Stand Your Ground - Essay Example

The Argument About “Stand Your Ground” Laws The world we live in seems to be growing more violent as the days pass. It is no longer uncommon to see news about mass murders, sniper shootings, and altercations that escalated into a loss of life on the nightly news. The dangers of our mixed race society seems to be reaching a boiling point and it is important that each person be given ample space within which to defend his life when he feels that it is being threatened. It is with that situation in mind that Florida passed its “Stand Your Ground Law” back in 2006. It was a law that was meant to protect the victim from the attacker rather than protect the attacker from the victim under their then Existing “Castle Doctrine”. The problem, is that the law seems to have been misused by some Floridians like George Zimmerman against Trayvon Martin. According to David Simmons, co-author of the state bill in his opinion article titled “Without Stand Your Ground, Attacker can Have Advantage”, the Castle Doctrine was revised to become the “Stand Your Ground Law” in order to prevent such incidents from happening. Under the doctrine, the victim, who, if carrying a gun, was first expected to flee the scene and try to de-escalate the situation before opening fire. The problem with that scenario, is that the victim more often than not does not have a chance to run away from the attacker. Hence the need to revise the law. I fully understand and support the “Stand Your Ground Law” because I have to live every day of my life in a world where I never know who is going to attack me. One can never be too sure as to when a situation might call for a “Stand Your Ground” response. It is always nice to know that I can defend myself whenever necessary without having to open myself to an all out attack in the first place. Sen. Simmons had his heart in the right place when he agreed to co-author this bill together with Rep. Dennis Baxley in 2005. I am quite sure that the law has saved many innocent lives since it was enacted into law in 2006. Even the safety measures to ensure that the law would not be used to turn Florida into a Wild West state were truly logical. That is why it saddens me that there are people who oppose the law simply because it has become tainted with racial discrimination accusations. The Trayvon Martin case has placed the “Stand Your Ground” law in the national spotlight because the person who was shot happened to be a young African American and the shooter, was a White male. The law is not as simple as “shoot first, ask questions later”, rather the safety measures that were set into place would actually hinder the shooter in the event of a trial. After all, it is never easy to plead self-defense when the alleged attacker ends up dead on the pavement. But, with the help of a properly investigated case that is tried with an untainted and non-bias jury, the truth is sure to emerge. That is why I cannot understand why there are groups like The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (Cohen, Adam “The Growing Movement to Repeal Stand Your Ground Laws”) are advocating the repeal of the “Stand Your Ground” and other similar laws in other states. I understand that there may be a spike in gun shooting incidences across various states that have such laws but, who is to say that the law was abused and used by someone simply to inflict harm on another person? With the growing number of loose firearms in our country, I believe it is only proper that such laws that protect the potential victim from the loss of his or her own life remain in full effect where ever possible. The police can only do so much and when faced with a real time fit or flee response situation, dialing 911 and waiting for the police to arrive is not necessarily an option. It was New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg who said that the National Rifle Association was backing the “Stand Your Ground” laws for a selfish reason, vigilantism. he claimed that: ... the NRA’s leaders weren’t interested in public safety. They were interested in promoting a culture where people take the law into their own hands and face no consequences for it. Let’s call that by its real name: vigilantism. (qtd. in Dionne Jr. “Why the NRA Pushes Stand Your Ground”) Let us assume for a minute that the NRA is really promoting vigilantism among the states. Believe that the NRA is doing this so that they can increase their membership and sell more guns. The reality of our situation is that local security is almost a thing of the past. What with the constant budget cuts and downsizing of the police force in various states in order to funnel their state budget into other nonsensical opportunities, it is virtually impossible to find a police officer when you need one or get 911 to dispatch a patrol car to your location before the predicament you are in escalates into a full blown, perhaps physical altercation. The reality of our current crime situation is that we do not have the proper number of law enforcers to actually help us feel safer in the streets and in our homes. That is the argument that was made within the opinion paper of state Sen. Simmons and that is why there is a need for the “Stand Your Ground Laws”. I agree with him when he insinuates that it is totally foolish for a person, who is already under threat of physical harm, and who knows that he has no way out of a dangerous situation, to try to flee from his assailant or attacker. He or she would be dead before even reaching the door. Those who oppose the law do so because they feel that it muddles up the separation of powers between civilians and the police force. Again I have to point out, if we had enough police officers to protect the population of the state, then the Castle Doctrine would not have needed to be revised. I understand that the courts have always recognized the right of an individual to self - defense (Dionne Jr, E.J. “Why the NRA Pushes Stand Your Ground”). But by having the “Stand Your Ground Law” to back up your defense, it makes it easier to prove your case and avoid a jail sentence as opposed to simply using a self-defense plea. In this instance, the attacker is put on trial and in a position to prove that he was not trying to harm the victim instead of the other way around. I really cannot understand the whole issue that has stemmed from the Trayvon Martin case and the “Stand Your Ground Law”. The law after all, was simply an extension and modification of the “Castle Doctrine” that nobody had any problem with in the past. The doctrine already allowed one to meet an attacker with full force provided that the person can prove he was in a place that he had a right to be in and that the situation was not provoked. Why then did the expanded version of the law become so hotly debated? I truly believe that it would have not become such an issue if the person who was shot was not an African American. In my honest opinion, the Trayvon Martin case was never about the law but rather a question of racism. Although Sen. Simmons refuses to make any pronouncements about the case attached to the “Stand Your Ground” law at the moment, I believe just like him, that the law will be vindicated in the end. Maybe not in the Trayvon Martin case, but another case in the future. That is because the “Stand Your Ground” law was meant to save lives and that is what it is truly doing. Works Cited Cohen, Adam. “The Growing Movement to Repeal Stand Your Ground Laws”. U.S. Time. 16 Apr. 2012. Web. 16 Apr. 2012. Dionne Jr., E.J. “Why the NRA Pushes Stand Your Ground”. 16 Apr. 2012. Opinions. The Washington Post. Web. 16 Apr. 2012. Simmons, David. “Without Stand Your Ground , Attacker can Have Advantage”. Florida House. Orlando Sentinel. 15 Apr. 2012. Web. 15 Apr. 2012. URLS: Cohen: http://ideas.time.com/2012/04/16/the-growing-movement-to-repeal-stand-your-ground-laws/?xid=gonewsedit Dionne Jr. : http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-the-nra-pushes-stand-your-ground/2012/04/15/gIQAL458JT_story.html Simmons: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-15/opinion/os-ed-stand-your-ground-law-041512-20120413_1_innocent-victims-deadly-force-castle-doctrine Read More