Duty to retreat v Stand your ground

[Wry Catcher]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

You dumb shit, that's not the point of the Zimmerman Syndrome. Zimmerman was a vigilante, and Zimmerman got his only coverage from having a gun in his possession. Kinda like you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bull shit ^^^. Are you a member or the LE Community? Of course not, you wouldn't have posted such a stupid comment if you were.

It was what the Sheriff said.

That's his opinion. It was an example of Zimmerman Syndrome, and I hope the dirt bag gets the needle.

No its the law. Its is very similar to Zimmerman in that both lawfully defended against hands on attacks and fear of great bodily injury.

Both were cowardly chicken shits, and needed a gun to go outside to feel safe. Both wanted to be seen as heroes, and both are murderers.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Thank you for taking the time to start this thread, @Quantum Windbag

Your link says that 'English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe.' - does this apply to America? If so, Zimmerman had plenty of chance to retreat - simply by not following Trayvon, and staying inside his car, where he would have been safe.

Whether Australia has such laws or not, I don't know - I have never heard of SYG being used in a case in which someone has died, and if the killer was the one who started the confrontation, I can tell you right now that they would be raked over the coals at trial and a jury may well find it hard to return a not guilty verdict, even if the defendant was defending themselves at the time.

How did Zimmerman have a chance to retreat after Martin had him on the ground?

I already posted in the other thread to show you that Australia has no duty to retreat as long as the person using the deadly force reasonably believed he was in danger. Why would anyone be raked over the coals for defending themselves from a rapist, even if the attack started because the woman slapped the guys face? You really aren't thinking things through, you should try dropping the emotions and consider exactly what it is you are advocating.

He should have retreated when he had the chance - and not followed the boy.

Over here, if you follow someone, whether you think they look suspicious or not is beside the point. You will be questioned as to why you didn't just back off and call triple 0.

You did not follow the trial..... Zimmerman followed martin, lost him and then complied with the 911 operator when she suggested he didn't need to follow martin...it was martin who broke the law and attacked zimmerman.

Traygone actually made it to his house and then went back looking for Z.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thank you for taking the time to start this thread, @Quantum Windbag

Your link says that 'English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe.' - does this apply to America? If so, Zimmerman had plenty of chance to retreat - simply by not following Trayvon, and staying inside his car, where he would have been safe.

Whether Australia has such laws or not, I don't know - I have never heard of SYG being used in a case in which someone has died, and if the killer was the one who started the confrontation, I can tell you right now that they would be raked over the coals at trial and a jury may well find it hard to return a not guilty verdict, even if the defendant was defending themselves at the time.

How did Zimmerman have a chance to retreat after Martin had him on the ground?

I already posted in the other thread to show you that Australia has no duty to retreat as long as the person using the deadly force reasonably believed he was in danger. Why would anyone be raked over the coals for defending themselves from a rapist, even if the attack started because the woman slapped the guys face? You really aren't thinking things through, you should try dropping the emotions and consider exactly what it is you are advocating.

He should have retreated when he had the chance - and not followed the boy.

Over here, if you follow someone, whether you think they look suspicious or not is beside the point. You will be questioned as to why you didn't just back off and call triple 0.

You did not follow the trial..... Zimmerman followed martin, lost him and then complied with the 911 operator when she suggested he didn't need to follow martin...it was martin who broke the law and attacked zimmerman.

Traygone actually made it to his house and then went back looking for Z.

So, was that a capital crime (If true). Zimmerman murdered him, and has been told by LE to not engage the victim. Without a gun he would have followed that direction, and retired to his car so he could run away.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Both were cowardly chicken shits, and needed a gun to go outside to feel safe. Both wanted to be seen as heroes, and both are murderers.

Both survived violent up close hands on attacks and used their lawfully concealed firearm to stop the attack.

 

[sealybobo]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

They argued it but you are right they didn’t technically use it

 

[OODA_Loop]

Traygone actually made it to his house and then went back looking for Z.

Yes doubled back and attacked Zimmerman who put a .380 through Martins chest cavity while he was on top of him.

 

[2aguy]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

They argued it but you are right they didn’t technically use it

No.... it wasn't part of the defense.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Traygone actually made it to his house and then went back looking for Z.

Yes doubled back and attacked Zimmerman who put a .380 through Martins chest cavity while he was on top of him.

Actually it was a Kel-Tec 9mm. but who's counting?

 

[2aguy]

Thank you for taking the time to start this thread, @Quantum Windbag

Your link says that 'English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe.' - does this apply to America? If so, Zimmerman had plenty of chance to retreat - simply by not following Trayvon, and staying inside his car, where he would have been safe.

Whether Australia has such laws or not, I don't know - I have never heard of SYG being used in a case in which someone has died, and if the killer was the one who started the confrontation, I can tell you right now that they would be raked over the coals at trial and a jury may well find it hard to return a not guilty verdict, even if the defendant was defending themselves at the time.

