In a recent news story from here in Florida, we have yet another senseless shooting. This one was the result of an argument over someone parking illegally in a handicap spot at a convenience store.
On July 19th of this year, security camera footage captured a car pulling up into a parking spot on the side of a convenience store in the city of Clearwater. We learn that this is clearly-marked as a handicap spot. A man (Man #1) exits the car from the passenger side. A small child also gets out. Man #1 and the child go inside the store. The driver remains in the car.
Shortly thereafter, an SUV pulls in and parks near the car in the handicap spot. The driver of the SUV (Man #2) gets out. He walks to the rear of the car and looks at something. Then he walks to the front and looks. We can deduce that he is checking to see if it had some sort of "handicapped" signage. He then initiates an animated, extended discussion with the driver of the car. The police report said it was a "pretty significant yelling match." It lasted for over a minute.
Eventually, Man #1 comes out of the convenience store, without his child. (Perhaps he'd been notified of the altercation happening outside.) He walks briskly toward the car, apparently unnoticed by Man #2. Suddenly, Man #1 body-slams Man #2 violently enough to send him straight to the ground, hard. Man #2 then pulls out a pistol and shoots Man #1, who turns and stumbles back inside the convenience store. Where he dies.
Is this a "too many damn guns in this country" issue? I don't believe so. Let us acknowledge here that Man #2 was carrying his pistol legally. Everyone should know by now - especially those who live here! - that Florida has rather generous rules on granting "concealed carry" gun permits. And even if you "know" this little fact it's something of which people must be more cognizant. You never really know who's carrying. If you get into a fight with someone and they become fearful for their life, they just might pull out their gun and shoot you! So maybe you should think twice before body-slamming someone to the ground, for whatever reason.
In any event, the police have refused to charge Man #2 under Florida's famous and controversial, “Stand Your Ground” law. Rest assured, this is not the end of this little story. Even if there are no criminal charges pressed against Man #2, there will certainly be a civil wrongful-death suit brought by the family of Man #1.
On July 19th of this year, security camera footage captured a car pulling up into a parking spot on the side of a convenience store in the city of Clearwater. We learn that this is clearly-marked as a handicap spot. A man (Man #1) exits the car from the passenger side. A small child also gets out. Man #1 and the child go inside the store. The driver remains in the car.
Street view of handicap spot on side of convenience store
Shortly thereafter, an SUV pulls in and parks near the car in the handicap spot. The driver of the SUV (Man #2) gets out. He walks to the rear of the car and looks at something. Then he walks to the front and looks. We can deduce that he is checking to see if it had some sort of "handicapped" signage. He then initiates an animated, extended discussion with the driver of the car. The police report said it was a "pretty significant yelling match." It lasted for over a minute.
Eventually, Man #1 comes out of the convenience store, without his child. (Perhaps he'd been notified of the altercation happening outside.) He walks briskly toward the car, apparently unnoticed by Man #2. Suddenly, Man #1 body-slams Man #2 violently enough to send him straight to the ground, hard. Man #2 then pulls out a pistol and shoots Man #1, who turns and stumbles back inside the convenience store. Where he dies.
Is this a "too many damn guns in this country" issue? I don't believe so. Let us acknowledge here that Man #2 was carrying his pistol legally. Everyone should know by now - especially those who live here! - that Florida has rather generous rules on granting "concealed carry" gun permits. And even if you "know" this little fact it's something of which people must be more cognizant. You never really know who's carrying. If you get into a fight with someone and they become fearful for their life, they just might pull out their gun and shoot you! So maybe you should think twice before body-slamming someone to the ground, for whatever reason.
In any event, the police have refused to charge Man #2 under Florida's famous and controversial, “Stand Your Ground” law. Rest assured, this is not the end of this little story. Even if there are no criminal charges pressed against Man #2, there will certainly be a civil wrongful-death suit brought by the family of Man #1.
Moving on... Is there a racial
component to this story? Oh, but of course! Isn't there always? The woman in the car is
black. Man #1 is black. Man #2 is white. The media has already latched onto this. Was Man #2's initial confrontation racially motivated?
In fact, we may never know the specific motivations of any of the players for their actions in this horrible event. But to a large degree, I think the racial element
is irrelevant. What matters is this: A man confronted a woman over parking in a handicap spot. He got his ass kicked, and now another man is dead.
Aside from the tragedy of Man #1's death, Man #2 will now have to
live forever with the fact that he shot and killed someone for no good reason.
Wait...what? For no
reason? Yep!
