Quantcast

Trayvon Martin's Killing Is Now A Murder Case. Should "Stand Your Ground" Laws Be Repealed ?

Che Guevara - Hero 2012/04/12 03:34:16
YES
NO
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Trayvon Martin's Killing Is Now A Murder Case. Should The "Stand Your Ground" Law Be Repealed ?

Stand Your Ground laws should be repealed because:

1. They require “law enforcement officials to prove that a suspect did not act in self-defense. [NYT] ” This burden of proof is a bridge too far on the presumption of innocence continuum. You cannot prove motive with confidence on the basis of circumstantial evidence when the other guy happens to be dead.

2. They protect shooters from civil suits, where the burden of proof for a civil judgement is lower. This means that when the state doesn’t charge no civil options remain to the victim’s family.

3. Many of the victims have been unarmed (12 of 13 studied in a recent Orlando Sentinel investigation).

4. Police chiefs do not understand the laws, and thus abrogate their duty to investigate fully in the first crucial hours following an incident, allowing vital forensic evidence to be destroyed.

5. Clueless gun owners, like George Zimmerman, who are inclined to ignore or misunderstand policies and regulations regarding use of a firearm, will falsely believe they have rights that they do not, in reality, possess.

6. They encourage vigilantism by codifying a set of assumptions that magnifies the real degree of threat posed by “suspicious” persons possessed of unknown intent. This effect is exacerbated by racial profiling, as well as outright racism, and further fueled by the now well-known “hoodie effect.”

7. They represent an attempt to “normalize” the use of firearms in situations where the standard of proof is that of “feeling threatened,” a standard that is not codified with objective criteria under the laws.

8. People under investigation for having committed a crime involving the use of a firearm already possess a presumption of innocence.

9. They serve to reinforce the brutality of American society, driven by a paranoid sense of threat experienced by some armed civilians.

10. They represent a license to kill. And, as I have said before, it’s not gun nuts who bother me, it’s nuts with guns. I agree with Chattanooga, Tennessee gun enthusiast Sally Peterson who told WRCB TV,"You can't approach a person and draw your gun. I just think there are too many wannabe cops.”


Read More: http://open.salon.com/blog/steve_klingaman/2012/04...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • aneed2know 2012/04/12 05:38:39
    YES
    aneed2know
    +9
    ASAP, there is no need for this law, there are laws on the books dealing with self defense.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Jeremiah Nomad58 2012/04/17 02:01:04
    Jeremiah
    You would be fun to debate if you ever got over the urge to insult people. You have knowledge on a number of topics, but the silly attacks tend to lower what should be interesting discussions.

    Good day to you too, my friend.
  • Nomad58 Jeremiah 2012/04/17 02:04:27
    Nomad58
    +1
    Silly attack are part of blogging ~ otherwise it would be like doing an online class & that's too much work.

    silly attack blogging online class work
  • Jeremiah Nomad58 2012/04/17 02:08:22
    Jeremiah
    OK, you get a rave for that one. Where do you find them?
  • Nomad58 Jeremiah 2012/04/17 02:37:47
    Nomad58
    +1
    First you open a new tab, then go to Google and select Images then type in the Subject. After that all you have to do is:
    - Click on the Image you want and it will go to it's webpage
    - Right click and scroll down to properties and click
    - Copy the Address (URL) from the popup box then close the popup

    - Return to SodaHead comment and click on "Add Photo & Videos"
    - Click Add By Image URL
    - Paste the copied URL into Image URL box & hit "Preview"
    - If image comes up Select "Add Image"
    - - if not go back and recopy the URL from image and repeat steps

    Properties
    Smiley
  • Jeremiah Nomad58 2012/04/17 03:02:32
    Jeremiah
    Thank you. I am obviously not a techie.
  • addie Che Gue... 2012/04/15 08:54:43
    addie
    If the state does it that means it is okay? Is that what you just said??
  • addie Uranos7 2012/04/15 09:03:57
    addie
    +1
    California, which does not execute people, has a death row that has grown to 700 people. Kill some of them or do not have a death penalty.Its embarrassing.
  • addie Jeremiah 2012/04/15 09:00:15
    addie
    Texas does NOT care about justice (or education or civil rights or women... ) that is clear, but that fact that they actually use the death penalty is one of the few things i like about them. Seriously. lol
  • Jeremiah addie 2012/04/16 16:50:28
    Jeremiah
    +3
    Even if they keep killing innocent people?

