If this case were prosecuted in Ohio there is no “stand your ground law” and the “castle doctrine” protects people from defending themselves in their residence or car.  There is also no requirement for persons to oblige with the duty to retreat.  This means that you do not have to retreat when defending either your home, place of business, or your vehicle.  (Castle Doctrine and Stand-Your-Ground Laws, 2013).  As a prosecutor for a case such as this I would look for corroborating statements from witnesses, video footage, something to indicate that the bartender did not have to discharge the firearm.  If none existed I believe I would have a hard time convincing a jury to convict on involuntary manslaughter which is defined as causing the death of an individual through reckless or dangerous actions.  The victim owed the subject $1500.00 which in an of itself is certainly cause to hold angry feelings, however if the subject kills the individual who owes him money, then the subject never gets his money back.  This would be one argument that the defense attorney could utilize.

A beer bottle in the hands of the victim, with a comment such as “Im going to kill you” could be construed as a deadly threat.  Especially if the bartender is in a physical location that will not allow them to retreat to a safe location.  If the weapon was kept behind the bar in a safe and legal manner and the bartender was not drinking then under Ohio’s concealed carry law he was within his rights to possess it, and defend himself from a perceived threat. 

respond to this discussion question in 100 words