Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
Where exactly have I argued otherwise?
Conversely, if he approaches a stranger in a private gated community, or in public, in a manner that causes that stranger to reasonably fear immediate harm they have not broken a single law in responding to that threat with physical force.
|
We don't know that Zimmerman approached Martin or got anyhwere close to him. Your filling in the facts. If Zimmerman does not get close to Martin or threaten him overtly, then the threat is not imminent. Zimmerman would also have to approach Martin in a way that did not offer reasonable escape.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
My position is that if you're going to be approaching people while armed, and then use that weapon in claimed self defense the onus showed fall upon you to prove the need to use deadly force, not upon the prosecution.
|
No. In a case where the state is attempting to take away a citizen's liberty and basic human rights, the state should always have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. That principle cannot be compromised merely because it's convenient to your own sense of morality.