How did Zimmerman have a chance to retreat after Martin had him on the ground?

I already posted in the other thread to show you that Australia has no duty to retreat as long as the person using the deadly force reasonably believed he was in danger. Why would anyone be raked over the coals for defending themselves from a rapist, even if the attack started because the woman slapped the guys face? You really aren't thinking things through, you should try dropping the emotions and consider exactly what it is you are advocating.

He should have retreated when he had the chance - and not followed the boy.

Over here, if you follow someone, whether you think they look suspicious or not is beside the point. You will be questioned as to why you didn't just back off and call triple 0.

You did not follow the trial..... Zimmerman followed martin, lost him and then complied with the 911 operator when she suggested he didn't need to follow martin...it was martin who broke the law and attacked zimmerman.

Traygone actually made it to his house and then went back looking for Z.

So, was that a capital crime (If true). Zimmerman murdered him, and has been told by LE to not engage the victim. Without a gun he would have followed that direction, and retired to his car so he could run away.

You are lying.... that isn't what happened. Zimmerman shot in self defense as the one witness who saw the fight testified, martin was on top slamming Zimmerman's head against the concrete, and punching him ground and pound like an MMA fighter.

Moron...... he lost track of Martin and then returned to his car, where martin ambushed him and attacked him.....

Does lying like that come naturally to you?

 

[2aguy]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

You dumb shit, that's not the point of the Zimmerman Syndrome. Zimmerman was a vigilante, and Zimmerman got his only coverage from having a gun in his possession. Kinda like you.

You are a shit stain...... you lie about the Ziimmerman case, you make up things out of your ass.....Zimmerman did not attack martin....martin attacked zimmerman and was a homophobe to boot...as was testified to by the friend he was on the phone with before he went to attack zimmerman.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Actually it was a Kel-Tec 9mm. but who's counting?

No this is good thanks. I knew it was a Keltec. I switch between a G43 and G42 and am always looking for real world experience. .380 vs 9mm

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Actually it was a Kel-Tec 9mm. but who's counting?

No this is good thanks. I knew it was a Keltec. I switch between a G43 and G42 and am always looking for real world experience. .380 vs 9mm

At that range I dont think it would have mattered.

 

[sealybobo]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

They argued it but you are right they didn’t technically use it

No.... it wasn't part of the defense.

I know but I remember specifically they argued SYG but you are correct, they didn't specifically use it. They argued it or used elements of the law, but no they didn't use it. I'm not arguing with you I'm telling you that they tip toed around SYG.

 

[sealybobo]

Both were cowardly chicken shits, and needed a gun to go outside to feel safe. Both wanted to be seen as heroes, and both are murderers.

Both survived violent up close hands on attacks and used their lawfully concealed firearm to stop the attack.

This law makes me sick. I want black people to go taunt whites into pushing them down. Make sure you have someone video tape the white pushing the black person down. And then claim stand your ground.

I'll guarantee you they will change their tune on this then. I was watching the pundits on TV last night and I wanted to throw up. They were saying all bets are off after the guy was shoved to the ground. Doesn't matter if the black guy is backing away. Too late. He already did the violent act. Now whitey gets to kill him.

This is the most blatant racist law we have on our books. Or, it's racist how it's applied. I guarantee you if a white pushed a black and the black shot him dead the black would go to prison.

 

[2aguy]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

They argued it but you are right they didn’t technically use it

No.... it wasn't part of the defense.

I know but I remember specifically they argued SYG but you are correct, they didn't specifically use it. They argued it or used elements of the law, but no they didn't use it. I'm not arguing with you I'm telling you that they tip toed around SYG.

One of the lawyers at legalinsurrection....I think he is Andrew Branca, went through the law during that incident and he explained how it wasn't part of the trial. If you are interested he is a self defense law expert.

 

[2aguy]

Both were cowardly chicken shits, and needed a gun to go outside to feel safe. Both wanted to be seen as heroes, and both are murderers.

Both survived violent up close hands on attacks and used their lawfully concealed firearm to stop the attack.

This law makes me sick. I want black people to go taunt whites into pushing them down. Make sure you have someone video tape the white pushing the black person down. And then claim stand your ground.

I'll guarantee you they will change their tune on this then. I was watching the pundits on TV last night and I wanted to throw up. They were saying all bets are off after the guy was shoved to the ground. Doesn't matter if the black guy is backing away. Too late. He already did the violent act. Now whitey gets to kill him.

This is the most blatant racist law we have on our books. Or, it's racist how it's applied. I guarantee you if a white pushed a black and the black shot him dead the black would go to prison.

It has already happened, it happens all the time and no, blacks are not charged when they have legitimate stand your ground claims.....