In telling me about this
event (of which I was only vaguely aware), my friend Terry
vociferously defended Man #2. "All he was doing was
telling the woman not to park there!” Terry said, as if
Man #2 was totally innocent and justified in his action. (And perhaps Terry was implying that he might have done the same thing.)
I had a few questions. To wit: Why was it important to Man #2 that
the woman parked in that spot? What was his gripe? Was he a cop? No. Was he
handicapped and in need of parking there? Apparently not. Was he the
neighborhood handicapped parking spot enforcer? No.
So I disagree with my friend, Terry. My view is that Man #2 should've just stayed the hell out of it. By injecting into himself
into a situation that was absolutely none of his concern, he
initiated and provoked a confrontation that resulted in another man's
death. Man #2 precipitated the whole thing, and now he'll probably "get away with murder," so to speak.
In the grand scheme of things, parking illegally in a handicap spot is not a heinous crime worth dying over. There was no need for Man #2 to intervene. Had he
simply not done anything...had he looked and walked the other way, the altercation between he and Man #1 would not
have happened. Man #1 would still be alive. Everyone would have gotten into their cars, driven off, and lived happily ever after (we hope).
We all need to learn to
MIND OUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS.
You can read the story and watch the video of the event HERE.
You can read the story and watch the video of the event HERE.
14 comments:
I've been conflicted about this story ever since it aired on my television. On one hand, I agree that following the law, Man #2 was rightfully exonerated. However, sitting in my chair, I would like to think that had he just pulled his gun and made it known that he wasn't going to be beat up anymore by Man #1, nobody would have had to die. Man #2 didn't have to argue his feelings so vehemently to the occupants of the illegally parked car and Man #1 didn't have to aggressively body slam him down. I would hope that had Man #1 just got up in Man #2's face and said his peace, he might still be alive.
I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment that Man #1 should have minded his own business. People need to know when they are acting like assholes. Yes in this case acting like an asshole and parking illegally didn't hurt anyone but what if it had been something that endangered the lives of other unnecessarily? People need to know that their actions can affect others. To me, the proper thing would have been to point out that the car was parked illegally and walk away.
Like you said, in this day and age with legally carrying citizens, any confrontation is inviting dangerous situations like this to play out.
Ed... Interesting questions! When do we interfere? When do we confront others about their behavior? It's complicated. Certainly, if you see something that endangers the safety or lives of others then yeah, we sort of have a moral obligation to speak up. But most of the time that's not the case. We've become a snippy, insensitive, critical and rude culture; we're often too eager to chime in and share our opinion, as if it means something. And I think that in general we ought to just mind our own business and go on with our lives.
In the case described above, the driver did not "park" in a handicap spot. In other words, she didn't shut her car off and leave it unattended. She stayed in the car. I think we can safely assume that the man and boy were only going to be in the convenience store for a short time (perhaps just to buy some crack), so she stayed in the car. Being Florida, and being summer, I'd bet real money that the car was running with the a/c on. So I doubt that she was going to be there all that long. So what was the big deal?
Final note about the guy with the gun. When you take the required training course prior to obtaining your concealed-carry license (as I have), the instructors harp on *never* pulling your gun unless you absolutely believe your or someone else's life is in imminent danger. And if that is the case, shoot! And shoot to permanently stop the threat (i.e. "shoot to kill"). In other words, don't try for a "leg-shot" or to hit some other part of the body that will allow the attacker to continue attacking...or, eventually testify in court that he really wasn't trying to kill you.
They caution against pulling the weapon out "for show." That'll get you arrested really quick here in Florida. Instructors caution against firing a warning-shot, too. If you really fear for your life, you have no choice but to defend it; that's why you have a weapon. Shoot!
So I don't agree that Man #2 should have just brandished his weapon in hopes of defusing the situation. With any hesitation, Man #1 (or someone else) might possibly have taken the weapon and turned it on Man #2. That is a chance I would never take. Not to sound too cowboy-ish, but if I ever had to pull my gun, somebody is going to die - and it isn't going to be me. This is the very hard reality that one must come to terms with before deciding to carry a concealed weapon. (Which I do not anymore, by the way.)
I've known people who "carried-concealed." In one case it was a close friend who could be kind of an asshole at times. When he started carrying his pistol it made him ever more arrogant. Although he never did get into any confrontations that justified pulling his gun out, he came awfully close. In a bar one night, he mouthed-off to the wrong guy who sucker-punched him so hard that by the time he woke up on the floor staring at the ceiling, the guy was long gone.
