If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Think Progress)   Trigger-happy Hispanic man invokes 'stand your ground' defense in the killing of an unarmed black teenager. This is not a repeat   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 208
    More: Asinine, stand your ground, Mr. Scott  
•       •       •

11648 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Oct 2013 at 3:29 PM (41 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



208 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-12 11:27:44 AM
Though in this case the kid that got shot was apparently completely innocent and the shooter didn't even get into an altercation first.
 
2013-10-12 11:48:36 AM
That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.
 
2013-10-12 11:52:46 AM
There are some more details here.

Apparently witness statements taken by the police suggest that Scott, the guy who killed the kid, may have been the first and only shooter, and he waited 4 days before he reported to the police that he shot the kid.
 
2013-10-12 11:55:05 AM
We'll see how the civil suit goes.

/good luck trying to prove the dead guy was more than 50% responsible for getting killed
 
2013-10-12 12:01:58 PM
Be thankful he only had a pistol. He could have stood his ground with belt fed 50 cal.
 
2013-10-12 12:27:21 PM

SkinnyHead: That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.


Doesn't that seem just a little messed up? He shot at a car full of teenage girls, killed a random kid in a Honda and there's no punishment at all?
 
2013-10-12 12:28:22 PM
I love that, "I felt threatened!" is now enough to let someone get off scott free with shooting and killing someone completely unrelated.

Hell, even the stated beginning of this- his daughter was being harassed by other girls- is ridiculous. "They were teasing my girl, so I went out there with my gun..." I'm perfectly fine with the secon amendment, but it's people like THIS that probably SHOULD be on a government list and not allowed to own a firearm...
 
2013-10-12 12:32:16 PM

Ashyukun: I love that, "I felt threatened!" is now enough to let someone get off scott free with shooting and killing someone completely unrelated.

Hell, even the stated beginning of this- his daughter was being harassed by other girls- is ridiculous. "They were teasing my girl, so I went out there with my gun..." I'm perfectly fine with the secon amendment, but it's people like THIS that probably SHOULD be on a government list and not allowed to own a firearm...


Waiting until they actually made threatening move would be cowering and we can't have that.
 
2013-10-12 12:52:03 PM
Some questions remain in the case

Many questions remain in the lead paragraph.  Take this from an entirely anti-Zimmerman acquittal guy, ThinkProgress:


thedailyshow.mtvnimages.com
 
2013-10-12 01:51:46 PM

thamike: Some questions remain in the case

Many questions remain in the lead paragraph.  Take this from an entirely anti-Zimmerman acquittal guy, ThinkProgress:


[thedailyshow.mtvnimages.com image 480x360]


The only part off about the first paragraph is the 'botched confrontation'.  From the sound of it, there was no confrontation, some girls harassed his daughter, she made it home safe, they drove by in an SUV, and he shot an innocent kid sitting in a car across the street.
 
2013-10-12 01:53:32 PM
www.triniandcarmens.com

Let's do this shiat.
 
2013-10-12 01:57:43 PM

TuteTibiImperes: thamike: Some questions remain in the case

Many questions remain in the lead paragraph.  Take this from an entirely anti-Zimmerman acquittal guy, ThinkProgress:


[thedailyshow.mtvnimages.com image 480x360]

The only part off about the first paragraph is the 'botched confrontation'.  From the sound of it, there was no confrontation, some girls harassed his daughter, she made it home safe, they drove by in an SUV, and he shot an innocent kid sitting in a car across the street.


You're right.  I should have said "entire story."  i just thought it would be redundant, and that "lead paragraph" would be taken loosely to mean "the initial framing."
 
2013-10-12 02:03:14 PM

thamike: TuteTibiImperes: thamike: Some questions remain in the case

Many questions remain in the lead paragraph.  Take this from an entirely anti-Zimmerman acquittal guy, ThinkProgress:


[thedailyshow.mtvnimages.com image 480x360]

The only part off about the first paragraph is the 'botched confrontation'.  From the sound of it, there was no confrontation, some girls harassed his daughter, she made it home safe, they drove by in an SUV, and he shot an innocent kid sitting in a car across the street.

