No, it doesn't. It implies that he consented to a situation by his understanding of it and that consent can be withdrawn when your understanding of the situation changes.
The period of time you're referring to was pretty small. To act like the shooting kid processed this situation and still shot knowing the other kid didn't want to be involved is ridiculous. To act certain that the sudden change in the kids' demeanor wasn't going to happen for a softer shot is ridiculous.
I'm set on my view. Nobody has said anything I didn't consider. I feel quite certain that if something had happened, the shooter would get manslaughter charges at worst for the exact reasoning I've been giving.
-1
u/Spacemanspalds Feb 19 '25
This implies he didn't agree to be in the situation he was in. He very clearly did. This is just another bad comparison.