Being extra arrogant simply because you carry a gun is not "supposed" to happen, but I can see how it does. And maybe it might make you arrogant enough to confront a woman who parked illegally in a handicap spot. I don't know.
All I do know is that as I go through my day, I sometimes see things that are either an affront to my sensibilities or that are just downright offensive. And although I might be sorely tempted to say something, I just shake my head and go, "What do I care...I mean, really?" And then I walk away.
And I think more people ought to do just that.
You raise some excellent points as well which just reinforces my conflicted thoughts on this situation.
I guess if nothing else, it is a warning to both sides, those that can't leave things alone and those who act aggressively first. Basically another reminder to think about the consequences before doing something.
Rather than mind my own business, I decided to butt in and leave a comment when I saw your post in Ed's sidebar.
Interesting observations all around (from you and Ed), but I'll throw in one more thing. Although this car showed no handicapped signage allowing it access to the spot, I couldn't help but think of two friends I have, both of whom have handicapped permits. Each has been challenged by people telling them they didn't "look" handicapped and both are quick to give the challenger a piece of their mind. (their handicaps aren't always visible, but do exist and qualify them for the permits)
As you say... we should just mind our own business when it really doesn't make that big of a difference.
Exactly, Kelly! And thank you for commenting.
We live in a gray world - hardly black-and-white.
One can imagine Pam Biondi, the Florida Attorney General, sitting at her desk, head down, rubbing her temples, agonizing over whether to press charges against Michael Drejka (Man #2) and what a shitstorm she'll stir up whether she does or does not. Biondi knows that either way, she's screwed. "Oh, brother," she groans as she pops four Extra-Strength Excedrin into her mouth, washed down with a glass of fine, aged scotch whiskey from the bottle Charlie Crist gave her last Christmas. "This is gonna be another goddamn Trayvon Martin case. Why the hell didn't I listen to my dad when he said, 'Pamela Jo, you sure don't want a career in law, Sugar. It ain't gonna bring you nuthin' but trouble!' Yep, thanks dad, I shoulda listened..."
After the fact, the father of Markeis McGlockton (Man #1) has come out defending his angelic son and at the same time attacking Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law. He said - and I am not making this up - that this law does not favor blacks.
Umm, as if it should?
I mean, aren't laws supposed to be impartial? Isn't justice supposed to be blind?
'Scuse me, Mr. McGlockton Sr., but your big, hulking son violently body-slams a smaller man to the ground and then gets his ass shot in the process, and you think this is some sort of miscarriage of justice against blacks??
The senior McGlockton says that his son was only defending his girlfriend and kids from...well...the "threat" imposed by Mr. Drejka. But Drejka was only standing outside the car. He hadn't (yet) pulled his gun. Ms. Jacobs could have easily just driven away. She was IN A RUNNING CAR, fer cryin' out loud. But she knew that her big, football-linebacker of a boyfriend was inside the store and would soon come out and make mincemeat of this old, wrinkly, racist, cracker pipsqueak yelling at her for parking where she shouldn't have, as if it was any of his goddamn business. "I'm not parked here, you idiot! I'm just waiting for my boyfriend to come out of the store!" And then it was McGlockton Junior who did come out and initiate the violence. And he paid with his life.
Having said that, let's also acknowledge that Mr. Drejka has been in trouble with the law as well. He's got a "history."
So none of the players in this tragedy are exactly babes-in-the-woods innocent when it comes to being good citizens.
And now all the politicians who are running for Governor of the Great State of Florida are falling all over themselves to weigh-in on this case and the "Stand Your Ground" law. Some have said that repealing it will be a day-one priority. (Heh, fat chance. If they continue with that promise they'll never get elected. This is FLORIDA, after all.)
Me, I'm comfortable with the law the way it currently...well...stands (sorry). However! That videotape recording of the incident could prove troublesome for Mr. Drejka. Watching it, a "reasonable man" might conclude that Mr. McGlockton had ceased his "attack" and had actually backed off a bit. Maybe he was done? Maybe all he wanted was to get Drejka away from his girlfriend? Maybe things would have only escalated further if Drejka got back up?
I don't know.
But damn, I'm so glad I'm not Pam Biondi right now.
I've learned so much more about this case just from reading the comments here! The mainstream media is only going to tell us what it wants us to know. (um....do I sound paranoid?)
I always try to be open-minded and will admit I can see fault on both sides in this incident. I'll also mention that here in Arkansas, we're taught (as you said) in the CHCL classes that a weapon should only be drawn when you feel your life is in imminent danger.
