I disagree with the "he's guilty because he started it" narrative. So you can't ever call someone out for doing something wrong? That's bullshit. As long as you don't escalate it to a physical confrontation. He's guilty because at the point he fired the shot the guy was backing away from him.
Isnt that part of the responsibility of carrying? You dont need to be a parking enforcement officer if theres a chance things get heated. If it doesnt matter to you then carry on with your own business, carrying or not. Besides, all the evidence points to him "starting shit" and if you are the instigator you have no right to stand your own dumb ass ground.I disagree with the "he's guilty because he started it" narrative. So you can't ever call someone out for doing something wrong? That's bullshit. As long as you don't escalate it to a physical confrontation. He's guilty because at the point he fired the shot the guy was backing away from him.
"Altercation " means noisey argument, not a fist fight. It is commonly used incorrectly, but if the law reads as quoted above, if you say something to someone, and that leads to a fight, you are legally required to let him beat you to death.
I disagree with the "he's guilty because he started it" narrative. So you can't ever call someone out for doing something wrong? That's bullshit. As long as you don't escalate it to a physical confrontation. He's guilty because at the point he fired the shot the guy was backing away from him.
I don't get why we even need SYG laws, let alone why anyone would oppose them. I mean, if someone attacks me, how in the world does the legal burden shift to me to retreat or otherwise defuse the situation?
"Altercation " means noisey argument, not a fist fight. It is commonly used incorrectly, but if the law reads as quoted above, if you say something to someone, and that leads to a fight, you are legally required to let him beat you to death.
I don't get why we even need SYG laws, let alone why anyone would oppose them. I mean, if someone attacks me, how in the world does the legal burden shift to me to retreat or otherwise defuse the situation?
Isnt that part of the responsibility of carrying? You dont need to be a parking enforcement officer if theres a chance things get heated. If it doesnt matter to you then carry on with your own business, carrying or not. Besides, all the evidence points to him "starting shit" and if you are the instigator you have no right to stand your own dumb ass ground.
I don't get why we even need SYG laws, let alone why anyone would oppose them. I mean, if someone attacks me, how in the world does the legal burden shift to me to retreat or otherwise defuse the situation?
I agree with that, but thats not what happened here. Problem is people will go around starting shit just for an excuse to pull a trigger, case and point. This scenarioI disagree. Yes if you start a physical altercation and you're getting your ass kicked for it you shouldn't be able to legally escalate it to lethal force. Or even if you threaten it. But calling someone out on their bullshit? Nah.
In the article it said he was surprised to hear the guy was backing up. I’m betting he will appeal the decision and get it reduced or overturned. That was a sticky situation once he got knocked to the ground.
yup..probably.
Anything the judge did not allow to be used by the defense will be used for appeal.
Like if the shooter's past was used against him and the pusher's past was kept from the jury....along with anything the defense requested a hearing over and were denied.
That would include any expert witness he was denied to have speak in his defense...."as such a experts testimony would be so strong as to create a 'thirteenth juror.'"...the thirteenth juror ruling ...set by precident ...used to block expert witness testimony for the defense.
yup.