Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law
There’s been a lot of talk about Florida’s Stand Your Ground (SYG) Law since the death of Trayvon Martin. So I decided to take a look at this law (which approximately 20 other states have adopted). Welcome to the age of vigilantism.
Here’s what outsiders might fail to realize: In Florida, the shooter only has to say these magic words to basically get a Get Out of Jail Free card: “I feared for my life…I felt I was in imminent danger, so I shot in self-defense.”
This is what the Florida Legislature has wrought with the so-called Stand Your Ground Law, enacted last decade.
The law allows gun owners to shoot (and kill) in self-defense if they feel threatened. Before Stand Your Ground, gun owners had to retreat in such situations, unless they were in their homes. There was a high legal threshold to cross before shots could be fired justifiably on streets, sidewalks or in other public settings.
Pretty amazing. I’m sure it’s made everyone safer and hasn’t been abused. Oh, wait…
“Gangsters are using this law to have gunfights,” he said. “That’s exactly what this law breeds.”
In 2008, two gangs in Tallahassee got into a shoot-out. A 15-year-old boy was killed. A judge dismissed charges against the shooters, citing “stand your ground.”
“Before this law, we would have had a duty to avoid that,” Meggs said. “I should not meet you in the street for a gunfight.”
How can this happen? Answer: It’s the law. And it appears nobody is keeping an official body count in Florida except Arthur Hayhoe, executive director of the Florida Coalition to Stop Gun Violence:
No other group keeps tabs — not the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, not the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. That’s problematic, because even academic studies of the effects of the law rely on anecdotes.
And Hayhoe admits his count is incomplete. The Times searched Florida newspapers and “found at least 93 cases in the past five years in which the new law was a factor. Those are just the confrontations that made the papers.”
What is known: Reports of justifiable homicides in Florida have spiked.
For the first half of this decade, the state counted an average of 34 justifiable homicides a year, as few as 31 and as many as 43.
[…]
2009: 105.
The first six months of 2010: 44.
“I have always predicted that they would increase as more and more gun owners learn what they can do with this law,” Hayhoe said.
And what did law enforcement (ya know, the professionals) think of the law:
Drowned out in the debate were the critical voices of law enforcement officials and prosecutors. They worried people would become less sensitive to gun violence and death. They envisioned vigilantism.
[…]
Miami’s police chief made a prediction shortly before the law took effect:
“Whether it’s trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn’t want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house,” Chief John Timoney told the New York Times, “you’re encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn’t be used.”
And these situations are happening.
Four years later, Billy Kuch got drunk, so drunk that at 5 a.m. one day he stumbled to the door of the wrong house in a look-alike neighborhood and tried to open it, twice.
Before the “stand your ground” law, homeowner Gregory Stewart would have been expected to hunker down in his Land O’Lakes residence, dead-bolt secure, and call police.
With the law in place, he could use deadly force anywhere he had a right to be, provided he felt threatened with death or great bodily harm. He had no duty to retreat from danger.
Stewart left his wife inside with their baby and stepped outside, gun in hand.
Kuch put his hands up and asked for a light.
“Please don’t make me shoot you,” Stewart said.
Kuch, then 23, says he might have stumbled. Stewart, then 32, told police the unarmed man took three steps forward.
The bullet ripped into Kuch’s chest, nicked his heart, shot through his liver, in and out of his stomach, through his spleen, then out his back. He felt like his body was on fire.
Stewart, when questioned by deputies, began to cry. “I could have given him a light,” he said.
Shoot first, ask questions later. There are a lot more of these stories. But here’s the money quote:
In many instances where deadly force is used, there are two witnesses and one of them is dead. That leaves one version of events, from a person motivated by self-interest.
That sounds familiar.
Great post. What a reckless law.
Having accomplished all of its goals, the NRA searched around for new laws to champion. They cooked up SYG in order to continue to be able to raise billions from the pants pissing wingnuts.
If ever there was an organization completely and utterly devoid of humanity, it is the NRA.
what else do you expect from Florida? Excluding Palm Beach county and south, it is southern georgia.
Does anybody know what the standard for the feeling of imminent danger/fearing for their life is with these laws? Is it subjective (do you think THAT GUY felt that way) or is it the reasonable person standard (that reasonable person in that given situation would feel threatened too).
It’s like Bernie Goetz but worse.
V,
if you are white and the other guy is not white, you should consider your life in danger.
If you are not white and you are being chased be multiple white people with weapons, you are endangering them and they are allowed to kill you.
Pretty sure Rick Scott explained it that way.
Try this link, V.
I keep reading articles, but it seems to be what you think is a threat. It’s very vague.
It reminds me of a South Park episode. Uncle Ned explained that you could shoot any animal, including endangered species if you just shout “It’s coming right at us!” before shooting.
Those guys are always ahead of their time.
LOL!
What we need is a Zimmerman 2012 campaign video to bring him to justice. We could sell t-shirts, bumper stickers and yard signs. Perhaps we can get some celebrities to appear in the video.
A very good argument for never going to Florida. Like we needed more of those?
Does this mean that dueling is legal in Florida?
It would appear so… Just as long as they both feel threatened.
Also known as the Dead Men Tell No Tales Law.
Clever boys! Scary thought… you both have a point.
Funny how wingnut gun fantasies revolve around only the wingnut having the gun.
I’ll wager that the next time a woman of whatever race pulls a gun on a man of whatever race, in a deserted parking garage late at night, all the bedwetter liberal types will immediately jump to her defense.
And by the way, the definition of racial hate crimes also has the same sort of subjective standard, i.e., it’s racist if you think it’s racist. It really isn’t as simple as this-is-a-law-cooked-up-to-justify-gun-nuttiness-primarily-on-the-part-of white-males, and it really isn’t as simple as you-shouldn’t-have-reacted-as-you-did-the-guy-meant-you-no-harm (whites never get away with claiming they meant no offense with an ill-considered though hardly malicious remark); Trayvon would have been equally justified, it would appear, to have shot George in the situation. And to boot, he could have claimed he was defending himself against a bias crime! Both those explanations are too facile, and yet the liberals, though decrying gun ownership and use, would nonetheless, if somewhat reservedly, defend Trayvon in this instance. Think Howard Beach, NY, about 20-odd years ago; those young black men could have stood their ground and shot a group of white gangbangers menacing them and been justified under this law.
All I’m saying is don’t paint yourself into an ideological corner on this one, folks.
” Trayvon would have been equally justified, it would appear, to have shot George in the situation”
I wonder who would be in jail now if they both fired and missed?
Well it took a little while to get there but we finally hear the gun nuts favorite rationalization. The core of the problem is that everyone is not armed.
Zimmerman felt in “fear of his life” because a young black male was walking on the street. It could have been high noon with bright sun, the result would have been the same. Zimmerman will burn in Hell for what he did.
I actually thought that a gun nut complaining about the poor persecuted white man might not show up on this thread. Was I wrong. That’s what I get for not counting on a manifestation of the.stereotype.
@trgf “…the bedwetter liberal types…”
Isn’t it ironic that the guy who is so afraid of his own shadow that he simply MUST carry a gun everywhere he goes is accusing far braver folks of cowardice??
Part of the conservative mentality is that the big bad world is out to get you… and that culture breeds millions of abject cowards. The entire NRA is a just a band of cowards.
Is that what “faux” stands for? LOL! Hey… I’ll bet you wet your bed every time you hear a sound outside of your house before you grab for your guns…
Bottom line: Cowardice is carrying a gun for protection when there is absolutely no need.
These cowards who love to grip some hard cold steel are also the ones who usually have a big stogie sticking out of their mouths. Just saying…….. 😉
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/20/trayvon-martin-case-justice-department_n_1366101.html
The feds are in!
So let me get this straight. All us NRA supporting gun owners are just hotheaded trigger happy cowards who hide behind a gun?? Sounds like a bunch of liberal left wing crap to me.
So tell me,how do you veiw coked up,methed out,drunken gangbangers?
You are far more likely to shoot your spouse than you are to shoot the method out gangbanger that haunts your gun viloence fantasy life.
That’s a plain fact. Don’t shoot the messenger. Seriously, don’t shoot me. Thanks!
So tell me,how do you veiw coked up,methed out,drunken gangbangers?
Well… in Florida they are getting off due to this law.
And does anyone else think that commenter therealguyfaux meant to be therealguyfawkes? If so, that’s priceless.
“So tell me,how do you veiw coked up,methed out,drunken gangbangers?”
