Florida
2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[20]
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the others imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
Not to be argumentative, but I think you are
both correct.
One must convince a reasonable person that lethal force was the ONLY possible decision. In order to convince someone else it could be assumed that the one utilizing this level of force believes this also.
The only thing a well written SWG law would do is eliminate any retreat requirement. For example, under SYG if someone came at you with a knife, you would not HAVE to turn your back and attempt to run prior to shooting. However, in coding this into law a natural contradiction occurs. If lethal force is only justified in cases where no other alternative reasonably exists, and retreat might well be a reasonable alternative, is lethal force still justified?
For example, if you are in a running motor vehicle and a maniac is hammering away at the window with a knife, is it reasonable to pull out a gun and shoot when you could simply step on the accelerator and move? This is where it is hoped that a jury steps in to say no, lethal force was NOT the only reaonable alternative, and you were under no immediate threat that could only be countered with lethal force. If the SYG law does not allow for this it is flawed.
In this case we have something else altogether, and it is questionable whether SYG applies to Zimmerman at all.
Trayvon, who was under no obligation to retreat, did so anyway. He was violating no laws, and attempted to leave. Zimmerman pursued. Even assuming (and there is no evidence to support this) that Trayvon eventually decided to assume the rights granted by the SYG law and defend himself, and got the upper hand, it is arguable that Zimmerman's decision to pursue cost Zimmerman the right to claim self defense.
For example, if you follow a cheerleader around while rubbing the crotch of your pants and saying "Rape kill rape kill...", she would have a reasonable cause to assume that she was in mortal danger. If she then turned and sprayed you in the face with pepper spray, incapacitating you, you would not then be legally entitled to pull out a gun a shoot her and call it self defense.
IN MY OPINION ONLY!
ullhair:
