I've had too many of these conversations. Maybe I can finally make this clear.
There are times when I talk about self-defense cases when the incident happened in a place where the law makes sense.
If I'm talking about a self-defense case out of New York, or Massachusetts, or Minnesota, and your rebuttal is to cite the law, that's not the point. My point is that those places have stupid fucking laws, or evil fucking DAs, or both.
People like to talk about Kyle Rittenhouse as being a perfect example of self-defense. He's a good example of self-defense. Being that he did retreat, he should have been a clear and obvious case of self-defense in just about every state in the country, and he still had his life put on the line by the government.
Since then, there have been clearer and more obvious cases.
Jose Alba was a clear and obvious case of self-defense, and the government still wanted him to die in prison. It's only because of the public outcry that he didn't end up on trial. The thing is, New York law is dumb enough that the state might have had a case. New York law is dumb enough that they might kinda-sorta have a case against Daniel Penny.
If it's a self-defense case that happens in a sane state like Arizona or Texas or Florida, yeah, I'm probably talking about the details of the case, and how they suss out ethically and legally.
If it's an incident that happens in one of these ass-backward states, I'm usually talking about how the laws have to change and that the DAs have to be fired.