[muawiyah]

As many times as Florida's self-defense law (your appellation) has been discussed on FR as a "model", I suppose I do know something about it.

Only a FR "newbie" wouldn't!

Now, about self-defense, somebody is armed. They're following you around. They get close. You are entitled to defend yourself.

Remember, this is a case where the victim ~ Mr. Martin ~ was NOT reported to have been doing anything other than going to and from a local store on foot and he had the evidence of that trip on him at the time of his death ~ to wit, Skittles and tea.

ON THE OTHER HAND the killer actually reported on his own activities to the 911 clerk.

Under the circumstances Mr. Martin was clearly entitled to defend himself!

Now, imagine the impact on Tourism In Florida if it were determined that armed people can always follow unarmed people around and shoot them.

Nope, sure wouldn't ever go to that state again for anything!

[Ratman83]

He is not entitled to defend himself until Zimmerman does something. Following someone is not a crime, attaching someone is.

As of yet we do not know who attacked first.

[DeaconRed]

"reported to have been doing anything other than going to and from a local store on foot"

YES REPORTED BY THE MSM. . . .
Why are you so quick to condemn with just a few facts?
Why not wait until we get a full report from BOTH sides?
The guy (shooter) may be guilty, and I won't have any apology to make because I am waiting for ALL the evidence before I crucify anybody. . . .