Having read the article linked above, I conclude it is poorly written as it makes unfounded assumptions and lacks logical conclusions based on fact.
It seems that this incident is at a stage where the facts are still being determined. The Florida law does not seem to be flawed. Depending upon the provable facts of this situation that need to be presented, we currently do not know enough to decide who was the aggressor.
Was there a size disparity?
Who was the aggressor?
If Zimmerman was following Trayvon Martin, how much distance was maintained?
Did Martin close the distance or did Zimmerman?
I don't know enough to ask all the right questions.
I assume that under Florida jurisprudence, someone charged with a homicide who claims self-defense has the burden to prove the use of deadly force was justified. I tried to find the text of the law, but was unsuccessful. I looked at all of the Title XLVI Cimes, Chapter 790 Weapons and Firearms and did not find it.
While this incident does raise questions, they are as yet still unanswered. I can not judge with such a lack of facts.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." Frederic Bastiat