Originally Posted by Just Passin' By
If you can't spell out the allowable specifics, you can't spell out the non-allowable specifics. It's really that simple.
since when has the law of regarding self-defense ever spelled out allowable vs. non-allowable specifics?
other than the use of a weapon or the like (zimmerman) hasn't the standard always been that of a reasonable man and not whether 1 finger or 2 were broken or whether a nose is bloody or *gasp* broken?
would a reasonable man in those circumstances have been in fear for his life because he got his nose broken? mr. z wouldn't want me on his jury...