Miami man kills AK-47 wielding robber.

[Edwardteach72]

A 60-Year-old Miami man said he was forced to shoot and kill a gunman who had broken in to his van early Monday morning in an attempt to rob him of his jewelry.

“The guy I killed last night, he put an AK-47 to my damn face,” said Donovan Stewart.


“I am from Kingstontown in Jamaica,” he said, “and I am not going to go out like a punk. So I emptied my Glock in his chest. This man tried to get in my van while I was sleeping and he was surprised to see what I did.”

Miami Man In Van Guns Down AK-47 Wielding Robber Because He Didn't Want 'To Go Out Like A Punk'

A 60-Year-old Miami man said he was forced to shoot and kill a gunman who had broken in to his van early Monday morning in an attempt to rob him of his jewelry.

miami.cbslocal.com

 

[repete]

Fl. he'll will be ok, NY he'd most likely be in jail!

 

[Edwardteach72]

Fl. he'll will be ok, NY he'd most likely be in jail!

Why?

 

[Blimey]

"I'm not going to go out like a punk"

This guy is quite the character.

 

[beebee]

[/QUOTE]

Fl. he'll will be ok, NY he'd most likely be in jail!

Why?

NY has no Stand Your Ground law..
NY is Duty to Retreat.. You are expected to leave the perp to do his will, and then report it to the police.
If you shoot someone in self defense in NY, even if justified, you are in for the hassle of your life, might even go to jail.. Best case scenario?
A civil lawsuit that the perps family WILL win, destroying your life as well as that of your family..
A few years ago, in Cortland not far from here, a guy caught a thief in his apartment , grabbed him and pounded him to a pulp, sent him to the hospital.. He was arrested for assault and battery.. This IS NY and its been this way a long time.. I carry here, but pray to Almighty God I NEVER have to defend myself with a weapon, because it typically turns out badly for the person that was forced to defend himself... bob

 

[Edwardteach72]

Why?
[/QUOTE]
NY has no Stand Your Ground law..
NY is Duty to Retreat.. You are expected to leave the perp to do his will, and then report it to the police.
If you shoot someone in self defense in NY, even if justified, you are in for the hassle of your life, might even go to jail.. Best case scenario?
A civil lawsuit that the perps family WILL win, destroying your life as well as that of your family..
A few years ago, in Cortland not far from here, a guy caught a thief in his apartment , grabbed him and pounded him to a pulp, sent him to the hospital.. He was arrested for assault and battery.. This IS NY and its been this way a long time.. I carry here, but pray to Almighty God I NEVER have to defend myself with a weapon, because it typically turns out badly for the person that was forced to defend himself... bob
[/QUOTE]

You may want to crack open the penal code and actuall learn the law

 

[Edwardteach72]

Oh and little lesson, he'd be just as liable for a civil case in FL. But hey keep pushing some BS fudd gossip

 

[Bananabandit]

I only have 1 question...was the AK held sideways?

 

[beebee]

Why?

NY has no Stand Your Ground law..
NY is Duty to Retreat.. You are expected to leave the perp to do his will, and then report it to the police.
If you shoot someone in self defense in NY, even if justified, you are in for the hassle of your life, might even go to jail.. Best case scenario?
A civil lawsuit that the perps family WILL win, destroying your life as well as that of your family..
A few years ago, in Cortland not far from here, a guy caught a thief in his apartment , grabbed him and pounded him to a pulp, sent him to the hospital.. He was arrested for assault and battery.. This IS NY and its been this way a long time.. I carry here, but pray to Almighty God I NEVER have to defend myself with a weapon, because it typically turns out badly for the person that was forced to defend himself... bob

You may want to crack open the penal code and actuall learn the law
[/QUOTE]

I have several times, and I stand by my opinion.. NY IS Duty to Retreat.. If there is a way to avoid confrontation at all you must retreat except in your own home, and even there the law is full of ambiguities that will be exploited.. In other words, as i stated unless the proof is ironclad, you must convince a judge and jury that your life was in imminent danger.. Please are you REALLY defending NY states Castle Doctrine lowas??. they are considered some of the weakest in the nation... I don't care how its written.. Over the years it has been proven weak, and lawsuits against home defenders are common ..bob


ev

Next »

1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:

(a) The latter's conduct was provoked by the actor with intent to cause physical injury to another person;  or

(b) The actor was the initial aggressor;  except that in such case the use of physical force is nevertheless justifiable if the actor has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical force;  or

(c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:

(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force.  Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;  except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is:

(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;  or

(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police officer or a peace officer at the latter's direction, acting pursuant to section 35.30 ;  or

(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal sexual act or robbery;  or

(c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of section 35.20 .

