Time to rethink stand your ground

As of this last Monday, the state of Florida had not yet arrested the alleged killer of 17 year-old Trayvon Martin, 28 year-old George Zimmerman. That decision on whether or not to arrest Zimmerman will come from State Attorney Angela B. Corey instead of a grand jury, however.

Race and Florida’s stand your ground law have both been cited as possible factors in the killing of Martin. The alleged shooter, George Zimmerman allegedly had a history of using what many consider to be racial profiling in his work as a member of his neighborhood watch program, a racial profile that 17 year-old Trayvon Martin just happened to fit.

But there is the vagueness of the stand your ground law to consider: That part of the law being used as a defense by Zimmerman reads “A person… not engaged in an unlawful activity and… attacked…where they have a right to be have no duty to retreat and have the right to stand their ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm….”.

In this instance, both Zimmerman and Martin had a right to be in that Sanford neighborhood, and from the evidence made public so far, both could claim they were the one being attacked. The fact does remain, though, that Zimmerman was the only one of the two who was armed.

But what if Martin had also been armed? Martin’s girlfriend is on record as saying that Martin knew he was being followed by a large, unknown male. Anyone who’s been followed in any city knows the fear Martin must have felt.

In such a situation, wouldn’t it have been reasonable to believe the stalker was planning on attacking Martin? So, if Martin had been armed, and became convinced that, unless he used deadly force against his stalker, his own life might be forfeit, then the situation might have been reversed, with Zimmerman dead and Martin the alleged killer, and seemingly also covered by this law.

So the next question to be answered: How would the Sanford Police Department have treated a young African American who’d just shot a 28 year-old member of a neighborhood watch program, especially if that young man had been wearing a hoodie? Would they have refused to arrest him if he’d claimed that he was covered by the stand your ground law?

Let’s just agree that no one knows for sure what the Department’s reaction would have been; but I don’t think too many people would believe Martin would have been released and given his gun back.

Still, this law seems geared towards provoking a reaction by people who might otherwise not have resorted to deadly force. Since this law was enacted in 2005, so-called justifiable homicides have increased by 200%.

One critic of the law in Florida law is Sen. Chris Smith, a Democrat who represents Broward and Palm Beach counties. One important change Smith would make would prohibit the use of stand your ground where the shooter has provoked a confrontation, as was allegedly done by Zimmerman.

A more certain way to keep stand your ground from being a focal point in such cases, though, would be to have the police conduct a more professional investigation after every such shooting occurs. It’s when questions are left unanswered, after all, that allegations of injustice arise.