    We get the idea Perry is trying to run up his body count. He is already way ahead of Bush, but there must be a record he is trying for.
  • 2468 Uranos7 2012/04/12 17:45:01
    2468
    +3
    If it is used in reasonable situations but not for cover when you gun down a kid as Zimmerman did. I don't think the law actually applies to him bu that is for the courts to fight out.
  • Uranos7 2468 2012/04/12 23:37:27
    Uranos7
    +2
    No it doesn't especially since Zimmerman was stalking Martin wich is an unlawful act in itself. So it actually applies to Martin who was 'standing his ground'.
  • 2468 Uranos7 2012/04/14 15:53:38
    2468
    +1
    The law didn't work for Martin though.
  • Che Gue... Uranos7 2012/04/12 21:21:11
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +3
    Texas executes more poor black men than any other state in the union ? You call that Justice.
  • Uranos7 Che Gue... 2012/04/12 23:42:42
    Uranos7
    They had a trial and 'if you do the crime you do the time' or in this case 'if you live by the sword you die by the sword.'
    I am not against the death penalty.
    In cases where someone has killed multiple people or committed brutal and inhumane crimes; such as those 2 that raped and murdered an 82 year old woman, and beat her husband nearly to death. Let em fry.
  • Jeremiah Uranos7 2012/04/12 23:56:01
    Jeremiah
    +3
    The trouble is, lots of innocent men and women are dying while we "fry" that one monster.

    Many death row inmates are freed each year in Texas due to DNA testing and diligence of people like Barry Scheck. Many others slip through the cracks of the legal system. We have a governor who is proud of having killed 234 human beings.

    It is why I have come to oppose the death penalty. It doesn't do any good to exonerate a corpse.
  • Che Gue... Uranos7 2012/04/13 00:36:46
    Che Guevara - Hero
    +2
    The main problem with the death penalty is that is only carried out on the poor. The Rich are the only people who get the advantage of a justice system.
  • Jeremiah Che Gue... 2012/04/12 23:50:20
    Jeremiah
    +3
    And lots of white ones too. Cameron Todd Willingham comes to mind.
  • Uranos7 Che Gue... 2012/04/13 01:45:08 (edited)
    Uranos7
    +1
    Race of defendants in death penalty cases
    defendants race

    Race of Victims in death penalty cases:
    victims race

    % of persons who favor vs oppose death penalty:
    death penalty favors

    As you can see the majority of defendants in death penalty cases are actually white. The percentage of victims in death penalty cases are white by a vast majority.
    So saying the death penalty mostly affects black people is hogwash.
    Also since blacks comprise 35% of the defendants but only 15% of the victims that would mean they are killing more whites than blacks.
    60% of Americans support the death penalty.
  • addie Che Gue... 2012/04/15 09:09:37
    addie
    They need to kill more white men and even it up. Good point.
  • CAPISCE 2012/04/12 14:37:13
    NO
    CAPISCE
    NOPE
  • <3 Xina )O( Wolfe <3 2012/04/12 14:27:43
    NO
    <3 Xina )O( Wolfe <3
    +3
    I don't think it should be repealed, but it DEFINITELY should be revised and looked at.
  • findthe... <3 Xina... 2012/04/12 19:42:12 (edited)
    findthelight2000
    +3
    No amount of revising will stop the nut-cases with a deep-down desire to thrill at the chance to kill someone knowing that they can easily get away with it by claiming they "felt threatened". These unconstitutional laws must be repealed.
  • kudabux 2012/04/12 13:17:25
    YES
    kudabux
    +7
    As it has been said before, Stand Your Ground is vigilantism and license to kill.
  • sokoyah 2012/04/12 12:35:10
    YES
    sokoyah
    +5
    The proof is in the death of this young man because of the way he looked to an unqualified, self-centered, overly zealous community watchman.
  • 2468 sokoyah 2012/04/12 17:46:10
    2468
    +1
    There are more people affected than just this one case.
    With these laws the numbers of justifiable homicides have increased in the states that have these laws.
  • findthe... 2468 2012/04/12 19:47:35
    findthelight2000
    +2
    And none of them were justified.