You're right.  I should have said "entire story."  i just thought it would be redundant, and that "lead paragraph" would be taken loosely to mean "the initial framing."


Are you saying that he didn't go all gun crazy and shoot an innocent kid from his front porch when he could have just stayed inside safe with his daughter?
 
2013-10-12 02:06:45 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Are you saying that he didn't go all gun crazy and shoot an innocent kid from his front porch when he could have just stayed inside safe with his daughter?


I'm saying that the article is assuredly framing the issue, despite admitting a lack of knowledge of many important details.  And you are reacting accordingly.
 
2013-10-12 02:13:05 PM
Come on fark, I are disappoint.


img855.imageshack.us
 
2013-10-12 02:14:12 PM

change1211: SkinnyHead: That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.

Doesn't that seem just a little messed up? He shot at a car full of teenage girls, killed a random kid in a Honda and there's no punishment at all?


It's 2:30 AM and a car driving by is shooting at the man's house.  The man returns fire in self defense and a bystander is killed.  Since the man was lawfully exercising his right to self defense, he is not to blame for the accidental killing.  The teenagers who fired at his house are responsible for the death of the bystander.
 
2013-10-12 02:31:53 PM

TuteTibiImperes: There are some more details here.


From your link:

As 5th Circuit Assistant Solicitor April Sampson warned over the summer, a decision in favor of Scott marks "the first time any state in this Union" has awarded Stand Your Ground immunity in the killing of an innocent bystander.

"If this law were to be applied the way (Scott) wants to apply it, he could shoot a 4-year-old playing in her front yard and still be immune from prosecution," she said, adding that it would transform South Carolina into "the Wild, Wild West."


OK. Let's set that precedent and go that route.

If we want a gun culture let's have a gun culture. That may be the only way we as a society give lie to the belief that "an armed society is a polite society".

If that lesson is mounted on a bloody pile of dead kids and innocents it is too bad, but that looks like the only way we will learn, if we will learn at all.
 
2013-10-12 02:56:33 PM

SkinnyHead: It's 2:30 AM and a car driving by is shooting at the man's house. The man returns fire in self defense and a bystander is killed.


http://www.heraldonline.com/2013/10/09/5291031/stand-your-ground-sc- ju dge-grants.html

"Shortly before, an SUV filled with youths who had been threatening his 15-year-old daughter drove by his house and they fired shots, according to testimony in the case.

Smith then saw Niles' 1992 Honda, and, believing its occupants posed a danger, fired his gun from his front yard across the street, hitting Niles in the head with a .380 bullet, killing him instantly. No evidence indicated Niles was a threat to Scott or his daughter."

It's not that he was returning fire and missed. He didn't even know where the shots came from and just shot at the first person in a car he saw. Some other articles on the shooting establish that a little clearer than this one.

And, of course, there's still conflicting testimony about whether anyone shot at him in the first place. And I have yet to see any mention of any arrests or charges against the girls in the SUV. One would think they would have been charged with felony murder if there was the slightest evidence they'd shot at this guy's house.
 
2013-10-12 03:34:49 PM
i.imgur.com
/wanted for questioning (DNRTFA)
 
2013-10-12 03:34:52 PM
thamike:

You're right.  I should have said "entire story."  i just thought it would be redundant, and that "lead paragraph" would be taken loosely to mean "the initial framing."

Well, I submitted this exact same link last night with a different headline (I do not know what happened but it unimportant) but what I do know is that the way the article is framed is exactly correct. Here is a more professional legal analysis.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2013/10/i-have-written -a -few-times-about-south-carolinas-stand-your-ground-law-also-known-as-t heprotection-of-persons-and-property-a.html
 
2013-10-12 03:35:25 PM

SkinnyHead: change1211: SkinnyHead: That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.

Doesn't that seem just a little messed up? He shot at a car full of teenage girls, killed a random kid in a Honda and there's no punishment at all?

It's 2:30 AM and a car driving by is shooting at the man's house.  The man returns fire in self defense and a bystander is killed.  Since the man was lawfully exercising his right to self defense, he is not to blame for the accidental killing.  The teenagers who fired at his house are responsible for the death of the bystander.


