Deadly force

[Criticalt]

You quoted 2 sections that illustrate exactly what I was saying about disparity of force. If the attacker is unarmed, you have an additional burden to prove that DPF was warranted, it is not by any means impossible, but you do have a higher burden.

A 98 year old woman in a wheelchair is a threat if she has a gun, not at all if she doesn't. An unarmed 250lb MMA champion is a threat warranting DPF, if youre a 120lb woman, but not if you're another MMA heavyweight champion.

A couple times youve mentioned a pro boxer, an mma champ.....
How exactly does someone know in the heat of the moment, or ever, what an attackers qualifications are?
That makes zero sense.
For instance, would being attacked by a 145 pound guy with a baby face and girly hair qualify?
I just descibed Uriah Faber, who could destroy many bigger guys.

 

[Criticalt]

That is what got Zimmerman in trouble, but he wasn't doing anything illegal, or even wrong.

The media and the prosecution made a lot out of that, but Zimmerman didn't really "start" anything, claiming he was the aggressor was a stretch.

But thats why he had ALL the legal trouble.
If he was just attacked by the hoodie wearing guy, he would not have had 99% of his issues.
If he just called the police saying there was a suspicious dude, all would have been good.
However, he followed the guy and confronted him when noticed.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Didn't it come out that Zimmerman was asked by 911 to provide a description and when he exited his vehicle, he eventually got ambushed?

 

[spat]

A couple times youve mentioned a pro boxer, an mma champ.....
How exactly does someone know in the heat of the moment, or ever, what an attackers qualifications are?
That makes zero sense.
For instance, would being attacked by a 145 pound guy with a baby face and girly hair qualify?
I just descibed Uriah Faber, who could destroy many bigger guys.

You don't generally know the attackers qualifications, but yours can make a difference. If he attacked you, and you knew who he was, certainly that could push things in your favor.


OTOH, if he attacked you, and the prosecution could show that you *didn't* know, you could be in trouble.

If you were attacked by a small guy who turned out to be a nobody, but you could articulate some reason he *looked* well trained, that might help. Some mall Ninja copying something he saw in a movie, but can say the stance looked like a well trained kickboxer or something.....

The law itself is about as clear as mud, this is all about what you can convince a jury of. If you can convince them that you really thought you were in serious danger of more than some bumps and bruises, that's what it's about.

I think the way the law is written and applied is asinine, having "feelings" and "beliefs" matter in a court of law is insane, but it's what we have to deal with.

 

[spat]

But thats why he had ALL the legal trouble.
If he was just attacked by the hoodie wearing guy, he would not have had 99% of his issues.
If he just called the police saying there was a suspicious dude, all would have been good.
However, he followed the guy and confronted him when noticed.

He could have been out looking for his lost cat, and Trevon could have attacked him because he *thought* he was being followed and it would have ended up the same. The media was not concerned with reporting reality, they were concerned with *making* a story.

If you don't think it could happen to you if you ever need to defend yourself you'very got your head in the sand.

The law says nothing about it, but in many places in this state you could have a situation where you would be considered perfectly justified for shooting a white attacker, but you'll end up in deep shit if he's black (or the media can call him black).

 

[Day444]

Not if you are at the VA. It's a GFZ.

LOL !!!!!!

 

[GOPerfect]

It is virtually impossible to go through each and every situation that one could run into.

Has nothing to do with my employment situation; if I am ever in fear of or concerned with my safety or the safety and well-being of my family, I will use every tool that I have with me.

I am no expert, but I have a very good working knowledge of Article 35. I will use that to my advantage in justifying why I used the force that I did. Again, it is always in the way one articulates the incident.

There are some really good articles written about this as well as good videos on YouTube. Yeah I know, YouTube?

 

[Jmac00]

Can't remember who, but somebody here said that the attacker would have been armed by the time the police showed lol.

that was probably me. I ALWAYS carry two knives. Hey, you may lose one.....