!

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by Levianon17

Although the "Stand Your Ground Law" states there is no duty to retreat, the force used must still be reasonable under the circumstances. The Georgia Court may have viewed the firing of a Firearm in a Traffic situation was not reasonable action by Wilson under the circumstances to protect him under Georgia's Stand Your Ground Law.

Then they should have found him guilty of the murder charge. See that’s where the stretch of the imagination comes in. Were it not self defense, then it would be murder. The jury chose to find him guilty of something other than murder so they must have believed it was self defense, so he should have been acquitted.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Then they should have found him guilty of the murder charge. See that’s where the stretch of the imagination comes in. Were it not self defense, then it would be murder. The jury chose to find him guilty of something other than murder so they must have believed it was self defense, so he should have been acquitted.

Murder was the original charge I am surprised it didn't stick. Wilson fired two shots the second shot was fired through the rear window of the Truck striking Haley Hutcheson in the back of the head. This would indicate Wilson's vehicle was back on the roadway behind the truck out of any danger. He might get a Civil suit coming his way from the deceased passenger's family. The driver of the truck should be charged with negligence for causing the whole incident. Wilson firing a weapon didn't diffuse the situation it complicated it further.