Stand Your Ground Law Irrelevant to Trayvon Martin Shooting.
By Bobby McDonald
The Trayvon Martin shooting is currently making headlines across the nation. This tragic story has caused the “stand your ground” laws to come under attack from anti-gun zealots in the media, the government, and elsewhere. The media and others are reporting that the stand your ground law must be changed; that it is a “license to kill.” The Pasco police department cites the law as the reason George Zimmerman has not been arrested. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Claims that the Florida law is a “license to kill” are either uninformed opinions or flat out lies. The law reads, “(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with forces, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. (Florida Statutes, Section 776.012).”
Basically, this law means that while a person is someplace he or she is legally allowed to be, such as a park, grocery store or anywhere other than another person’s private property, and are attacked, then that person is allowed to defend his or her life or the lives of others.
The second part of the law outlines provisions in cases of violent home invasions and carjacking. Since this shooting did not take place in a home or car, it does not apply.
There are currently two conflicting versions of the events in the Martin shooting. Some witnesses report Zimmerman as the initiator of violence while other witnesses report Martin as the attacker. Either way, the Stand Your Ground law does not apply.[This may be why the special prosecutor indicted Zimmerman on April 11. -Ed.]
Let’s examine the two conflicting versions of events put forth by witnesses and see how the law in question pertains to both. If Zimmerman was the attacker, the law provides no protection for him as the law only covers the victim. If Trayvon was the aggressor and was, as some eye witnesses report, straddling Zimmerman while attacking him, Zimmerman had no ability to retreat. Therefore, the law does not apply. What does apply is a completely different law. The Florida statute which is relevant is statute 776.032, which states that a law enforcement agency “may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful” (Florida Statutes Section 776.032). This Florida statute simply restates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which forbids arrests without probable cause. The Pasco Police Department is blaming the wrong law! Former Senator Durell Peaden and Representative Dennis Baxley, two lawmakers that helped craft the law, said that it did not apply to the Martin shooting. “There’s nothing in the Florida law that allows him to follow someone with a d*** gun,” said Peaden. Peaden went on to say, “He has no protection under my law.”
The right to defend yourself from an attacker is self-evident. No one needs to explain to me that, if attacked, I can fight to save my life! This is a natural right of all living beings. Would anyone question a dogs’ right to bite his attacker when attacked by another animal? Or should people now be protesting gazelles for kicking the lions trying to eat them? Of course not, no reasonable person would witness an animal, or human, being attacked and then blame them for fighting back. Yet, this is exactly what happens to many victims of violent crime who defend themselves in states which do not have stand your ground provisions. They regularly face imprisonment and civil law suits simply for defending their lives! Do humans have fewer rights than animals? Roughly half of U.S. states have provisions similar to Florida’s stand your ground law. In states which have no stand your ground provision, a person has a “duty to retreat when attacked if able to do so.” This may sound reasonable to some, but let’s take a closer look.
What does, “duty to retreat” really mean? It means that if a burglar breaks down your front door, you have a legal responsibility to run out the back door. If, while in your car, a criminal threatens violence to steal your car, you must give him the keys, even if you are armed, and hope he doesn’t kill you anyway. Does that sound just?
I make no judgment about the Trayvon Martin shooting. I don’t know yet if George Zimmerman should go to jail or not. It has yet to be proven which of them was the initiator of violence. I am waiting for the forensic autopsy report to come out. It should answer at least one question. Was Trayvon on top of Zimmerman when he was shot? The trajectory of a bullet fired up into someone sitting on a persons’ chest will be vastly different from the trajectory of a bullet fired from another position. Why has the media not mentioned that? If the bullet trajectory does not match Zimmerman’s account, and the accounts of witnesses who corroborate his account, then I will be the first to call for his arrest. I do, however, without apology, believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
The real question is this, what type of world do you want to live in? Either, a world where the natural right of all persons to defend their lives from those that would do them violence is acknowledged by the law, or a world where victims become criminals for not allowing themselves to be hurt or killed by their assailants? I prefer to live in a world where people are not jailed for defending their lives. A world where laws, like the stand your ground law, focus the moral spotlight where it belongs, not on the victim of, but rather on the initiators of violence. Those calling for the repeal of the stand your ground laws are, presumably out of ignorance of the law, calling for the repeal of people’s natural right to a self-defense. The choice is yours.
Sources.
Kopel: Debunking the ”stand your ground” myth. David Kopel, The Washington Times.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/apr/2/debunking-the-stand-your-ground-myth/
“Stand Your Ground” Authors Say Law Doesn’t Apply To Trayvon Martin Shooter”. NBC Miami. http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Stand-Your-Ground-Authors-Say-Law-Doesnt-Apply-To-Trayvon-Martin-Shooter-143684626.html