 

[beebee]

Here's a good article on the subject..

New York Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Facts and Myths

Since the recent tragedy of Trayvon Martin, and George Zimmerman's trial, in Florida, there has been a significant reaction to not only the highly

www.usacarry.com

 

[Edwardteach72]

You may want to crack open the penal code and actuall learn the law

[/QUOTE]
I have several times, and I stand by my opinion.. NY IS Duty to Retreat.. If there is a way to avoid confrontation at all you must retreat except in your own home, and even there the law is full of ambiguities that will be exploited.. In other words, as i stated unless the proof is ironclad, you must convince a judge and jury that your life was in imminent danger.. Please are you REALLY defending NY states Castle Doctrine lowas??. they are considered some of the weakest in the nation... I don't care how its written.. Over the years it has been proven weak, and lawsuits against home defenders are common ..bob


ev

Next »

1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:

(a) The latter's conduct was provoked by the actor with intent to cause physical injury to another person;  or

(b) The actor was the initial aggressor;  except that in such case the use of physical force is nevertheless justifiable if the actor has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical force;  or

(c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:

(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force.  Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;  except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is:

(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;  or

(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police officer or a peace officer at the latter's direction, acting pursuant to section 35.30 ;  or

(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal sexual act or robbery;  or

(c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of section 35.20 .
[/QUOTE]


Your opinion doesnt mean shit. Especially when you literally post the law explaining when the use or force is able to be used... sorry you dont have reading comprehension?

 

[Edwardteach72]

@beebee I take it you are not a lawyer, and if you were hopefully no one ever comes to you for legal advice,

 

[BDinPutnam]

Can we please get a sticky entitled "how to use the quote function"?

 

[Edwardteach72]

Can we please get a sticky entitled "how to use the quote function"?

I dont know what happened to it but I kept trying to fix it but gave up

 

[meketrefe]

Yes you have the duty to retreat until you are innyour home with a gun in your face or would you like to wait until it goes bang?
You might not shoot someone running away with your stereo or your wallet. Regardless of legality that is morally and humanly wrong but if you are inside your house with no option to move and a gun in your face then that is a complete different story. At this point you are in mortal danger.
I mean, one might get lucky and see a toy gun with a mental person behind but what are the chances?
Being inocent and dead is not going to help anyone.

 

[Pedro]

Can we please get a sticky entitled "how to use the quote function"?

BD, all I did was click the Quote button in your post, then clicked the insert Quote button in the reply box.
Pedro.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Yes you have the duty to retreat until you are innyour home with a gun in your face or would you like to wait until it goes bang?
You might not shoot someone running away with your stereo or your wallet. Regardless of legality that is morally and humanly wrong but if you are inside your house with no option to move and a gun in your face then that is a complete different story. At this point you are in mortal danger.
I mean, one might get lucky and see a toy gun with a mental person behind but what are the chances?
Being inocent and dead is not going to help anyone.

Read 2.b
It doesnt say anything about in your home

 

[Edwardteach72]

BD, all I did was click the Quote button in your post, then clicked the insert Quote button in the reply box.
Pedro.

You dont even have to do that much.. just click quote then reply

 

[meketrefe]

Read 2.b
It doesnt say anything about in your home

Whatever, it can be in an alley. The smartest move is always to run away from danger given all your loved ones are safe. If not possible and put in mortal danger then one is going to use everything one has to survive. That is natural law right there before any lawyers opinion on who should die or survive.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Whatever, it can be in an alley. The smartest move is always to run away from danger given all your loved ones are safe. If not possible and put in mortal danger then one is going to use everything one has to survive. That is natural law right there before any lawyers opinion on who should die or survive.

