frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





I guess criminals run this country. Do you support: StandYourGround laws?

Debate Information

https://www.foxnews.com/us/florida-michael-drejka-second-amendment-guilty-manslaughter-mcglockton
I had a situation in my personal life where I was almost murdered, so I passionately support stand your ground laws. The way the far left coddles criminals and terrorists, is astounding. Let me put it this way: If some tries to injure, torture, rape, or murder me, I have the ABSOLUTE GOD GIVEN moral right to kill my attacker, in order to defend myself, law, or no ****ing law. #MyBodyMyChoice #LiberalsAreHypocrites #RapeCultureIsWhen



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • all4acttall4actt 304 Pts   -  
    This is not a case of self defense.  The man simply pushed him to the ground and was in the process of turning away when he was shot.  The man with the gun did not appear to be in immanent danger therefore he had no right to shoot the man.
  • jesusisGod777jesusisGod777 115 Pts   -  
    Stand your ground laws were inacted to recognize that someone who intends to kill someone can be dealt with.

    God says thou shalt not kill.

    However David killed Goliath and others so the Lord God Almighty Jesus Christ is the ultimate decision maker on what defines such actions.
  • VaulkVaulk 813 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    I watched the video, the perpetrator in the video is also the Man who was shot (McGlockton).  He approached Drejka and violently shoved him hard enough to force his entire body into the ground.  Drejka leaned up after hitting the ground and pulled his gun, McGlockton did back up but not until he realized that Drejka had a gun.  An accurate shot with a handgun from a seated position after being violently flung to the ground without warning or prior preparation (It took him by surprise) and taking into account other innocent people's lives within the immediate vicinity would take anywhere from 3-5 seconds to acquire after drawing the firearm.  Anything quicker than that from someone who doesn't hit the quickdraw range every week and you're running the risk of either missing and hitting someone else, or failing to take into account the potential for over-penetration and hitting someone on the other side of the target.  It took Drejka just over 2 seconds to pull the trigger once his pistol was drawn from his holster.

    I don't see this as Murder, and apparently neither did the Judge and Jury, he was convicted of Criminal Manslaughter which means the prosecution had no reason to believe that Drejka acted out of ill will or malice towards McGlockton.  The prosecutor didn't even argue that he WASN'T acting in self-defense, only that there were technicalities that made it so that Drejka couldn't claim "Stand your ground".  

    To address some of the other arguments here. 

    McGlockton wasn't in the process of turning away when he was shot, he turned his body away AFTER seeing the gun trained on him.

    Whether or not it appeared that Drejka was in imminent danger has absolutely nothing to do with the stand your ground law...the appearance of imminent danger doesn't appear anywhere in the verbiage of the law and is completely irrelevant in determining legitimacy under the statute.

    Also, stand your ground laws WERE NOT "Enacted to recognize that someone who intends to kill someone can be dealt with".  I'm not sure who told you that this is what the statute was made for or where you got this information but it's completely and totally wrong.  Stand your ground has nothing to do with protecting you against someone who intends to kill you, if it did...then you wouldn't EVER be able to "Stand your ground" unless you could prove intent to kill...which would be impossible unless the person assaulting you had a letter of intent with them that said "I plan on killing you".  

    The stand your ground statute is long and complex but essentially applies to a person who is under the presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm and grants that person the right to stand their ground instead of retreating and to use or threaten to use any force including deadly force in order to prevent death or great bodily harm.  

    There is no requirement that the person ACTUALLY try to kill you or cause great bodily harm...only that the person standing their ground be fearful of and have the reasonable presumption of death or great bodily harm.  

    "Guy breaks into your home, you come downstairs, he's standing there, you blow him away...you were fearful for your life and had reason to believe that he was there to either kill or cause great bodily harm to you.  Imagine though if someone saw the video of that incident and said "Well, it didn't LOOK like they were in imminent danger when they shot the guy".  Never mind the fact that they broke into your home at night and couldn't have had good intentions...just the fact that someone else doesn't think that you look like you're in imminent danger means you could go to jail for 30 years.  Luckily the law isn't built on what the situation "Appeared" to be and requires evidence to substantiate what it actually was.

    In Drejka's case...the jury came back with a verdict of Guilty and McGlockton's parents made several disparaging remarks about the fact that Drejka was White.  There appeared to be a large and domineering argument within the courtroom that because Drejka was white and Mcglockton was Black that it was obviously racially motivated.

    I'd be interested to see the appellate filing for this case.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch