Quote Originally Posted by TaePo View Post
Your last paragraph is the main reason I bring the case up. Political pressure caused a change in handling of a case. I would imagine stand your ground (SYG) assumption of innocence would also apply in a straight forward self-defense case outside of the home (clearly not castle doctrine, CD).

Well, the attention on a possible example strays away from the original question, though. I have very little faith not because of the system but how the system is run/applied.
"Stand Your Ground" really just means that you have no duty to flee before using force, IF force is justified. Other changes come in with that, and Castle Doctrine includes additional presumptions (and in PA, is applied to occupied cars, too).

The important thing to know, the thing that I emphasize in my 4 hour classes on this, is that you NEVER get "permission" to kill another person. You just get excused, sometimes. If you and your family can survive without pulling the trigger, then don't pull the trigger. You can't take those bullets back, you could be shooting your wife's idiot brother who thought it would be funny to climb in the window. Sometimes you have to shoot, but it's not like a traffic ticket where "if you speed, the cop gives you a ticket". There's no rule "if you break in, you get shot". Maybe there should be, but there isn't. It's just a shift in the burden of proof, it's kind of subtle, in practice.

Besides, ammo is expensive and hard to find these days. It's even worse in prison.