Stop saying "the smart thing" we wre talking about what the law says so fudds and boomers will stop spreading misinformation about what is and is not legal

 

[meketrefe]

I am not talking about any written laws. I am not trying to convince anyone or spreading anything. I am just giving my opinion.
It is good to know what the laws are, like any other type of knowledge, but if the time comes and I am put in that position I will always pivot towards tactics and natural instincts. The first law of safety is, if there is trouble, DO NOT BE THERE. This is part of the doctrine of many warriors. Sometimes it is harder to pull away from danger than to get into danger. Man made Laws do not overwrite natural laws and ancient conventional wisdom.

 

[beebee]

I am not one to argue, but as stated, NY Castle Doctrine is a joke and many of us know it

New York law is an open invitation to home invaders

There is a reason homeowners can rarely afford to dispense mercy on an overnight invader: Criminal intruders tend to be the dangerous type. What homeowners don’t expect are law enforcers and prosec…

nypost.com

 

[Edwardteach72]

I am not one to argue, but as stated, NY Castle Doctrine is a joke and many of us know it

New York law is an open invitation to home invaders

There is a reason homeowners can rarely afford to dispense mercy on an overnight invader: Criminal intruders tend to be the dangerous type. What homeowners don’t expect are law enforcers and prosec…

nypost.com

1 this isnt a "castle doctrine" situation. Two there is nothing to argue, you just either cant read, never actually read the law, or cant comprehend what it says.

 

[Edwardteach72]

LMFAO you are now using a NY Post as your source for your argument... gtfo.

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal sexual act or robbery;


buT Hey you keep bringing up castle doctrine for no reason....... let's continue.....

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:

(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force.  Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;  except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is:

(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;  


Now I put this stuff a little closer together and cut out the other things to maybe make reading a little easier to comprehend because it's clearly not a strong suit

 

[GOPerfect]

Fl. he'll will be ok, NY he'd most likely be in jail!

More fake news. He would absolutely not be in jail in NY State.

This is false info and talking points only.

Show me a case similar to this where the victim (shooter) is in jail.

 

[Edwardteach72]

More fake news. He would absolutely not be in jail in NY State.

This is false info and talking points only.

Show me a case similar to this where the victim (shooter) is in jail.

What you didnt want to read his NY Post story??

Remember if you see his other statements he has on multiple occasions read the penal law and still believes if this happened in New York (recap, guy puts rifle into another mans face (deadly force) and demands his jewelry (robbery) and victim shoots the initial aggressor (robber with rifle) that the victim will end up in jail because he hears someone say the words "duty to retreat" at some point in his life

 

[Acer-m14]

If there is a way to avoid confrontation at all you must retreat except in your own home,

his van was his home .. just like lots of retired people in there Rv's traveling .. its there home ..

no duty to run and hide .. ..

case closed ..

 

[GOPerfect]

Here's a good article on the subject..

New York Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Facts and Myths

Since the recent tragedy of Trayvon Martin, and George Zimmerman's trial, in Florida, there has been a significant reaction to not only the highly

www.usacarry.com

Did you even fucking read what you posted???

Here is a small point in the crap that you posted:

So while there is a “no duty to retreat when in your home” and the legal protection afforded against “burglary” it is not the same as actual Castle Doctrine and the incorrect interpretation of them has contributed to the myth that New York is a Castle Doctrine state.

The term home does not just mean ones house.

Please, in all seriousness, stop posting ignorant statements.

Please, dig deep, do a bit of research and learn something.

 

[Edwardteach72]

his van was his home .. just like lots of retired people in there Rv's traveling .. its there home ..

no duty to run and hide .. ..

case closed ..

But that still has nothing to do with it, he could have just been sitting on a corner or bench or walking down the street and still would have been covered under NYS law

 

[beebee]

I know you think all newspapers lie, but here's another example there are lots.. Yeah NY is a GREAT place to own a gun for protection..

Cohoes man charged in fatal shooting of home intruder

He's charged with endangering the welfare of a child.

spectrumlocalnews.com