Hey, it works for the PoPo.
 
2013-10-12 03:35:58 PM

ShawnDoc: Come on fark, I are disappoint.


[img855.imageshack.us image 565x308]


You cannot trust Señor Cartmenez or any other Hispanic, clearly.
 
2013-10-12 03:36:45 PM
woah (keanu-like)... look what I found on a GIS for 'coming right for us':

http://i.imgur.com/efmJpnk.gif
/NSFW, &ywvm
 
2013-10-12 03:38:49 PM
What a pussy.
 
2013-10-12 03:39:19 PM
Second degree murder. Period.
 
2013-10-12 03:39:42 PM
Carrying a firearm is prematurely escalating any situation.

The second amendment ensures every American's right to be a giant pussy, because it's hard to be brave when scary brown people will out number you in three decades.
 
2013-10-12 03:40:41 PM
When I think of male Hispanic names, Shannon Anthony Scott  would rank up there.
 
2013-10-12 03:40:43 PM

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Carrying a firearm is prematurely escalating any situation.

The second amendment ensures every American's right to be a giant pussy, because it's hard to be brave when scary brown people will out number you in three decades.


Nope. Plonk.
 
2013-10-12 03:41:35 PM

SkinnyHead: change1211: SkinnyHead: That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.

Doesn't that seem just a little messed up? He shot at a car full of teenage girls, killed a random kid in a Honda and there's no punishment at all?

It's 2:30 AM and a car driving by is shooting at the man's house.  The man returns fire in self defense and a bystander is killed.  Since the man was lawfully exercising his right to self defense, he is not to blame for the accidental killing.  The teenagers who fired at his house are responsible for the death of the bystander.


The guy didn't return fire at a person he claimed fired at him first. He claims somebody fired at his house, so he went outside and shot at the first person he saw. That at the very least is reckless endangerment.
 
2013-10-12 03:41:47 PM
maybe we need to rethink these stand your ground laws, when you commit manslaughter and automatically are immune to prosecution

especially if the person who was killed was a bystander
 
2013-10-12 03:42:23 PM

change1211: SkinnyHead: That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.

Doesn't that seem just a little messed up? He shot at a car full of teenage girls, killed a random kid in a Honda and there's no punishment at all?


Not to Skinnypants.
 
2013-10-12 03:42:44 PM
Immunity from prosecution =/= immunity from a civil suit.

Also, never trust a man with two first names, especially one of 'em is a girl's.

/also, he has three first names
 
2013-10-12 03:43:32 PM
Here we go again...
 
2013-10-12 03:43:47 PM

loonatic112358: maybe we need to rethink these stand your ground laws, when you commit manslaughter and automatically are immune to prosecution

especially if the person who was killed was a bystander


Well more so I think we need to stop letting people invoke the law where it clearly doesn't apply.
 
2013-10-12 03:43:59 PM
Hahahaha, welcome to Hell, asshole!

/The shooter, not the kid.
 
2013-10-12 03:44:03 PM
What happens if a car back fires?  Can a black person shoot him as a threat to their life?
 
2013-10-12 03:44:34 PM

ongbok: SkinnyHead: change1211: SkinnyHead: That's the way self defense laws usually work.  If you're lawfully exercising your right to self defense and an innocent bystander gets shot by accident, it's an accident, not murder.

Doesn't that seem just a little messed up? He shot at a car full of teenage girls, killed a random kid in a Honda and there's no punishment at all?

It's 2:30 AM and a car driving by is shooting at the man's house.  The man returns fire in self defense and a bystander is killed.  Since the man was lawfully exercising his right to self defense, he is not to blame for the accidental killing.  The teenagers who fired at his house are responsible for the death of the bystander.

The guy didn't return fire at a person he claimed fired at him first. He claims somebody fired at his house, so he went outside and shot at the first person he saw. That at the very least is reckless endangerment.


This.  According to this decision, if I hear gunfire, fear that it may be directed at me, and just shoot the first person I see, I'm apparently immune from prosecution for that.
 
