The infamous George Zimmerman case has stirred the controversy around Stand Your Ground laws and brought these laws to the public light, becoming the subject of vigorous nationwide debates whether these laws should be repealed or not. Like many controversial legislative, Stand Your Ground laws have their critics and proponents, and both sides tend to make valid points in defense of their position. The goal of this paper is to show cons and pros of Stand Your Ground laws.
In Florida as well as 21 other American states, as stated by to the National Conference of State Legislatures, the above-mentioned laws are self-defense laws that relieve individuals of their “duty to retreat from an attacker before using force against them anywhere they are legally allowed to be” (Clark). While in general these laws do not use such a notion as “stand your ground” specifically, Florida together with nine other states has these words in its law. In Stand Your Ground law in Florida, particularly, it is stated that “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 force, 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” (qtd. in Clark).
The major con of this law, as its critics think, is that it essentially gives individuals with malicious intent a legal loophole to avoid criminal prosecution for killing someone if these individual state that they had to defend themselves. Eric Holder, the US Attorney General, is among those opponents of Stand Your Ground laws who believe that these laws will allow individuals to provoke others to attack them first and then, as it can be deemed self-defense and these individuals will not have the duty to retreat, they will be able to kill them without fear of getting prosecuted (Cooke). In states with Stand Your Ground laws, people will not have to think twice whether they should use weapons to defend themselves against the attackers or retreat because they will have the right to kill their attackers. Such violence will breed further violence. Criminals may use this law to cover up the deliberate and premeditated killing of people.
However, proponents of this law may respond to the above-mentioned claims of their counterparts as follows. This critique of Stand Your Ground crumbles under the weight of the argument that “In almost every state, if and when an individual enters into an altercation with the deliberate intention of provoking the other party into threatening him with death or injury, they lose the right to claim that they were acting in self-defense” (Cooke). All individuals have the right to liberty and life and therefore, they have the right to defend themselves. Those who attack people violate their victims’ rights to live, so Stand Your Ground laws legally recognize these rights, attempting to “tilt the balance in favor of the attacked” (Cooke).
Both, the opponents and proponents of Stand Your Ground laws have reasonable and sound arguments, but they need to find some middle ground regarding these laws that will satisfy both sides.
Works Cited
Clark, Korey. Nearly Half of States Have "Stand Your Ground" Laws like Florida 's. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013. http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/criminal/b/criminal-law-blog/archive/2013/07/24/nearly-half-of-states-have-quot-stand-your-ground-quot-laws-like-florida-39-s.aspx.
Cooke, Charles C.W. Stand Your Ground on Stand Your Ground. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013 .
Cited: Clark, Korey. Nearly Half of States Have "Stand Your Ground" Laws like Florida 's. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013. http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/criminal/b/criminal-law-blog/archive/2013/07/24/nearly-half-of-states-have-quot-stand-your-ground-quot-laws-like-florida-39-s.aspx. Cooke, Charles C.W. Stand Your Ground on Stand Your Ground. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013 .
