"People have a right to defend themselves with deadly force IF they feel like their life or body is threatened."
The latest trial of George Zimmerman, its results, and the other 16 like cases in Florida where someone shot someone, and were acquitted, herald back to the days of the Wild West. In these cases justice was dealt out by a single person acting as the judge, jury, and executioner upon an individual who may or may not have presented a real or imagined threat. The flaw is not within jury findings, but in the law itself.
George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. Only one version of the how and why it happened came in the form in inconsistent statements to police and investigators. In a statement George Zimmerman made to Sean Hannity, he said that Trayvon was running away from him...seemingly because he 'feared' George Zimmerman. So, if Trayvon had attacked George, with the intent to defend HIMSELF, and he had killed George Zimmerman...he'd have been 'right,' or according to Florida Law, completely justified.
The law's flaw is that it provides untrained, paranoid, or even delusional 'personal feelings' to justify the slaying of someone not charged with a crime. Seemingly, the person who carries the biggest gun, knife, or stick, and has quickest draw wins. It would seem that the Florida Legislature missed the days of history class when the merits and pitfalls of yesteryear were discussed. Allowing people to use deadly force to resolve disputes is a step backwards.
I sincerely fear for the citizens of Florida. You have every reason to fear your fellow Floridian. I do not recommend you bring Skittles to a gun fight. Trayvon was right to attack George, but his legal failure was losing the physical battle. This law endangers the unarmed and the physically diminished, who merely appear threatening, or act in a manner that might frighten the neighborhood gunslinger.
This law is fundamentally flawed and should be abolished.