Hal Uhrig: This is a gun law consistent in about 23 or 24 other states. What is basically says is nothing new. If you are confronted by someone and physically attacked and in reasonable fear for your safety, you're entitled to defend yourself.
The statute has four little . . four stools . . . four legs to that stool. First, you have to be someplace where you're allowed to be. Both of them were. you've gotta be not doing anything illegal. As far as we know both of them were. And you cannot be the first physical aggressor. Not the first "Hey, I want to call you a bad name," or call you mama a bad name. The first physical aggressor. The only evidence and most of the forensics support the fact that that was Trayvon Martin.
When . . when that happens. When that happens . . .
[Reporter interrupts with something unintelligible about mortician]
Let me tell you what the mortician said about Trayvon Martin. What, what he said on his little announcement was, other than the bullet, bullet hole, I didn't find, ah, injuries on Trayvon Martin. I guess he was intending to say, I didn't see the, ah . . .
[Another reporter interrupts with something unintelligible]
Did you want to outshout me? Or did you want to go talk to somebody else?
[Unintelligible response]
I'm answering a question. You can stay out of it. What the, what the mortician said was I didn't see any injuries. [Reporters still murmuring] He didn't have a broken nose. He didn't have scars on the back of his head. [Obnoxious reporters] You won't find any photographs of those. You won't find a witness to come in and say that.
Silly me. I forgot to mention that Uhrig’s comments were in response to a reporter asking him (well, demanding of him) wasn’t this all because of guns, and wasn’t the gun law a bad law.
Thanks, Scoutmaster. I especially liked his schooling on the idea of offensive speech not being an indication of physical aggression. (If it were, the folks in my nabe would all be locked up.)
Agreed. I was looking forward to seeing this guy in action.