As no more, or less, a threat to me than you are. Frankly, you might be more dangerous, as you contribute to an organization responsible for loosing much mayhem on the country.
Everyplace has bad actors. Only America turns its good actors into bad actors by letting them buy guns. You are probably one of the 98% who’s no threat — but of course, there’s no way to tell. You gun-lovers all look alike to me.
Ron, when was the last time you encountered a “coked up,methed out,drunken gangbanger?” Please provide FACTS and links.
$1000 says he can’t.
The message here is clear lure your enemy, your spouse or any politician to Florida and eliminate the problem you may be having with them. Under this law you could shoot any pole at the rope line and claim you were in fear of your life regardless of what other witnesses my say.
@RJ “So let me get this straight. All us NRA supporting gun owners are just hotheaded trigger happy cowards who hide behind a gun??”
Yea. That’s about right. People who hide behind guns are cowards. Come on… Face the world like a man!
…but the joke’s on you. If your gun ends up killing someone, more than 90% of the time it’s killed family or friends… and those odds are just terrible.
The sponsor of the Stand Your Ground law in Florida was Rep. Dennis Baxley. He was quoted in an Associated Press story that the law was not intended to apply in cases like this:
“The “Stand Your Ground” law’s legislative sponsor, Florida Rep. Dennis Baxley, said it wasn’t written to give people the power to pursue and confront others.
“That’s not what this legislation does,” said Baxley, a Republican. “Unfortunately, every time there is an unfortunate incident involving a firearm, they think it’s about this law, and it’s not.” (latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/03/20/feds-to-investigate-killing-black-florida-teen-by-latino-man/#ixzz1pfLfEkEV)
Also, according to the AP, “Five years after Florida’s Stand Your Ground law was enacted, a 2010 review by the St. Petersburg Times found that reports of justifiable homicides had tripled, and a majority of cases were excused by prosecutors or the courts.” (www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/washington-to-probe-fatal-shooting-of-black-teen-in-florida/article2374759/)
I was curious about the intent of the law, since it apparently is not the ability to pursue and shoot someone, so I emailed Baxley. If you wish to do the same, his contact information is at http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Representatives/emailrepresentative.aspx?MemberId=4200&SessionId=72.
Well, if the law is having unintended consequences, which is to say legalizing cold-blooded murder, don’t you think the state legislature should get busy with reconsidering it? And wouldn’t it make sense for gun supporters to get out in front and push for it, since it’s a mess their side created?
@Jason330, @Dana Garrett, @Liberal Elite:
Of course, in your vituperation against me for having had the temerity to point out that this case is fraught with problems, you have failed to fairly meet the substance of what I was saying, which is that a law you may find abhorrent may be, in a given circumstance, one which would inure to the benefit of someone you would feel more ideologically at home with defending. And you also have not fairly met the question as to when it is appropriate to apply the “subjective standard,” and when it isn’t. But I should expect that if I’m going to post a comment on a clearly partisan blog.
What I was saying is that, as Thomas More observed in A Man For All Seasons, having lopped down all the trees behind which the devil might hide, where wilt thou hide when the devil turn upon thee? Give the devil the benefit of the law, that ye may have it when ye need it. Or is this concept too quaint and old-fashioned, like Sir Thomas’s speech?
Or are you really just haters, only ideologically Left, and none of this means anything to you? If you are, abandon the pretense of being reasonable and intellectually coherent, and allow yourselves the joy of that visceral type of hate which you seem to believe is solely to be found in your opponents’ psyches. You won’t wet the bed as much.
“Or are you really just haters, only ideologically Left, and none of this means anything to you?”
It is the height of irony that someone who speaks from a political ideology that allows murder, controls women, denies science because of Jesus, is afraid of Muslims, shuts the door to immigrants, and legislates against gays can call the people who oppose their disgusting views “haters”
Your right about me @Therealguyfaux. I am a hater. I hate racism especially when it is expressed so unambiguously as you did above.
Dana, they like to call us hypocrites because we demand tolerance but scold them for being racist….
Tolerating bigots was never part of the plan, guys. sorry. If you say or think things that society considers bigoted or racist, that makes YOU a racist. If you CHOOSE to refer to certain people a certain way, YOU are the one being unacceptable, NOT the people you offend. you don’t get a pass just because you say think you’re entitled to go around saying whatever you want with no consequence.