The lesson I’m seeing:  Don’t escalate a verbal disagreement into a shoving match in a state that treats their citizens like adults.

Will be interesting to see how this one plays out.  I also wonder if the guy being disabled (which I assumed) will play a factor.

Total Monday morning QB here, but I wouldn't necessarily view the shove in itself as justification for use of deadly force.  That said, wasn't the guy who was already assaulted and on the ground and vulnerable. 

The shoving guy had a long rap sheet including domestic violence and drug offenses.

Shooter guy doesn't get much sympathy from me either.

Here's another one this morning. Icelanders already pay 46% income tax so they're used to taking it up the ass by their government.

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/iceland-is-for-gun-lovers-but-nobody-gets-shot-1283273283910

How could he exercise his "duty to retreat" if he is on the ground?  And after he puts his gun down, it looks like he is trying to move his legs with his hands.  Like they're not working 100%.

Looks like a case of when idiots collide.  I'm assuming they got into an argument over the stall.  Not guilty criminally, but he will lose the lawsuit

One person dead, the other loses everything he owns.  All over a parking stall.

How could he exercise his "duty to retreat" if he is on the ground?  And after he puts his gun down, it looks like he is trying to move his legs with his hands.  Like they're not working 100%.

To be clear, I'm 1000% for the right to defend oneself, with a firearm if necessary.  However, there are still rules, laws, principles, whatever on use of deadly force. 

I didn't say anything about the guy on the ground was supposed to retreat.  My opinion was that what happened wasn't enough in my mind that use of deadly force was obvious.  Would other reasonable folks say it was warranted?  At least one did and that was the sheriff who apparently didn't pursue charges. 

We don't know if the guy who shot was threatening the lady in the car and the guy who shoved him was stopping that threat.  Once the guy shoved him, I didn't see any aggressive motions toward the guy on the ground.  Did the guy on the ground believe the guy who shoved him was a threat?  I would believe definitely.  That said, after the guy shoved the guy that fell, the guy who shoved looks like he backed off some. 

My initial impression was that the guy who shot was sort of an "angry disabled" type who wanted to tell off the lady who probably was inconsiderately parked in the disabled parking stall and the shooter wanted to tell her off.  If that's the case, he started the confrontation.  Then the guy who shoved certainly escalated.  Was that justified?  I don't think so, but I also don't think that in and of itself was justification for the guy on the ground to shoot him in defense.  Just my opinion. 

On a side note, now that my dad really needs use of the disabled parking stalls and particularly family who help transport him, I get the anger for those who misuse those stalls.  However, I'm not going to opening confront anyone. 

Looks like a case of when idiots collide.  I'm assuming they got into an argument over the stall.  Not guilty criminally, but he will lose the lawsuit

One person dead, the other loses everything he owns.  All over a parking stall.

Pretty much. 

That the guy who shoved has a long rap sheet is perhaps an indicator of what kind of person he was.  But I could see many a jackass acting like that regardless of their past. 

To be clear, I'm 1000% for the right to defend oneself, with a firearm if necessary.  However, there are still rules, laws, principles, whatever on use of deadly force. 

I didn't say anything about the guy on the ground was supposed to retreat.  My opinion was that what happened wasn't enough in my mind that use of deadly force was obvious.  Would other reasonable folks say it was warranted?  At least one did and that was the sheriff who apparently didn't pursue charges. 

We don't know if the guy who shot was threatening the lady in the car and the guy who shoved him was stopping that threat.  Once the guy shoved him, I didn't see any aggressive motions toward the guy on the ground.  Did the guy on the ground believe the guy who shoved him was a threat?  I would believe definitely.  That said, after the guy shoved the guy that fell, the guy who shoved looks like he backed off some. 

My initial impression was that the guy who shot was sort of an "angry disabled" type who wanted to tell off the lady who probably was inconsiderately parked in the disabled parking stall and the shooter wanted to tell her off.  If that's the case, he started the confrontation.  Then the guy who shoved certainly escalated.  Was that justified?  I don't think so, but I also don't think that in and of itself was justification for the guy on the ground to shoot him in defense.  Just my opinion. 

On a side note, now that my dad really needs use of the disabled parking stalls and particularly family who help transport him, I get the anger for those who misuse those stalls.  However, I'm not going to opening confront anyone.

I was referring to our laws that we all have a "duty to retreat", unless inside our home/business.

If it were me, I'm a pretty healthy 30 year old.  So to justify being planted on my ass and using deadly force will be very difficult.  But the aggressor could have jumped on top him MMA style in less than a second.  I would have gone full taco style to defend first.

Situation seems like the Zimmerman case.  Looking for trouble. 

The people who parked in the handicap stall are assholes who get no sympathy from me.  Look at all the open stalls that were in front of the store but she said she had the right to park whereever she wanted.  NO YOU DON'T STUPID.  As for the guy that got shot, he only shoved the other guy because he felt he could easily beat his ass.  I doubt he would have shoved someone like a Brock Lesnar.

I was referring to our laws that we all have a "duty to retreat", unless inside our home/business.

If it were me, I'm a pretty healthy 30 year old.  So to justify being planted on my ass and using deadly force will be very difficult.  But the aggressor could have jumped on top him MMA style in less than a second.  I would have gone full taco style to defend first.

Situation seems like the Zimmerman case. 
Looking for trouble.

Gotcha.  Other than basic right to defend oneself, I thought the article's mentioning of stand your ground, as related to not having to retreat from one's home or vehicle, was misleading.  I felt that that would lead to questioning against stand your ground laws. 

And I agree with you on the perspective of use of deadly force.  And yes, the guy could have jumped on him quickly.  Again, hindsight 20/20, but I didn't see aggression there after the shove.  But ultimately, I wasn't the one on the ground and nor will I have to answer to questions about why I felt deadly force was necessary.  That's why I was wondering if the guy on the ground being disabled will be factored into the case. 

  I doubt he would have shoved someone like a Brock Lesnar.

Reading SSH, many are saying that if the guy didn't have a gun, he wouldn't have provoked anyone.  We don't know that.  But if the shover guy was smaller, would he have not done any shoving?  As in if Brock Lesnar was the guy scolding him for parking in a handicap stall.  I look at that as a factor as well.  "I'm bigger and stronger so I can shove someone who appears weaker, no way I would have shoved someone bigger than me."

The shover is a big dude and the shove was violent, not a push.
Planted the guy on his ass and kept advancing.

However, when the gun was pulled, shover appears to start back pedaling.
Force equalizer.
Then the guy shot him.

Guy who got shoved definitely initiated verbal confrontation with shovers girlfriend.
Did she deserve it. Yes.
Can't park anywhere you like. Especially in handicapped stall.
Did she escalate it. Possibly.  Doesn't look/sound like he politely asked her to move her car and she obliged.
He possibly was a dick too as there are reports he was kinda the handi-cap stall police.
Reports he confronted other handi-cap stall violators prior to this.

Pure verbal though until shover shows up.

Justified deadly force ?
.
What would have happened to the guy from the shover if he didn't have a gun?
.
Who knows.

Lesson in saying " I feared for my life"

JMO

I think even if he didn't fire, SJW would be blasting him for even pulling his gun. "Why draw your gun, you were just pushed".

The shover is a big dude and the shove was violent, not a push.
Planted the guy on his ass and kept advancing.

However, when the gun was pulled, shover appears to start back pedaling.
Force equalizer.
Then the guy shot him.

Guy who got shoved definitely initiated verbal confrontation with shovers girlfriend.
Did she deserve it. Yes.
Can't park anywhere you like. Especially in handicapped stall.
Did she escalate it. Possibly.  Doesn't look/sound like he politely asked her to move her car and she obliged.
He possibly was a dick too as there are reports he was kinda the handi-cap stall police.
Reports he confronted other handi-cap stall violators prior to this.

Pure verbal though until shover shows up.

Justified deadly force ?
.
What would have happened to the guy from the shover if he didn't have a gun?
.
Who knows.

Lesson in saying " I feared for my life"

JMO

I don't doubt the guy on the ground feared for his life.  What would have happened if the guy on the ground didn't have a gun?  No idea.  I would have hoped bystanders would have helped the guy from getting pummeled, but in this day and age, I bet most would have pulled out their cell phone to get a video. . . 

My thinking was that he put himself into that position as the "handicapped stall police".  Yes, I supposed the lady who parked "started it".  I was just saying that I don't feel that this one was so clear cut as obvious justified self-defense.  Will the guy on the ground get charged and if yes, if he will get indicted and/or convicted?  I believe there's a good chance for either.  My point, or feeling is that this isn't a good example of the "stand your ground" law nor necessarily for CCW. Definitely we all can learn from though.   

For the CCW part, it is my feeling (no real basis really) that CCW could tend to embolden SOME people to act more aggressively, as in start a confrontation and end up needing to use their firearm in "self defense" when they are the one who put themselves in that situation in the first place.  Which is what my first impression of this video was. 

I don't doubt the guy on the ground feared for his life.  What would have happened if the guy on the ground didn't have a gun?  No idea.  I would have hoped bystanders would have helped the guy from getting pummeled, but in this day and age, I bet most would have pulled out their cell phone to get a video. . . 

My thinking was that he put himself into that position as the "handicapped stall police".  Yes, I supposed the lady who parked "started it".  I was just saying that I don't feel that this one was so clear cut as obvious justified self-defense.  Will the guy on the ground get charged and if yes, if he will get indicted and/or convicted?  I believe there's a good chance for either.  My point, or feeling is that this isn't a good example of the "stand your ground" law nor necessarily for CCW. Definitely we all can learn from though.   

For the CCW part, it is my feeling (no real basis really) that CCW could tend to embolden SOME people to act more aggressively, as in start a confrontation and end up needing to use their firearm in "self defense" when they are the one who put themselves in that situation in the first place.  Which is what my first impression of this video was.

There is a new story from some one else that got confronted by the same guy for parking on the same handicap space, he said the guy threatened to shoot him for it.

I really do think this is a case of a guy with a gun providing a situation to use it.

The shooter is 47 years old, so not considered "old" by most adults.  He apparently liked to be the stall police.  Bottom line is all those involved were/are assholes.

The shoving guy had a long rap sheet including domestic violence and drug offenses.

Shooter guy doesn't get much sympathy from me either.

Of course the shooter cannot use that in his defense unless he somehow already knew of the individual's criminal history.

I think it will be hard to justify the shooting from what the video shows. Now if a witness at a different angle saw something the video doesn't show and/or if something was heard by a witness it could possibly make it into a justified self defense case. His defense will be an uphill battle though I think.

Of course the shooter cannot use that in his defense unless he somehow already knew of the individual's criminal history.

Prior bad acts are not admissible in court unless used to refute something the other party testified to, such as, "I've never hurt anyone before my life."  So he would NOT be able to use that in his defense whether or not he had prior knowledge of the man's criminal past.  There is no "unless he somehow already knew ...".

You should take a law class or something.