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Civil Rights Outline Contents Introduction 3 42 U.S.C. § 1983 3 Monroe v. Pape & Related Cases 3 11th Amendment 4 Exceptions to 11th Amendment State Sovereign Immunity 5 The 11th Amendment and § 1983 7 Suits Against Officers 8 Bivens 8 Rejecting or Limiting Bivens 8 Official Immunity 9 Absolute Immunity 10 Legislative Immunity 10 Judicial Immunity 10 Witness Immunity 11 Prosecutorial Immunity 11 Qualified Immunity 12 Sequence of Analysis (“The Order of Battle”) 13 Appealability of the Denial of Qualified Immunity 15 “Reasonableness” 15 Qualified Immunity Comparison with Liability Rules 17 Evolution of Qualified Immunity 17 Governmental Liability 19 Official Policy or Custom 20 Four Incoherences in § 1983 Law 22 Remedies for What Wrongs? 23…
- 29388 Words
- 118 Pages
Powerful Essays -
First, I would like to bring to your attention that George Zimmerman was found not Guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin under the 'Stand your ground law' This law which is placed gives individuals the right to use deadly force to defend themselves without having to retreat from a dangerous situation However, When Zimmerman called 911 and explained to the police department about the suspicious of Trayvon Martin the police officer informed him not to follow yet Zimmerman continue to follow him after the dispatcher told him there was no need to do so Surely if George Zimmerman after calling a dispatch unit because he felt unsafe why did he feel the need to then follow the young teenager he is now inserting himself into what he declared to be a dangerous situation Knowing full well that he was armed, Zimmerman followed Trayvon in his car AND on foot meaning he left his car making the decision to bring his gun in order to pursue and confront someone Here you can see he was clearly wanting trouble. he was ordered not to follow him. But he did so he has no right to claim self-defense. He was asking for a fight and he got one, with a kid he thought to be dangerous. we can clearly see George Zimmerman was the instigator and placing himself into this position and then use the act of self defense to justify murder of an innocent unarmed teenager. I don't think he set out to shoot Treyvon Martin, but in the end, he did and that was his choice he was warned not to approach the boy and decided to neglect the warning and take it into his own hands he simply took advantage of an opportunity trying to play the part of a…
- 1011 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
The "Miranda rule," which makes a confession inadmissible in a criminal trial if the accused was not properly advised of his rights, has been so thoroughly integrated into the justice system that any child who watches television can recite the words: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney" Yet the 1966 Supreme Court ruling in Miranda v. Arizona remains the subject of often heated debate, and has had a great impact on law enforcement in the U.S.…
- 1557 Words
- 5 Pages
Better Essays -
Thesis: The Federalist Papers influenced the ratification of the Constitution by making some of their most important arguments, including the importance of being in a Union by having a Constitution, answering to the objections made by the Anti-federalists about separation of powers, and defending opposing arguments made against the characteristics of the executive and judicial branch as provided in the Constitution.…
- 470 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
I dissaree with the stand your ground law, becaues of the case of trayvon Martin. George Zimmerman says Trayvon Martin attacked him and shot him from self-defence( trayvon was an unarmed man). The Stand Your Ground Law states that if you are attacked or feel like your in danger, you had the right to kill that person.This is like saying if some one almost pushed me off the edge of a clif while running,i have the right to push them off that same clif leaving them dead. Although the stand your ground law help people defend them selves in life thretining situations, it gives a murderer a reason to kill innocent people.On the day trayvon martin died, he was on the phone with his girlfriend. she clames he saw a man following him and started to run. She also says he got away form a man,who turn out to be Zimmerman, but only temporaily Eventruly he stoped running, because he was close to the house he was staying in. when Zimmerman got closer to Trayvon, stated the girlfriend, Travon called out, "Why you following me for?" "I hear this man, like this old man, say, 'What are you doing around here?' " the girl said. The girl said she called out to Martin, asking what was happening, but he didn't answer. The next thing she heard was a bumping sound, followed by what might have been a scuffle. "I could hear it a little bit, 'Get off, get off,' then the phone just hung up," the girl said. This is some evidence that proves Zimmerman is guilty.…
- 732 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The Stand your ground laws originated from the general right to self defense, rooted in both natural law and the constitution” (fair). For example the laws on self defense vary from state to state, but in general there allowed to use reasonable physical force to protect there self from imminent or immediate physical injury, you can only use that amount of force that’s necessary to stop the threat of harm. For example, if you get into an arguement with someone and the other person lunges at one or threatens to punch one, they can protect yourself by fighting back. We want less people hurt or…
- 1726 Words
- 7 Pages
Good Essays -
The "Stand Your Ground" laws are laws that allow people to defend themselves with deadly force, rather than retreating, if they feel they are in danger or a serious felony is about to be committed. This law was present in Zimmerman's trial briefly and that was when he didn't get arrested right away. However, Zimmerman was arrested on April 11, 2012 because the police found evidence that proved that it didn't have anything to do with the "Stand Your Ground" laws. In the court, the lawyers for Zimmerman didn't base their defense on the law, instead since Zimmerman had no option of retreat, so therefore the "Stand Your Ground” didn't apply in the court of law. The Stand Your Ground law was primarily passed in Florida.…
