Posted on 08/09/2012 9:35:57 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
SYG is why there is no duty to retreat, even if the option to do so is available.
Just because he didn’t even have that option doesn’t mean SYG doesn’t apply.
You still haven’t explained why you think that?
Sorry, I don’t understand your points.
Having no duty to retreat is a GOOD thing, not a thing that has to be “overcome”. ??
When Martin suddenly appeared and asked “you got a problem?”, Zimmerman had no reason to try running away, because he had no way to know Martin was going to deck him and jump on top of him the next second.
When Martin was on top of him and beating his head into pavement, Zimmerman wasn’t trying an unarmed defense. He was simply helpless in terms of getting up and running away. And by that time, since he was being attacked with potentially deadly force, he had no responsibility to try running away, even if he could. (which he couldn’t).
I’m not being deliberately dense to your points. I truly don’t understand what you’re trying to say about “no duty to retreat” vs “duty to retreat”.
I think my initial post was clear enough. It isn’t that I think “the law” doesn’t apply. I think the label “SYG” is used in a broad and confusing way, to encompass an immunity hearing. What doesn’t have any play in this case is the phrase in the law that says “and has no duty to retreat.”
Let ‘em riot. The places they tend to riot in aren’t places where the Constitution and freedom are held in very high regards. Let them burn it all down for us. Saves us the trouble of doing it later...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.