Obviously, there’s the usual caveat of “we don’t know all the facts”…..but from what we can gather from the information presented to us, this does seem like a legitimate use of deadly force.
There is a concept known as a “per se” weapon (I learned this from Massad Ayoob), which is essentially anything (including your physical body – hands, feet etc), that is not ostensibly a weapon, being weaponized to commit an assault.
Lira was using his body as a “per se” weapon in this case (much like the abusive husband battering his wife), and Schmidt could be reasonably expected to consider Lira a potentially deadly threat after being punched in the face and knocked to the floor.
Maybe he’ll get fired from Walmart for having a concealed weapon, that’s a separate issue.
An important part of the whole “castle doctrine” concept is to essentially correct a glaring perversion of our legal system – that somebody had to prove they were innocent of wrongdoing. Now, the emphasis is righteous – innocence before guilt. The state has the burden of proof, as it should. The immediate investigation of the incident resulted in Schmidt being arrested and jailed for a while, but without any probable cause to detain him further, he was released. This is how our system of justice is supposed to work. We have no right to incarcerate people we cannot prove are guilty.