- 458 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
In the United States, stand-your-ground law states that an individual has no duty to retreat from any place they have lawful right to be and may use any level of force, including lethal, if they reasonably believe they face an imminent and immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death. Anyone that’s being violated or assaulted against their will and is threatened for their life can use this law. In order to present a case in court one must you have to be able to present a strong case and have evidence to defend yourself. Not all states use or possess this law, but there are a lot that do. Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia are all the states that have the law in their state. There are a lot of states that use the law, but Florida has recently had the most problems occur with this law. Between the Trayvon Martin trial and Jordan Davis trial both instances where “stand your ground” took place.…
- 1178 Words
- 3 Pages
Better Essays -
The first “stand your ground” law was passed in Florida in 2005 and since then 21 states have followed suit by implementing a law of the same sort. Those…
- 1574 Words
- 7 Pages
Good Essays -
Although the stand your ground law is used to stop violence its use results in uneccessary deaths therefore O.C.G.A should be revised.the whole u.s was shocked when george zimmerman was founf innocent of killing 17 year old trayvon martin.it was thought of as a easy case for zimmerman since he had no strong opposing testimony.he also used the stand your ground law to prevent jail time.ever since this case there have been continous cases of the law where murderers get away therefore it needing to be revised.…
- 436 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Former Florida governor Jeb Bush (R) signed the Stand your ground law after it passed 39-0 in the state senate and 94-20 in the state house. This new law has changed the legal definition of self-defense for people that claim they are in fear for their lives. We now have situations like the case I referred to at the beginning of my essay. It was already hard dealing with our young Black men being profiled for the clothes they were, or looking like they do not belong in a certain part of town. Stand your ground now says if you think someone was going to do something to you, or if you start a fight but start to lose it is alright to kill a person and the law will back you up one hundred percent.…
- 566 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The criminal justice system of America is deeply scarred with racial bias. Crimes are being committed and, in turn, are resulting with innocent people doing hard-time. Thankfully, newfound methods of appealing court rulings are finding justice for these minorities; however, the results are as shocking as the crimes being committed. When it was found that the majority of successful appeals were of minorities, the true defects of the system was apparent. The minority community is being critically judged for things they’re not doing.…
- 1204 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
Use of force within law enforcement is used to control and try to contain the suspect or situation. The United States have gone through many problems with trying to find a middle ground and the correct use of force. There have been problems with the correct use of force even when weapons are not used like the unfortuante death of Eric Garner who was killed by a illegal chock hold in New York. Although, this is an obvious problem within the law enforcement in the United States, there has been no clear solution to the problem. Many have…
- 902 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
In 1985, the Supreme Court outlawed the indiscriminate use of deadly force with its decision in the case of Tennessee v. Garner. In this case, the court ruled that the use of deadly force against apparently unarmed and non dangerous fleeing felons is an illegal seizure of their person under the Fourth Amendment. “Deadly force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent escape and the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious injury to the officer or others”(Tennessee v. Garner, 1985). The majority opinion stated that, when the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend the subject does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, non dangerous suspect by shooting him dead. As a result of the decision in the Tennessee v. Garner case, policies that restrict the police use of violence have been implemented by some states. Others have continued to upgrade training in the use of force. The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center(FLETC) has developed the FLETC use-of-force model to teach officers the proper method to utilize force in response to the threat they face. Through demonstrations, lectures, and training scenarios officers are taught to assess the behavior of the suspect and apply an appropriate amount of force(Graves, F. and G. Connor, p.59). Policy making by police administrative review boards as well as internal review are also ways in which to control police shootings.…
- 313 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Terry vs Ohio was a case against in 1963 in which a Cleveland, Ohio Police Detective Martin McFadden noticed three suspicious individuals pacing back and fourth by a jewelry store. Thinking that the men were possibly planning an armed robbery, McFadden stopped and questioned the men. After a quick search he found a pistol in John Terry’s overcoat and a revolver in Richard Chilton’s pocket, the third man with the last name Katz was unarmed. McFadden arrested both Terry and Chilton with carrying concealed weapons. The judge Bernard Friedman found both men guilty and due to the suspicious behavior of the two men and the concern for the safety of himself and the citizens in the area, Detective McFadden was justified for conducting the search (http://www.acluohio.org/cases/terry-v-ohio).…
- 405 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays