Just scrolling through the thread here and there seems to be a lot of argument about totally irrelevant points. The chick parked where she shouldn't have, and the guy called her out on it. Okay, whatever.

What happened here was a guy #2 walks up during a verbal altercation and turns it into a physical altercation. It did appear that guy2 was taking another step towards guy1 on the ground. Then guy1 draws his firearm, and guy2 stops and backs away. Guy1 shoots guy2 as he was taking a step backwards.

If I am on that jury, I don't have a problem with anything that happened right up to the point when the trigger was pulled. Guy1 had reason to believe his life was in danger and pulled his firearm, but by the time he had the gun out I think you could question the danger in the situation. Had he come out firing, it would have been open and shut. But he paused for a second or two before he fired, and during that time guy2 backed off and changed the entire dynamic of the situation.

There is an interview with wife, it is suggested that a witness went into the store to report the shooter harassing the woman and the husband hears it. If this is your wife and it was going down as such how are you walking out there.

Where is the information on the supposed "cussing of the wife"? That has been used a lot to inflame the folks who think the gentleman who shoved the shooter to the ground was acting appropriately. It was also asked how a normal husband would react if someone "was cussing your wife". The best response is it wouldn't happen because she would not park in a handicap parking spot. I would not run up and blindside someone if i witnessed an altercation, unless i feared for her life that is for sure! I also think that people should speak up when the see unlawful acts occurring. I don't expect the police to be everywhere at all times or that laws are only to be followed in the presence of law enforcement. If the man shoved the shooter to the ground and said "i'm going to beat your a#%, cracker!" would he be ok to shoot then? That seems as likely a scenario as the dead guy feared for his wife's safety and had to assault someone.

I think saying “Guy1 had reason to believe his life was in danger” is quite a stretch. Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t, but based on the video 1Shot posted there’s no way I could agree with that statement. He had reason to believe he was going to be in a scuffle, he had reason to believe he was about to get his arse whupped...etc., sure...but what did you see that would lead you to conclude “he had reason to believe his life was in danger”?

My point exactly.

Really??? Seems like there�s an entire continuum of ways to respond - some appropriate, some not. At one end of that continuum is �lethal force�. I�d have to assume most firearms instructors and most logical, responsible and well-trained gun owners would support the notion that �lethal force should be used as a last option�. Key word being �option�.

I fail to understand how (given the scenario you described) walking out of the store looking to use lethal force could in any way be considered the appropriate course of action - IF that�s what you were suggesting.

case by case basis, not a lot of time to exercise or think about the Dear Abby options