…Every Time Two Fools Collide?

Florida has another “stand your ground” case. Or does it? And does “another” even make sense in this context?

I am tired of typing “stand your ground,” so from now on, it’s “SYG.”

Florida’s first controversial SYG case was that of George Zimmerman, who shot a violent criminal in self-defense and was then railroaded by prosecutors who went so far as to perjure themselves to get him indicted. Problem: SYG was not involved. The SYG doctrine says you are allowed to use deadly force against an assailant, without trying to flee. Trayvon Martin, the deceased, sat on his victim and beat his head on a concrete sidewalk. Zimmerman was not able to flee, so SYG was not triggered. If you can’t flee, you don’t need SYG to save you. You’re stuck, so you do what you have to.

Zimmerman appears to have lost his mind after his acquittal, and it’s easy to understand why. Franz Kafka could have written his story. The government, which is the entity one ordinarily goes to for justice, tried to nail him to a political cross. Liberals drove his parents out of their home. A second man tried to murder him and went to prison. Now he’s probably as crazy as liberals tried to make him seem during the trial.

The Zimmerman case did not involve SYG, but people who are dishonest or ignorant keep saying it did. Human nature is really something.

The new case involves a man who was attacked at a convenience store. Michael Drejka, a white Florida man with some sort of handicap, saw a black woman parked in a handicapped space. Mr. Drejka has a history of yelling at people who steal these spaces. While he was peacefully arguing his case with the lady, her boyfriend, Markeis (you see where we’re headed) McGlockton, came out of the store and attacked Drejka physically. He shoved him to the asphalt and stood over him.

From his position on the ground, Drejka pulled a pistol and shot McGlockton, who then died. Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri (who supposedly has a law degree) declined to press charges, citing the SYG doctrine. He mealy-mouthed in his announcement, suggesting he didn’t agree with the law.

I will now point out the two issues with this case.

1. Mr. Drejka could not flee. He was on the ground in a heap, with a powerful man standing over him a few feet away. When you can’t escape, SYG is not a factor. This is not an SYG case.

2. When Mr. McGlockton saw Drejka’s gun, he backed up and appeared to be intimidated. It was pretty cowardly. He was brave as he could be when he ran out and attacked a handicapped man for no reason, but when he saw that he himself might take some punishment, he danced a different dance. Coward though he was, it appears that his shooting was not justified. Once an assailant gives up, you’re not allowed to shoot. It kills the right to self-defense.

It may be that Drejka was right to shoot. For all we know, McGlockton said something like, “Put that gun away, or I’ll take out my piece and blow your brains out.” Maybe he said, “You scared me, but I’m about to give you a beating anyway.” We don’t know everything that happened. The most likely explanation is that Drejka got mad and shot McGlockton for pushing him. That would be second-degree murder.

The decision not to prosecute is mystifying. The sheriff didn’t cite any facts explaining why it was okay for Drejka to shoot a man who was backing off.

Journalists hate the right to self-defense, and they really hate SYG, so they are playing up Gualtieri’s law degree. Their unspoken thesis is that a lawyer said it’s an SYG case, so that’s what it is, and now a man is dead because SYG legalizes murder. Journalists are fairly stupid, as we all know.

Here’s the problem with relying on Gualtieri’s law degree: he may be a bad lawyer. When a thousand people graduate from law school, the one with the worst grades is allowed to take the bar exam. When a thousand people take a bar exam, the person with the lowest passing grade is given a law license. Mr. Gualtieri is a bar member, so he must have passed the exam, but that’s not a powerful endorsement.

People with good prospects for jobs as attorneys generally do not become cops. It has probably happened, but it’s not normal. Police work–forgive me, police–is not intellectually demanding. Departments reject applicants for scoring too high on intelligence tests because they know smart people will get bored after a year of rousting bums and arresting the same wife-beaters over and over. I don’t know Mr. Gualtieri, but if he were a good lawyer, he probably would not be a sheriff.

In any case, he appears to be wrong about the McGlockton case, and it’s strange that prosecutors haven’t stepped in to change things.

If he’s restraining himself because he hates cowardly, violent people like McGlockton, I certainly understand. McGlockton deserved prison time and maybe a beating which Drejka could not supply. But the law is the law. You can’t kill an assailant who chickens out.

I don’t feel sorry for McGlockton. He got what was coming to him, whether the law says so or not. I don’t like violent criminals. If you’re going to go around attacking smaller people, don’t cry injustice when you get shot. He didn’t feel bad about the injustice he himself perpetrated.

I don’t feel sorry for Drejka, either. He could have waited for brave McGlockton to run away, and then he could have called the cops. It’s not that hard to refrain from shooting a person.

It’s unfortunate to see nearly everyone involved in this case get it wrong, but it’s something anyone who has been on earth for more than 15 years should expect. People are not that smart, and they are very biased. It’s a wonder we get so many things right.

