When we ponder exactly how tough we want to be on a person who is under attack by an assailant, whether we want SYG, or OTOH a clear burden of proof of actual injury or extreme threat or something in the middle I think we need to look at and then pat the Zimmerman shooting of Trayvon Martin. We need to look at when SYG should have worked and did not, arguably in this case for racial or other improper reasons. SYG is too vague. But as a guy who has been taught and taught people to defend themselves I have to look at it less emotionally, more practical, and more legal than anything.

So how about taking a look at the case below and reconsidering the “lessons” learned in Florida. How about we see what we need so a good guy in a bad dangerous spot can protect himself and not have his life ruined by a late prosecution that may be unjust, (as perhaps shown below and it’s original article) and NOT leave room for vigilantism.

Then let’s kick some ideas around. What language might work?

Oh and gotta say, no matter what legal language winds up codified, none of it means crap if racism is going to distort it.

It all began in early 2005, when McNeil and his wife, Anita, hired Brian Epp’s construction company to build a new house in Cobb County, Ga. The McNeils testified that Epp was difficult to work with, which led to heated confrontations. They eventually decided to close on the house early to rid their lives of Epp, whom they found increasingly threatening. At the closing, both parties agreed that Epp would have 10 days to complete the work, after which he would stay away from the property, but he failed to keep up his end of the bargain.

On Dec. 6, 2005, John McNeil’s 15-year-old son, La’Ron, notified his dad over the phone that a man he didn’t recognize was lurking in the backyard. When La’Ron told the man to leave, an argument broke out. McNeil was still on the phone and immediately recognized Epp’s voice.
According to La’Ron’s testimony, Epp pointed a folding utility knife at La’Ron’s face and said, “[w]hy don’t you make me leave?” at which point McNeil told his son to go inside and wait while he called 911 and headed home.

According to McNeil’s testimony, when he pulled up to his house, Epp was next door grabbing something from his truck and stuffing it in his pocket. McNeil quickly grabbed his gun from the glove compartment in plain view of Epp who was coming at him “fast.” McNeil jumped out of the car and fired a warning shot at the ground insisting that Epp back off. Instead of retreating, Epp charged at McNeil while reaching for his pocket, so McNeil fired again, this time fatally striking Epp in the head. (Epp was found to have a folding knife in his pocket, although it was shut.)After a neighbor across the street who witnessed the encounter corroborated McNeil’s account, police determined that it was a case of self-defense and did not charge him in the death.

Nevertheless, almost a year later Cobb County District Attorney Patrick Head decided to prosecute McNeil for murder. In 2006, he was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

Even viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence was overwhelming in showing that a reasonable person in McNeil’s shoes would have believed that he was subject to an imminent physical attack by an aggressor possessing a knife and that it was necessary to use deadly force to protect himself from serious bodily injury or a forcible felony. Under the facts of this case, it would be unreasonable to require McNeil to wait until Epp succeeded in attacking him, thereby potentially disarming him, getting control of the gun, or stabbing him before he could legally employ deadly force to defend himself. This is not what Georgia law requires.

More: When ‘Stand Your Ground’ Fails

Apologies for a gun site link, but the following is what is at least one version of “Chapter And Verse” on when self defense with serious or legal force is to be used.

Here we are talking about the concepts of power and disparity of force. Clearly, a person with a gun or a knife and the ability to use it has the power to kill or cripple you. However, you can’t shoot that person unless he has the immediate opportunity to use that ability on you and he acts in such a manner that leads you to reasonably conclude you are in immediate jeopardy. But, what about if the threat does not have a gun, knife, or bludgeon? There are several other factors that would fulfill the criterion for ability.

1. Force of numbers. Two or more threatening persons, even without identifiably deadly weapons, against you alone, would constitute a disparity of force. If they attack you and act in such a manner as to lead you to believe that, unless you do something, they are going to kill or cripple you, then you are on solid legal ground. Against a group of attackers, each member of the group shares the same responsibility for the fear the group creates in the intended victim, and also shares the danger from the intended victim’s lawful response.

2. Able-bodied versus the disabled. If you are old and frail or physically challenged and you are viciously attacked by a younger, more able-bodied man (and the criteria of opportunity and jeopardy are in play), you are on solid legal ground.

3. Greater physical size and strength. If you are attacked by King Kong Bundy, you are on solid legal ground in using a force multiplier (a weapon) to avoid being killed or crippled.

4. Training or reputation. Is the attacker a person known to you to be highly trained in the martial arts? For this criterion to be considered a valid, affirmative defense for the defensive use of deadly force, you must have known about it before you resorted to using deadly force. It is not valid if you didn’t know it at the time, but learned that it was so after the fact. You will be judged based solely on what you knew at the time.

5. Male versus female. Our society assumes that females are more vulnerable and that there is a cultural predisposition for males to be more inclined to violent physical aggression than females. So, if you are female, you are being attacked by a lone male, and the other criteria of opportunity and jeopardy are in play, you are on solid legal ground in terms of using deadly force if you have no other viable choice to avoid being killed or crippled. This would also include self-defense against rape.

To read more about the issues surrounding concealed carry and use of deadly force, check out Eimer’s new book, Armed: The Essential Guide to Concealed Carry.