Q, don't get too worked up by hvybarrels.

In his time on this forum he has established.

A) He's a troll.
B) He has disdain for law enforcement, military and authority.
C) He has never served his country.
D) He has never been employed as a LEO under any circumstance.
E) He is a bleeding heart liberal.

He purposely tries to push people to react to his off the wall ASSumptions and misstatements.
The reality though is that no one knows him. He never shows his face at any functions, I don't even think he owns a firearm.
He's simply a pimple on an ass that won't go away.

my point exactly. you got nothin'

What say we just get this over with?

Bro, you're a punk antagonist.

I could sit here all day and night going back and forth with you but every post you type further proves my point.

If you'd like to meet face to face and discuss this further, let me know.

No no no aiea....I was just break in your brawls buddy. Didn't mean for it to sound offensive

Agreed, through personal experience, as well as many videos etc. that are out there, one punch and people can fall back hit there head and be paralyzed or in a coma. That is why I shake my head when I hear people say fight it out. Being born and raised here in the islands we have a culture of fighting not found many other places on the mainland, however once you grow up you realize you have family, work, life that is much more important than throwing hands to prove who is tougher. It is worse in the mainland because it is almost always never one on one either. I am not willing to risk my life, health or safety nor that of my loved ones. I will be willing to do anything within my power to get safely home, if someone threatens violence I view that as a threat on my life. So many people have this romanticized idea of fighting whether from tv, movies etc. There are many things that can change your life forever from these altercations, just remember that legally, physically, and personally.

Does it matter if the armed party instigated the conflict and was probably drunk, by witness accounts?

Great point. Elderts definitely continued to move forward. And threat of bodily harm to Deedy appeared real and imminent.
Looked like Elderts was kicking his trained ass !

Does it matter if the armed party instigated the conflict and was probably drunk, by witness accounts ? ( prosecution witnesses though. haven't heard defense )

That would depend.  How was it instigated? Just because someone is yelling at you, talking shit, isn't justification to swing at someone.   If he [deedy] thought there was a problem, he has every right, just like any other person to say something about it.   Now if it's a nose-to-nose kind of threat, then yeah it would most likely matter.   Drunk doesn't (or shouldn't come into play) until it's established that he was intoxicated.  Smelling like alcohol =/= drunk. (could have just had some, had some spilled, been around it etc.).  He also have had of consumed sufficient quantity to be over the limit.

People forget - even if I came up to you talking shit, that's no justification to attack.


Serious question as I'm now thinking it doesn't. Justified use of deadly force doesn't appear to depend on who instigated what or what frame of mind they were in.
So long as the threat of great bodily harm was real and imminent.

This would be bad for CCW though.
If I'm carrying a gun, I can pick whatever fight I like and once I feel the threat of great bodily harm, I'm justified to shoot.
This is nothing more than bullshit (the way you mean it, but it could also be true legally). You cannot  just "pick" a fight.  Now, by pick a fight I mean going and starting a fight i.e. "Hey, F-u! *swing*" /get ass kicked -- *bang*.   That would mean you go to jail.  That is not self-defense, nor would it get you off of a trial.  Now, that said, let's say we fight, I lose or something, and I try to run away.  You continue to follow me, after I have tried to flee and have retreated, you could certainly get shot and the other individual could claim self-defense.

I think this may be the monkey wrench in Deedy's argument. If he provoked the situation by threatening Elderts with physical harm or death, then he was not within the confines of Hawaii state law to use deadly force to protect himself.

This continues to be an irrelevant argument.

Personally, I feel ALL people should be held to a higher standard and held accountable for their own actions.