Following someone is not an overt act, neither is following someone while possessing a firearm. Overt acts are those which leave little doubt as to the intent, this is usually grabbing, hand gestures and language suggesting imminent violence, putting hands on the body of someone, etc. Following someone does not signify intent to harm.
Uh, no. Following someone in a car is following someone in a car, following someone on foot is following someone on foot. Whether the following intimidates the person or not is not grounds for an assault charge. Now, if the driving of the car is done so in a way that would signify that the person on foot is in danger that is different, which can be either assault with a deadly weapon or attempted vehicular homicide dependent upon how the aggression is handled. Following someone on foot may "intimidate" them but there is no clear intent of harm in either scenario of any engagement of violence. However actions that come from the following which are more clear in intent are where assault occurs legally.
Nope. This is completely false, I have seen plenty of "bulges" from the side and back signifying a carrier, and I have seen enough people "side holstered" who have been absolutely no threat to me whatsoever. It is completely irrational to be afraid of a holstered gun, and it isn't assault with a deadly weapon. The time that assault with a deadly weapon is when you reasonably have fear of bodily harm, this could be a weapon pointed at you, or a stance with a weaponized object like a frying pan, baseball bat, car, etc. and this boils down to what signals you are picking up like an attack stance, hands upon your person, violent language declaring intent, or as simple as the person taking a swing at you. Assault is a condition where you have little doubt that person is willing to cause you harm. Battery is when they actually engage in committing that harm, aggravated being an increased harm usually causing bodily damage and hospitalization and second degree usually aggravated plus a weapon.
No. Stand your ground defense states that you were not running away from an illegal action where you have the right to engage. IOW the defense is dependent upon you having the legal right to engage in current activity, the attack on your person was an illegal act, and thus you weren't compelled to flee.
Hmm. Okay, I thought there actually had to be some form of illegal activity such as assault, or battery, etc. and I have come to the understanding that SYG is only admissable if the claimant was not engaged in illegal activity already. I am not conviced that following someone meets that standard under most circumstances, though there are times anyone would be creeped out.
This is why people should communicate before they act. Either way both of these people contributed to what happened and it's up to a court to decide who's more at fault, this could have been avoided by Zimmerman simply saying "listen, we've had some trouble in the neighborhood and I'm just keeping watch" then Martin could have easily said "I'm just coming back from the store, I'm not a threat". God knows who actually escalated the violence but it could have been avoided. It's possible Martin thought Zimmerman was out to hurt him and it's possible Zimmerman thought "a runner is guilty" at the same time and that will always be a tragic communication fail.
To your first point. I am a firm believer in knowing as much as possible, and keeping a constant threat awareness. Being followed is at best a "minor" threat but I do concede that once a person is aware they are being followed they should probably be on some sort of alert and ready to react if necessary. In the case of someone preparing for an assault......well, you're going to know pretty quickly what's going to happen in that situation. Again it's about assessing the situation first and foremost, and if you feel threatened there is nothing wrong with verbalizing it to the persuant.
Well, if you are watching the neighborhood you are profiling. Anyone you don't recognize in a high crime area is a suspect. The police being "on the way" doesn't mean much if they aren't there, on the way could be 5 seconds or 25 minutes.
Not if there have been documented reports of burglary and other crimes which from what I understand is the case. Every stranger is a suspect when your area has been victimized, and sometimes your neighbors are "strangers" then too.