 

[2aguy]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967 by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

They argued it but you are right they didn’t technically use it

No.... it wasn't part of the defense.

I know but I remember specifically they argued SYG but you are correct, they didn't specifically use it. They argued it or used elements of the law, but no they didn't use it. I'm not arguing with you I'm telling you that they tip toed around SYG.

Here is an article by Branca on stand your ground....

Stand Your Ground Laws & Self-Defense: Media Misconceptions Explained | National Review

 

[2aguy]

I just did a little research because of something [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION] said in another thread. It seems that not only is she completely wrong about how stand your ground laws work here, she is totally ignorant about the fact that Australia has the same basic understanding of the right to self defense as Florida.

That got me to thinking, how many other countries have stand your ground laws? It turns out that most of them do.

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial discussed Florida’s “stand your ground” law before reaching a not guilty verdict on Saturday, according to juror B37. The controversial law eliminates the obligation to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, even if it would be safe to do so. Do other countries require their citizens to retreat before using deadly force?

Many do not. English common law imposes a duty to retreat whenever it is safe. In continental Europe, the duty applies only when the defender provokes the attack, or when the attacker doesn’t understand the situation. (Europeans must retreat from young children with guns, for example.) Nor is there a general duty to retreat in countries like Japan and Argentina, which derive their criminal-law systems from Europe. Even England, originator of the duty to retreat, repealed the doctrine in 1967

Here by statute. Defenders of the European system argue that imposing a duty to retreat may prevent the attack on the victim’s life, but it permits an attack on his legal rights—the right to be in a public place, the right to move freely, etc. By passing the “stand your ground” law, Florida brought its laws closer to those of Europe. Otherwise, the U.S. is in the minority in having, within some states, an explicit duty to retreat.

Is stand your ground unique to the United States? - Slate Magazine

Stand Your Ground was not a part of the Zimmerman Trial. That is one of the mistakes that people make when they talk about Florida and it's self defense laws.

They argued it but you are right they didn’t technically use it

No.... it wasn't part of the defense.

I know but I remember specifically they argued SYG but you are correct, they didn't specifically use it. They argued it or used elements of the law, but no they didn't use it. I'm not arguing with you I'm telling you that they tip toed around SYG.

Here is Branca on the anniversary of the Martin shooting, he revisits the issues in the case including stand your ground....

Five years after Trayvon Martin's death, myths and lies about case live on

False Stand Your Ground Narrative
As Andrew Branca has explained many times, Florida’s Stand Your Ground law was not invoked in Zimmerman’s defense. SYG also is very misunderstood, it is not a “license to kill” – it only kicks in when all the other elements of lawful use of deadly force is established. SYG only addressed the need to retreat.
-----------

Since Zimmerman was pinned to the ground, he didn’t need to invoke SYG because there was no reasonable means of avoidance.

While the jury instructions did contain language similar to the SYG standard, the SYG statutory protection itself was not invoked.

So why is SYG so frequently mentioned when talking of the Zimmerman case? Because it is a convenient excuse for gun control advocates to try to scale back self defense laws.

 

[2aguy]

Both were cowardly chicken shits, and needed a gun to go outside to feel safe. Both wanted to be seen as heroes, and both are murderers.

Both survived violent up close hands on attacks and used their lawfully concealed firearm to stop the attack.

This law makes me sick. I want black people to go taunt whites into pushing them down. Make sure you have someone video tape the white pushing the black person down. And then claim stand your ground.

I'll guarantee you they will change their tune on this then. I was watching the pundits on TV last night and I wanted to throw up. They were saying all bets are off after the guy was shoved to the ground. Doesn't matter if the black guy is backing away. Too late. He already did the violent act. Now whitey gets to kill him.

This is the most blatant racist law we have on our books. Or, it's racist how it's applied. I guarantee you if a white pushed a black and the black shot him dead the black would go to prison.

Here is the truth....actual statistics on the topic....

What liberal media won't tell you -- blacks benefit most from Stand Your Ground laws

But the debate has everything backwards over who benefits from the law. Poor blacks who live in high crime urban areas are not only the most likely victims of crime, they are also the ones who benefit the most from Stand Your Ground laws. It makes it easier for them to protect themselves when the police can't be there fast enough. Rules that make self-defense more difficult would impact blacks the most.

Blacks may make up just 16.6 percent of Florida's population, but they account for over 31 percent of the state's defendants invoking a Stand Your Ground defense. Black defendants who invoke this statute to justify their actions are acquitted 8 percent more frequently than whites who use that same defense.

Prior to "Stand Your Ground," citizens had to retreat as far as possible and then announce to the criminal that they were going to shoot. The "Stand Your Ground" law drops the original requirement to retreat. But lethal force is still only justified when a reasonable person would believe that an attacker intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death. The law doesn't protect anyone who provokes a confrontation.