Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Any punch can be life threatening. If hit just right, you could kill a person with the first punch.
|
Of course, and as such a person on the ground, getting pummeled has a legitimate reason to fear grave bodily harm. You've just again said its a reasonable concern.
You can't argue that getting killed or crippled is a reasonable concern and then simultaneously argue that its not a reasonable concern at the same time.
If it is, he has an argument for a self defense shooting. You don't have to like it or agree with it... that's the law. It's quite bizarre that you keep ignoring that this is exactly what the law is. You don't have to agree with it... but repeating over and over that its not the law does not make it so.
The case is about the law. Plain and simple.
Quote:
|
But that doesn't mean someone can punch you and then you can shoot and kill him.
|
Again, this is where you derail. If the person getting hit has reason to fear grave bodily harm or death, then he can kill the attacker. Making up fantasy scenarios and downplaying Zimmermans injuries etc has nothing to do with the simple fact that if a person feels they are at reasonable risk for grave bodily harm or death, they can shoot.
Again, this is the law man. That's not a disputable fact or opinion, no matter how many times you want to state it as not being true.
It's the law in the State of Florida.
This isn't about anyones feelings on skittles or gun control or losing fights.
Quote:
|
His story just doesn't add up.
|
This is your opinion. This is also pure speculation and conjecture. This is not something you've managed to demonstrate with fact.
He wasn't charged for so long, precisely because the belief was that his story did add up and was corroborated by eye witnesses, all the phone calls, character witnesses and so on.