Originally Posted by UglyPug
just a lil FYI: Zimmerman's defense will probably not use stand your ground self-defense. THey are going to argue simple common-law self-defense. Which is what I was trying to tell people from the beginning.
Where I laid out all the elements, and applied the facts of the case (the ones not in dispute) to the law to show how he was indeed covered by the law.
Stand your ground is a good concept, I believe. You should not have to try to retreat if somebody is attacking you. . That could result in you getting ****ed up even worse. . . But the law is often written vaguely, and in turn, can be used to cover certain instances that are not itended to be protected.
Still need to know more about this case, but it sounds like this should not be covered by stand your ground, nor common law self-defense. But I can't say for sure.
I believe it is a good concept as well, just a little vague
and this is what's causing problems.