Giving Ground on Stand Your Ground laws

"Stand your ground" is a legal doctrine that is sometimes referred to as "the Castle Doctrine."  Before we discuss it in detail, let's make sure we understand what the law says and what it means.  Here in California it is Penal Code Section 198.5:

198.5.  Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or
great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to
have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great
bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that
force is used against another person, not a member of the family or
household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and
forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or
had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.
   As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant
or substantial physical injury.

In Florida it is:

The 2011 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI

CRIMES

Chapter 776

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

It's too long to post here.  You can read the full text here:  http://www.lawserver.com/law/state/florida/statutes/florida_statutes_chapter_776

Here's the important part. 


A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

   (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

   (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

* * *

 

That's the law as written.  This is a pretty good description of how the law is applied:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_your_ground

 

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder talked about these laws on Tuesday.  He said:

 

it is "...time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods."

 

"By allowing and perhaps encouraging violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety..."

 

"The list of resulting tragedies is long and — unfortunately — has victimized too many who are innocent."

 

He's right on all three, and other points he raised in his speech to the NAACP convention.  But the answer is not to do away totally with these laws.  They, and other laws, need change.

 

* * *

 

First and foremost, the laws on who can carry a weapon outside of their home need to be changed.  Unless a person is a member of law enforcement, the military, or a trained security guard; or transports large sums of money or other valuables as part of their employment; or is the victim of a documented threat on their life, no one should be carrying a weapon outside of their home.  Except of course to transport it to and from a firing range, or for a hunting trip.  I'm sure some people will think of other appropriate exceptions I haven't mentioned.

 

Every single permit to carry a concealed weapon that is currently valid should be reexamined by law enforcement.

 

Every single person who is issued a permit to CCW must undergo appropriate training in the safe use and handling of their weapon before the permit is granted, or reissued.

 

Yes, people who are going to commit crimes aren't going to pay any more attention to these laws than they are the other laws they intend to break.  But the time has come for our nation to move beyond being the second coming of the "Wild Wild West" where everyone had a revolver on their hip and disputes were settled on Main Street when two men stood there and we watched to see who was the fastest draw.

 

A person who illegally carries a gun and uses it in self-defense, outside of their home, will be guilty of a crime.  If they kill the person they are "defending" themselves again, the appropriate charge will be somewhere between manslaughter (involuntary or voluntary) and third-degree murder.  Knowing that if you shoot and kill someone while defending yourself outside of your home will likely result in you going to prison may deter some otherwise law-abiding citizens from "packing heat".

 

Every state should pass and enforce a stand your ground law, within the confines of a person's home.  We have the right to be absolutely secure in the place where we live, and to defend that home against any intruder.  Armed or unarmed.  California's law gives the presumption that a person using deadly force within their home was in "fear".  That's appropriate.

 

* * *

 

I've said it before, I'll say it again.  That Trayvon Martin died is a tragedy.  Even though a jury found him not guilty of a crime, this began with George Zimmerman ignoring the advice to not get out of his car.  Had he remained in his car, Trayvon Martin would be alive today.  Had he not armed himself with a gun, George Zimmerman would not have shot Trayvon Martin. 

 

He was and is a cop wannabe.  He lacked the training and experience and it shows in his decision to exit the vehicle.  Neighborhood Watch members watch.  They don't stalk.