Lots of stupidity and over-reaction. And while I'm sensitive to and respectful of race issues when they apply (race not always being just black and white!), I get tired of the "card being played" at the drop of a hat. So often it's truly not relevant.
Wow what a discussion! Think I’m gonna stay out of this one and just learn from my friends!
Bob, why stay out of it? You know that your input here is always welcome. And in fact, I'd like to hear your opinion on it. So far, I've tried to keep my own opinions from coloring the event, and I've tried to stick to the facts - at least as we know them from the video surveillance cam footage and the police report. That said, I do have some opinions on how it went down...and why. Sooooo...you show me yours and I'll show you mine ;)
UPDATE:
Well it turns out that the Florida State Attorney for the Pasco/Pinellas County area has decided to charge Man #2, who's name is Michael Drejka with manslaughter in the death of Man #1, Jameis McGlockton. McGlockton's family is, understandably ecstatic (or as ecstatic as can be under the circumstances).
Now, before anyone jumps to conclusions about the outcome, we must remember that ol' George Zimmerman was charged but later acquitted in the killing of the infamous (and erstwhile son of Barack Obama), Trayvon Martin. This is Florida, after all. And so we'll see how this one plays out.
Personally, I think the State Attorney's office was in one of those damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't binds. So they came up with charge of manslaughter, the most serious crime they think they can prove. They even said as much (about that last part, anyway).
So a lot will depend on the makeup of the jury. If it skews black, then Drejka will do time. If it skews white, he's a free man.
As I said, this is Florida.
Here's the story from the Tampa Bay Times newspaper:
https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/Shooter-charged-with-manslaughter-in-Clearwater-stand-your-ground-case_170853729
Ok Bob, for what it’s worth, I tend to think Man#2, if he felt he needed to, should have quietly and peacefully pointed out to the driver she was parked in a handicapped spot. If she didn’t want to move, he could have contacted law enforcement. But you’re right, his overreaction resulted in someone’s death.
I have no problem with “stand your ground” and you can be assured that’s the defense Man #2’s lawyers will make. His life was in danger (he was body slammed!) and he defended himself, the lawyer will say. You might not like the law, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, but you don’t have the authority to change it.
And I agree - not a racial issue.
Pam Biondi is corrupt and she could probably could give a shit less about this.
Bob says: "And I agree - not a racial issue."
Not really. Except that...!
I mean, I agree with you. The individuals in this little drama could have been of any color or ethnic background. But I do believe that there was a racial component at play here.
I see it as: Racist white guy sees a black woman parked in a handicap spot and decides to give her a piece of his mind. I'll make a leap and assume that he might not have been so quick to do so if she was a white woman. Black woman in the car, not wanting to take no shit from a white guy, mouths off right back. Black boyfriend sees white guy yelling at his girlfriend and reacts violently, maybe more violently than he would have if the guy doing the yelling was black. (The police report that the discussion was heated - I'm inferring that it was heated in both directions.)
It's a touchy subject, but down here in this part of the south, racial tensions are high. "Racism" (as we define it being perpetrated solely by whites against blacks) still exists and is widespread. But on the other hand, blacks absolutely do not like whites! I see evidence of this all the time. Reverse-racism is a thing...a thing that people don't like to acknowledge or talk about.
So, yeah. At the core of this thing it's one little man who got violently body-slammed by a big guy and says he was in fear for his life and so he shot him. End of story? Welllll...not quite. It's always more complicated than that. I think racism played a part in this. Maybe not provable by a jury, but it's there.
Point well taken.
After reading a letter to the editor in my small town paper today, in which a black man ranted about Trump, Obama, Putin, and Republicans, ending with a statement about "racism in the highest form".... I got to thinking about that word. How often do we misuse it (I'm guilty!!), not truly understanding the differences between racism, bigotry, and prejudice? I guess in reality I don't consider myself racist, but I'm prejudiced more often than I'm comfortable admitting. Our prejudices (and we ALL have them) cover a wide range of characteristics.
I could say soooo much more, but it stresses me out too much so I'll just close with a funny story of conceived racism/prejudice. One of our many dogs is named Sam and over time I've taken to calling him Sambo. I was jokingly accused recently of calling him that because of his black color, as in Little Black Sambo. No amount of denial on my part convinced the accuser, despite my pointing out Little Black Sambo wasn't even black, as in someone from Africa. The story takes place in India. Sheesh!
Post a Comment