    Some think these laws were put in by NRA and ALEC because the whites are afraid the blacks will soon take over as the majority in America, and they needed some kind of law that would allow for "legalized lynchings" to control their population. When we consider that all these cases ended up with African Americans as the victims, it seems that that could be quite possible.
  • sokoyah 2468 2012/04/12 20:55:10
    sokoyah
    +1
    ok???????
  • Nomad58 2468 2012/04/13 01:26:12
    Nomad58
    +1
    Which means an innocent family didn't have to go through the years of anguish of a trail and having to relive the dead of their loved ones. Sounds better to have the aggressive criminal die than a law-abiding citizen.

    BTW there were over 9000 firearm Homicides in the U.S. last year.
    Of those, only 212 were Justifiable Homicides (there's your double since 2005).
    (and no they were not all Black as the findtheLight would have it)
  • carolynb 2012/04/12 12:11:17
    YES
    carolynb
    +6
    The law shouldnt apply in this case, but the law makes it so easy for someone to kiil another person and say it was self defense. I believe that we should be allowed to kill someone if necessary if they break in your house or invade your property, but not when it comes to someone just walking down the street.
  • Keeping It Real 2012/04/12 11:16:28
    YES
    Keeping It Real
    +6
    All vigilantes laws should be repealed.
  • Jeremiah Keeping... 2012/04/12 15:49:45
    Jeremiah
    +5
    Exactly.
  • Nomad58 Keeping... 2012/04/13 01:30:05
    Nomad58
    Are you nuts. Vigilante Laws are used to prosecute Vigilantism which is not allowed in this Nation.
  • Keeping... Nomad58 2012/04/13 04:25:44
  • Nomad58 Keeping... 2012/04/13 05:03:55
    Nomad58
    No Never Did Drugs ~ Leave that to Loser Progressives

    "Vigilante justice" leads to 30 year jail sentence for Memphis man
    http://www.wmctv.com/global/s...

    Border Vigilante Shawna Forde Sentenced to Death for Home Invasion
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/minu...

    Just a couple off the first page. However, if you think Stand Your Ground is a Vigilante Law then maybe you are the one on one of those substantances.
  • Keeping... Nomad58 2012/04/13 06:20:15
  • Nomad58 Keeping... 2012/04/13 12:48:31
    Nomad58
    Come on Keeping,

    I never said I hate you. Just trying to educate.

    Nomad58
  • Keeping... Nomad58 2012/04/13 12:51:22
  • Nomad58 Keeping... 2012/04/14 02:52:09 (edited)
    Nomad58
    So you never even bother to read the Law and I'm the one clueless? RIght...

  • addie Nomad58 2012/04/15 09:20:58
    addie
    Do you mean because these laws define specific pararmeters for vigilantism, so they can also be used to prosecute would be vigilantes who go outside of these laws?
  • Nomad58 addie 2012/04/15 14:03:42
    Nomad58
    Yes they do.
    FL's SYG is statue 776. Refer to 776.012, 776.013, and 776.041(below). The Law 776.041 specifically forbids pursuit. That is why the writer of the law stated the if Zimmerman was actually in pursuit at the time of the shoooting the SYG Law did not apply.
    http://www.leg.state.fl.us/st...

    776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
    . . . .
    (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

    (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

    (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 09:35:29

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals