Arguments in Support of the Stand Your Ground Law - Essay Example

Stand Your Ground Introduction In December 2005, a few years after the ruling by United s Supreme Court that it was appropriate for Zimmerman to kill Trayvon Martin for self-defense. Since then, many Florida residents have bought guns to aid self-defense. Although the Supreme Court ruled in support of the stand your ground, few residents do not feel it appropriate and a good idea. There had to be some reasons for this. It is just a portion of residents who feel that “Stand Your Ground Law” is bad. Some are also taking sides in supporting it, and they are doing all they can in ensuring they maintain their safety. Stand Your Ground “Stand Your Ground Law “gives rights to individuals to protect themselves from any danger. In many cases, robbers have been terrifying individuals and residents because they have the guns and can control the law-abiding citizens. They also use their powers and resources to kill or injure innocent persons. With the legalization of killing for defense, individuals will have the rights of protecting themselves and moving away from danger (Cox 16). They will be able to confront their enemies who put their life in danger. Through this, the individual will be able to preserve his or her dignity. It will result to confrontation and abruptly minimizing risks individual’s faces. Many scholars have advanced the argument that there was no point of condemning Zimmerman after all, everybody aspires to live a peaceful life away from insecurity. Although Zimmerman might have violated the spirit of “Stand Your Ground Law,” it was upon the court to decide the fate. People have the right to protect themselves wherever they need to. Anybody is justifiable on self-defense. Individuals must also put their focus in ensuring their rights and safety when they are law-abiding citizens. They should not allow the criminals who prey for them to have the advantage and instead should defend. Therefore, “Stand Your Ground Law” is effective as it gives individuals powers to protect themselves against criminals who want to take away their lives (Cox 16). More so, there should be no debate on the use of guns in killing people. “Stand Your Ground Law” gives the individual powers to protect themselves when in danger. This implies that individuals should use the available means for self-defense in case his or her life is in danger. Because of this notion, guns do not kill people but people kill one another. The guns should not be victimized, as guns do not work on their own but controlled by people. People need to be scrutinized but not laws on guns. Somebody can secure himself or herself without the use of a gun. From this perspective, the “Stand Your Ground Law” is justifiable. It does not guarantee individuals to have guns, and it is not all about killing using guns. It is about self-defense when cornered and life in danger by criminals or any other form of danger (Cox 16). Because of this notion, “Stand Your Ground Law” is effective and do not require any amendment. Latest reports indicate that criminals are devising new tactics of invasion and law enforcement agencies are overwhelmed and are being murdered in the streets by recidivist offenders. Law-abiding citizens are forced to use baseball bats in defending their families or hockey stick and whatever item is available to them at the time of the attack. The downturn of the economy has also led to downsizing of many local police departments as others are eliminated altogether. Because of the increasing insecurity and low number of police officers, individuals can use the available means in protecting themselves against the criminals. “Stand Your Ground Law” is effective in bridging the gap between police officers and the law-abiding citizens (Cox 16). Before the law was placed, criminals were bridging the gap hence increasing insecurity among the law-abiding citizens. Therefore, “Stand Your Ground Law” is effective in bridging the police gap, and it promotes a self-defense among law-abiding citizens. Similarly, “Stand Your Ground Law” is effective since it protects the law-abiding citizens. Before the enactment of this law, law-abiding citizens who fought and injured the criminal elements became the target of civil law suits because of an injury caused. This was very expensive since one had to pay an attorney for a defense against the accuser and the government, which was there to protect the rights of every person. However, “Stand Your Ground Law” protects law-abiding citizens from such victimization (Cox 16). In the case of criminal attack on one’s family, the law affords an individual immunity from civil suits on the use of force for self-defense. When the law is looked at in this way, it gives individuals immunity from prosecution in events that he or she injured a criminal in self-defense. Therefore, “Stand Your Ground Law” law is effective in considering the individual’s interest and immunizing them against lawsuits. What is more important is that law-abiding citizens will have no legal duty to retreat in events of confronting criminals. This means that citizens can protect their property and family in life or death without fear of prosecution in court or applying the use of force to stop criminal acts (Cox 16). It does not permit or give room for criminal activities as it nullifies any legal defense on illegal activity. Despite the positive aspects of this law, it becomes bias owing to how the case was handled. The acquittal of Zimmerman was consistent with the racism, which is rampant in the American society. It will make people of color suffer and be killed as most of them are seen as criminals. It promotes stereotype of blacks and Latino Americans youth to be criminals as it also encourages police brutality on them. It was a blame game, which happened while the trial as the black boy was given a negative perception. During the Zimmerman trial, Trayvon Martin was blamed for wearing a hoodie that made them assume he was a criminal (LRP 12). That was insufficient evidence, and it was based on a stereotype. Additionally, the law is against the blacks since they are characterized by criminality. Most of the blacks live in the informal system characterized with criminal activities and other vices. This will make other races take advantage in the informal settlements and shoot using their guns in the name of self-defense. Being that “Stand Your Ground Law” allows for self-defense, people will kill others and they will give justification, as the law will protect them against prosecution (Bloom 120). More so, the blacks will suffer since the ruling of Zimmerman case showed how racism influences the rulings. Similarly, researchers show that a homicide has been on the increase since the law was enacted. Similarly, studies show that whites accused of homicide is not convicted whereas blacks accused are convicted (Bloom 67) . Therefore, “Stand Your Ground Law” is oppression to the blacks. Conclusion “Stand Your Ground Law” is a good law, which guarantees individuals self-defense. The increasing insecurity is caused by the criminals’ advance ways of escaping police traps. They take advantage of the weak system to victimize individuals. “Stand Your Ground Law” helps in bridging the police gaps since individual can defend himself or herself. It also immunes law abiding citizens from prosecutions and lawsuit should they injure criminals in the event of a confrontation for self-defense. More so, it allows individuals confronted by criminals not to retreat since they can use any available means of self-defense in protecting their family and property. This makes it effective in enhancing a self-defense as in the case of Zimmerman. However, measures need to be taken since it oppresses the black population to some extent. For instance, the verdict of the court on Zimmerman trial illustrates that blacks are stereotyped to be gangs depending on how they wear. Blacks are likely to fall victims since latest studies indicates that blacks are falling victims of homicides. Works Cited Bloom, Lisa. Suspician Nation. Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint Press, 2014. Cox, Chris. Should” stand your ground” laws be repealed. US News Digital Weekly. 2013. 5(30). 16 LRP. Gun control, “stand your ground” and self-defense. Bulletin of the League for Revolutionary Party. 2013. http://www.lrp- cofi.org/statements/trayvonmartin_081713.html Read More