2013-10-12 03:44:35 PM
Judge should be disbarred for this one.
 
2013-10-12 03:44:45 PM

thamike: TuteTibiImperes: Are you saying that he didn't go all gun crazy and shoot an innocent kid from his front porch when he could have just stayed inside safe with his daughter?

I'm saying that the article is assuredly framing the issue, despite admitting a lack of knowledge of many important details.  And you are reacting accordingly.


So basically, TP has reported the facts truthfully, and you're objecting because they didn't frame it like you wanted?
 
2013-10-12 03:45:27 PM

SuperNinjaToad: When I think of male Hispanic names, Shannon Anthony Scott  would rank up there.


True, but in other articles with Mr. Scott's photo, he "looks Hispanic".
 
2013-10-12 03:45:54 PM
How many "good guy with a gun" t shirts does he own?
 
2013-10-12 03:46:31 PM
So the Zimmerman acquittal is looking less and less egregious isn't it?
 
2013-10-12 03:46:51 PM

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Carrying a firearm is prematurely escalating any situation.

The second amendment ensures every American's right to be a giant pussy, because it's hard to be brave when scary brown people will out number you in three decades.


Have you any rational commentary to offer,or are you relying upon the "poisoning thr well" fallacy due to an awareness of advocating a position lacking any intellectual merit?
 
2013-10-12 03:47:08 PM

Kit Fister: Well more so I think we need to stop letting people invoke the law where it clearly doesn't apply.


yea, that too

it just boggles my mind that this was OK at all
 
2013-10-12 03:47:39 PM

Kit Fister: Schroedinger's Glory Hole: Carrying a firearm is prematurely escalating any situation.

The second amendment ensures every American's right to be a giant pussy, because it's hard to be brave when scary brown people will out number you in three decades.

Nope. Plonk.


I've never understood this whole "plonk" thing. It really screams of "I wanna get in the last word!" If you don't like someone, just put them on ignore; why advertise it? Seems attention-whorish.

Also kinda curious why this one needed to be put on "ignore". I don't recognize the name; is he known for random anti-gun comments?

loonatic112358: maybe we need to rethink these stand your ground laws, when you commit manslaughter and automatically are immune to prosecution

especially if the person who was killed was a bystander


This. Seems "stand your ground" should be a valid defense for killing someone you found threatening; it should not be a valid defense for endangering the lives of others or other such reckless behavior.

Really does seem to be a pretty screwed up interpretation of the law.
 
2013-10-12 03:47:49 PM
From an article linked to FTFA

"Scott has admitted firing the shot that killed Niles, but argues he should not be prosecuted since he believed himself in danger from other people at the time he killed Niles by mistake."

See, that's completely dumb. And you should be prosecuted for that. If the teen who was killed was actually assaulting the man or his daughter, then it would be another story.

Nice try invoking Zimmerman into this... way different ball game. Different sport.
 
2013-10-12 03:48:05 PM

FC Exile: So the Zimmerman acquittal is looking less and less egregious isn't it?


Hell, at least Zimmerman waited to get beat up before he shot.  I still think Zimmerman was in the wrong and could have gotten out of the situation without escalating it to the point he did, but this guy just straight up shot some kid because some teenage girls scared his daughter.
 
2013-10-12 03:48:13 PM
Where's the picture of the 10 year old victim?
 
2013-10-12 03:49:04 PM

drjekel_mrhyde: What happens if a car back fires?  Can any person shoot him as a threat to their life?

FTFM
 
2013-10-12 03:49:12 PM

EkimProx: From an article linked to FTFA

"Scott has admitted firing the shot that killed Niles, but argues he should not be prosecuted since he believed himself in danger from other people at the time he killed Niles by mistake."

See, that's completely dumb. And you should be prosecuted for that. If the teen who was killed was actually assaulting the man or his daughter, then it would be another story.

Nice try invoking Zimmerman into this... way different ball game. Different sport.


Plus, if he believed this was legitimate stand-your-ground, why did he wait four days before telling the police he shot the kid?
 
Displayed 50 of 208 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report