Right. I started by saying that a "he said...he said" case will be hard to resolve with one of the two dead.
calex59, it's NEVER been the law that you can use deadly force in a fight where you are a willing participant. J.... Ch...., how many manslaughter convictions have there been coming out of bar fights?
All I'm saying is that I DON'T KNOW if the Florida "stand your ground" law CHANGES THE COMMON LAW OF SELF-DEFENSE, and I asked if any knowledgable freepers could enlighten me.
Do you know if the Florida "stand your ground" law CREATES the right to use deadly force once you start losing a fight in which you are not the aggressor but which you could avoid by reasonable conduct?
I mean, you have the right to be in a given bar, and you have the right to fight back if attacked, but if you wade into a bar fight that you didn't start, punch a guy, and he falls, hits his head, and dies, that's manslaughter, right?
All I'm asking is, in Florida now, if under the same circumstances, he knocks you down and you shoot him, is that legal and proper use of "stand your ground"?
looking at Prosser, Wade and Schwartz's "Torts - Cases and Materials" 9th edition, on page 104 under the heading of "Self-Defense," point No 6 says (without giving any case cite):
Retreat. One basic disagreement in approach to the privilege of self-defense focuses on whether the defendant must retreat if he can do so without increasing his danger, rather than stand his ground and use force. It is settle that he may stand his ground and use any force short of that likely to cause serious injury. The common law was that, rather than kill his assailant or seriously wound him, defendant must "retreat to the wall." A minority of the American courts still apply this rule, and it is adopted by the Restatement (Second) of Torts Sec. 65. The majority, chiefly in the south and west, have insisted upon a higher important of the dignity and honor of the individual and have held that the defendant may stand his ground and use deadly force, and even kill his assailant. [Remark about retreating from a gun bearing assailant skipped]and Section 65 of Restatement of Torts 2nd, says this ...
S: 65. Self-Defense By Force Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harm (1) Subject to the statement in Subsection (3), an actor is privileged to defend himself against another by force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, when he reasonably believes thatThe link has notes and example scenarios.(a) the other is about to inflict upon him an intentional contact or other bodily harm, and that
(b) he is thereby put in peril of death or serious bodily harm or ravishment, which can safely be prevented only by the immediate use of such force.
(2) The privilege stated in Subsection (1) exists although the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can safely avoid the necessity of so defending himself by
(a) retreating if he is attacked within his dwelling place, which is not also the dwelling place of the other, or
(b) permitting the other to intrude upon or dispossess him of his dwelling place, or
(c) abandoning an attempt to effect a lawful arrest.
(3) The privilege stated in Subsection (1) does not exist if the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can with complete safety avoid the necessity of so defending himself by
(a) retreating if attacked in any place other than his dwelling place, or in a place which is also the dwelling of the other, or
(b) relinquishing the exercise of any right or privilege other than his privilege to prevent intrusion upon or dispossession of his dwelling place or to effect a lawful arrest.
Want to prove your asserting about what the law says by giving us a legal citstion of the exact law that say it?
He who transits from speech to physical attack is in the wrong, no matter WHAT the speech is. Evidence is that Martin initiated the physicality. “Being pissed-off” is not grounds for assault.
All I’m asking is, in Florida now, if under the same circumstances, he knocks you down and you shoot him, is that legal and proper use of “stand your ground”?
I do know that race has nothing to do with it beyond the reality that black thugs were commiting a lot of crime in the neighborhood which necessitated Zimmerman’s crime watching - at least, in his mind. The media, saturated in the hate doctrines of critical race theory, screwed the pooch when they took off with the liberal race hate meme thinking Zimmerman was white. They have made total racist asses of themselves, as usual.