That is not self defense, because the victim did not introduce the deadly force. The killer introduced the gun into a nonviolent argument. The victim made not threat to warrant the murderer going to get the gun therefore that is not true self defense. In fact the murderer provoked the victim's reaction. It is the same thing that George Zimmerman did. Zimmerman provoked or instigated the reaction from Trayvon Martin, which is why Zimmerman was charged with the criminal act.
You can not provoke someone to make an act or a statement and then claim self defense because you reacted to their action or statement.
you can't possibly be black and be comparing this to the Trayvon Martin situation, can you? that's disgraceful dude
holding a gun, especially in Texas, is not 'introducing deadly force'. firing a gun at someone is.
and you're not the instigator/provocateur if the other person walked up to your front door yelling at you and everyone in the house
whether the argument was violent or not was irrelevant, because it involved a trespasser refusing to leave. but the aggressive way he was dealing with the woman could certainly qualify the argument as violent.
and some of yall are caught up on the fact that he brought out the gun. it definitely doesn't matter in an open carry state, but in any case he was dealing with a hostile trespasser. he didn't walk out pointing it, and other dude still had ample opportunity to leave (a place he had no legal right to be). instead, dude rushes him and threatens to take the gun and use it on him, then after first dude fires a warning shot into the ground, he rushes him again and
grabs the gun he just threatened to take and shoot him with.
nobody was arrested, and rightfully so.
and yes, of course it's understandable to be mad if there's fukkery going on with custody/visitation of your son. but you can be mad and smart, or mad with a hole in your chest