He was scared. Defense will be about self-defense. Thirty years ago, a man was acquitted after shooting and killing a kid who knocked on his door. He claimed self-defense, stating that he was scared.
The stand your ground "defense" is quite stupid and can b abused. If the shooter was able to successfully double tap the poor kid, he probably would have gotten away with it cause it would b his "scared" a$$ words vs a dead kid.
I remember when I was 14 and my uncle was picking me up at the front of my apartment complex, I went to his car hopped in, and heard a shriek "Excuse me", I looked left and was shocked the see a complete stranger, my uncle's car was about 40 feet behind, the same exact car and color. I hopped out quickly, apologized, and explained the situation. Innocent mistake, and in an alternate reality, if the person had a gun in their lap, probably would have been legal grounds to blow my head off at the same time, thankfully the person was just normal about it. Gun culture in this country is simply mad.
https://abc13.com/woodlands-elite-c...n-pedro-tello-rodriguez-jr-arrested/13150502/ Girls getting shot for going into wrong car. Let's get more guns into lunatics hands.
Who was the "racist" that said the following? “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” Answer: Jesse Jackson What his racism also based on hatred? Of course not. This wasn't racism but rather fear... a fear which was based on the extremely high rate of crime (5-8x average) for the black community. This is Jesse Jackson we are talking about - an advocate for civil rights! If this doesn't conclusively prove my point, then I'm not sure what will.
Self defense laws cite “reasonable fear”. unfortunately this can play into a lot of social biases regarding what any group might feel is reasonable. Into this case given that Yarl showed no visible threat other than being young and black along with that the Lester shot him multiple time it seems like a very hard argument to claim reasonable fear..
Stand your ground doesn’t apply here but the Castle Doctrine does as it happened at the shooters own property. Even so I agree. Even under threat if you can retreat is still the best option. A lot can go wrong in any situation where you actually have to defend yourself.
The young Japanese boy who was shot was much smaller and did not have any weapon. However, the much bigger and stronger man claimed that he was fearful, and the juror acquitted him for that. I think our society gives more weight to one's perception of fear, regardless of whether it is reasonable or not. That is okay until it means harming the other person based on one's perception. I believe we would have a less violent society that is safer for all if we moved away from what one feels and more towards the end result. If someone shoots another person dead, and it is later found that the person was not dangerous, at a minimum, they should face punishment for that. This will provide an incentive to prevent rash shootings. One should only take a shot to kill someone if they are genuinely fearful for their life, not if they think they are fearful.
Removing the word "accused" does not imply guilt. Did he or did he not admit to shooting the young man? Let's say he starts the process and claims Stand Your Ground. If the headline was "Andrew Lester, 84-year-old Kansas City man who shot Ralph Yarl, to utilize a Stand Your Ground defense" that is no different than removing "accused" from the headline. Now had it listed the crime he was charged with, then yes "accused" should absolutely be used. "Andrew Lester, 84-year-old Kansas City man accused of Assault in the First degree in the shooting of Ralph Yarl, is in custody" See the difference?
You cannot and should not be allowed to say, in press, that "X committed Y crime" until X has been found guilty of committing Y crime by the judicial process. Not only do we need to respect due process in all circumstances, but saying you did something doesn't always mean you did it.
Jesse Jackson doesn't speak for all black folks, if u are thinking he does that just shows how racist u are. There was a South Park episode about it. U address racism by fixing the mindset of the racists not force the victims to improve themselves to avoid getting hated on. What u are suggesting is as stupid as telling a bullied kid to stop being a victim and do his best to appease the bullies to avoided getting bullied. U still haven't answered my question in this instance is the shooter 100% at fault yes or no. Why should the race that are the victims of racism have to change just to appease the racists, it should b the other way around. Like what do u suggest Muslims have to do to avoid being viewed as terrorists by the racists?
We are a society of idiot fish who keep taking that obvious bait every single time. It’s not that someone was shot, it’s now about the skin color of those involved. It has to be specific. The minority must be the victim for the national media to grab hold of it and the perpetrators must be white. Now we have a story!! I know a white guy that walked down the wrong street in NO and was robbed and shot by black guys. Is walking down the wrong street, looking for your car, much different than ringing the wrong doorbell? The national media thinks so. Go ahead and tell me one is a racially motivated crime and the other isn’t. Maybe they both were. Maybe neither were. You don’t know but follow that narrative anyway and take that bait. It helps the country so much.
This poor kid is going to need some professional help, I can't imagine what he`s going through, I would hope at some point the old white dude apologizes to this kid and his family. This poor kid`s life will never be the same.....just sad man
he has a bright future…hopefully this physical and mental trauma doesn’t stop him from achieving his dreams as for the guy who shot him, I’d be shocked…this would’ve been 2 shots to the head and a young kid dead if he had better aim, and all this over ringing his doorbell
To further this point, black on white crime is far more prevalent than white on black crime. Most of the people in this thread are using white on black crime to decry racism. But are the blacks that murder whites racist? The logic on the left just doesn't add up -- it's emotion and not logic. The media has their narrative that they want to pursue... and most of the time its to drive voter engagement for reliably democratic voters... it's awful. People are getting absolutely played when they take the bait.
Black kid gets shot up and almost executed by white old man bc he was ringing a door bell and u are getting triggered? If this was a white kid ringing that door bell, u God dam know he wasn't getting double tapped. We have one poster blaming the victim that the black community crimes were why he got shot and another one getting triggered that the media isn't covering black on white violence. Well if a white kid gets shot up by a black old man for ringing a door bell let me know.
You and others are doing a great job of that when you continue to equate a group of people to criminals over and over again.