On the Internet, I have seen some people defend McGlockton’s actions. “Get in my woman’s face, and I will put you down,” and so on. There are some cultures in which any verbal friction or refusal to submit is considered to be an excuse for a beating or killing. I have seen this attitude a lot among black people. For example, some believe you have to beat any non-back who says “nigger” or “nigga.” It’s not exactly uncommon among white southerners, Italians, and Hispanics, either. In come cultures, you’re supposed to use your fists every time someone makes you feel bad.

This is not how life works. It’s not a sustainable lifestyle. It’s how you keep yourself and your family on the bottom, and society is not going to accommodate your misconceptions. It can’t afford to.

Going back to the English common law, it has always been clear that mere words, short of threats of immediate violence, never justify physical attacks. If they did, weak people would essentially be gagged in their daily dealings. Big people would be punching folks in the mouth all the time, without redress. Life does not work that way. It’s intolerable, so we don’t tolerate it.

SYG is an excellent doctrine. The idea that we should have to try to escape from stronger or better-armed people is ridiculous. It compromises our ability to respond. While you’re trying to get away, you’re not going to be able to focus on fighting back, and it may cost you your life. I shouldn’t have to prove I can’t get away from a larger, younger, stronger man, or one who is better-armed, when I didn’t cause the problem. The burden should always be on the criminal. If you don’t want to get shot, obey the law like everyone else.

SYG promotes civility and lawful behavior. If you’re a criminal, and you see a weaker person with a fanny pack or a bulge in his pocket, you know you better obey the law. That’s a positive result. It’s better for criminals to die than it is for innocent people to be injured, raped, or killed. An innocent person shouldn’t have to sustain brain damage or a broken arm just to protect you from yourself. It’s more just for you to be shot, even if you die.

It’s too bad journalists keep trying to change the law. I suspect it’s because they know most violent crime in America is committed by minorities. A lot of minority criminals get hurt by people defending themselves. That’s sad, but who chose that paradigm? Not the innocent. Rewarding criminals and punishing victims will only make crime worse.

My prediction: Drejka will face a jury. Either that, or new facts will come to light. Notice I don’t say he will do time. There are jurors who would refuse to convict him, and he might get lucky so he can go off and shoot more people in parking lots. Prosecutors have to obey the law, so I think an indictment is coming, but jurors can do anything they want. Remember O.J.

It will be a nice experience for prosecutors this time. They won’t have to make anything up.

More

Looks like I’m not alone in my take on this. Here’s a Politico story which says even the NRA’s Marion Hammer disagrees with Gualtieri.

Gualtieri apparently thinks he was legally barred from making an arrest, and Hammer says he is wrong, as long as he had probable cause.

Ben Crump, the scavenger lawyer who helped Trayvon Martin’s family profit from his death, comments in the story: “This was a cold-blooded murder. This is not self defense. And communities of color, the black community, are very emotional about this issue with these stand-your-ground cases.”

What a crock.

Crump may not be smart, or he may be misrepresenting things deliberately because he hopes to cash in (or both), but he got it wrong. “Cold-blooded murder” describes crimes committed by people who are not angry. For example, if you shoot a stranger for money, it’s cold-blooded murder. If you’re mad because a criminal just shoved you onto the hard pavement of a parking lot, you can’t be a cold-blooded killer. Second-degree murder laws were written for the specific purpose of prosecuting people who don’t kill in cold blood.

Why does he say SYG is a special concern for blacks? It applies to everyone. It’s very much like ordinary self-defense: if you’re where you’re supposed to be, and you’re not doing anything wrong, you’re in no danger. If you’re in someone else’s house holding a crowbar, you have a problem. And you should.

As long as minorities commit the majority of violent crimes, they will form the majority of people killed in self-defense. That’s just how it is, and it will still be true even if SYG is done away with. Trayvon Martin would have been killed with or without SYG. His victim had no choice, and Martin made it happen.

This week we saw a remarkable BLM reaction to a completely justified killing. A chronic Minnesota criminal named Thurman Blevins was sitting around with an illegal gun hanging out of his pants. The cops told him to stop and put his hands on top of his head, and they warned that they would shoot. He ran, and while he was running, he pulled the gun on them. Guess what happened.

Still, the BLMsters are up in arms. They seriously believe shooting criminals who pull guns on cops is wrong. We can’t pay any attention to the excuse-makers. They are against ALL minority killings, except in the cases of minority Trump supporters, and they don’t care about the facts or the danger to innocent people.

Thurman Blevins ran from the police after they accosted him with probable cause to believe he was committing a felony. That obligated them to chase him. He pulled a gun on them during the chase and refused to drop it. That justified the shooting. It’s not a puzzle. In half a second, he could have turned and killed one of them. But BLM people are creating self-righteous memes calling for “Justice for Thurman Blevins.” Unbelievable.