Now it's the lawmakers' turn

Legislators must stand their ground on self-defense

  • Follow Editorials

A Texas teenager recently shot and killed a burglar at his grandmother’s house. Few would say he didn’t do the right thing.


So maybe we need a “Stand Your Grandmother’s Ground” law?

Let’s not.

It’s bad enough that the
nation’s series of “Stand Your Ground” laws are under attack since the George Zimmerman acquittal – including Georgia’s and South Carolina’s.

Despite the fact that the Florida law wasn’t even invoked by Zimmerman. And despite the fact that the law merely codifies a natural, God-given right to self-defense.

Where do the armchair Einsteins get the right to insist that someone who is being attacked has the obligation to retreat? That’s frankly none of the state’s business. And how does a person know he or she won’t be killed even in retreat?

One supposes that the experts on the sidelines are willing to bet your life on it.

We’ll say it again: You have a natural, God-given right to defend yourself. And while flight is often preferable to fight, you are under no natural obligation to do so. Laws to the contrary are wrong, morally and practically – and, arguably, constitutionally.

The irony is that the movement to recognize your right to stand your ground in the law has turned the discussion upside down. Opponents of the law want to put the onus and responsibility for the deadly encounter on the victim.

That’s not how the American system of jurisprudence operates.

Recently the South Carolina law was eroded when its Supreme Court ruled a stand-your-ground claimant must face a full criminal trial before having an appeals court consider his stand-your-ground claim. That’s a dreadful shame – and the South Carolina legislature should fix that, first thing next January.

It’s interesting, though: Lawmakers in nearly half the 50 states have passed such a law after careful deliberation, while many in other states have debated it. All the while, pointy-headed academics have written about it from their cozy dens and postulated about it in panel discussions – and yet they all expect you to process all their hand-wringing nuances and negotiate their little legal labyrinth in the blink of an eye while staring into the muzzle of a gun.

Thanks so much for the before-the-fact second-guessing, but no thanks.

Early next year, Stand Your Ground will be attacked in legislatures across the country, including Georgia and South Carolina – in an effort to strip away our natural rights, because of a case that didn’t even address the issue.

Stand Your Ground laws do not create a right to self-defense; they only recognize that existing right in the law. But once on the books, neither should we retreat from them.

We urge our senators and representatives in Atlanta and Columbia to stand their ground.

Comments (81) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
karradur
2986
Points
karradur 09/03/13 - 12:41 am
4
10
Yeah, the law is the law!

Like the Affordable Care Act and equal marriage rights!

They shouldn't be questioned!

KSL
186301
Points
KSL 09/03/13 - 01:43 am
3
2
Then I hope you have to face

Then I hope you have to face this.

Rhetor
1183
Points
Rhetor 09/03/13 - 05:46 am
7
7
factually incorrect

Homework, again, ACES, homework.

"The Florida law wasn’t even invoked by Zimmerman." Actually, it was. You could correctly say that Zimmerman's lawyers waived the Stand Your Ground preliminary hearing to which he was entitled. They did, however, use specific language from the Stand Your Ground Law during his trial, and the judge quoted the Stand Your Ground Law's provisions in his instructions to the jury.

pantherluvcik
628
Points
pantherluvcik 09/03/13 - 05:58 am
6
1
I have to say that like

I have to say that like everything else in the world there are people who abuse the law and use it in a manner other than it was intended. I think we need to have an effective gauge for when it is being abused and limit its use. There are legitimate cases where it is necessary to stand firm and not retreat. Sometimes running from an attack can get you killed.

seenitB4
128340
Points
seenitB4 09/03/13 - 06:31 am
7
2
Doesn't matter to me

I will protect myself & my family & don't really care what others "think".

corgimom
51451
Points
corgimom 09/03/13 - 06:33 am
6
3
"Recently the South Carolina

"Recently the South Carolina law was eroded when its Supreme Court ruled a stand-your-ground claimant must face a full criminal trial before having an appeals court consider his stand-your-ground claim. That’s a dreadful shame – and the South Carolina legislature should fix that, first thing next January."

This isn't about eroding the law, this is about attorneys delaying trials indefinitely. If you read the case that was under review, you would see that this is about a criminal who was trying to beat a murder rap.

Here's an article about that ruling- http://www.thestate.com/2013/08/21/2932847/sc-supreme-court-puts-some-li...

The Stand-your-ground law was enacted in 2006, the murder was committed in 2005, but don't confuse the ACES with that minor detail.

Bodhisattva
10899
Points
Bodhisattva 09/03/13 - 06:38 am
6
10
There's a big difference

There's a big difference between protecting yourself if someone is breaking into your house and walking on the street and being able to instigate a confrontation and blow someone away after you provoke them. That's the major flaw in so called "Stand Your Ground" laws. You have a right to protect yourself. That doesn't mean if someone walks on your land and tries to steal a gas can you should get to be the judge, jury, and executioner. Only if your life if truly in danger AND you didn't have any part in starting the confrontation, such as following and stalking an individual, calling them names, harassing or threatening them in any way, should it ever be considered. Laws such as this give cowards, such as Zimmerman, cajones that he doesn't naturally have. He wouldn't have had the guts to get out of his truck and follow Martin if he didn't have his fake cajones. He would have cowered in his truck waiting for the cops, like he was told to do. Since he had his store bought courage/cajones, he got out and followed, knowing that he could just blow the guy away, which he did. It leaves only one guy to tell the story. Very convenient. Nearly half the states have passed it? Check the wording. How similar is it to ALEC's model legislation? Did they even bother to retype it or just submit it on ALEC letterhead as happened in at least one state. Republican legislators, right wing billionaires, and corporations writing model bills and spending millions of dollars to create model legislation. Supposedly that's what our representatives are supposed to do. Instead, the right wing just feeds model bills written by corporate interests into the hopper. They brag that there are thousands of them. Ohio, Wisconsin, the GOP got in and rushed the bills through. Always virtually if not exactly the same wording. Written by Exxon, Coors, the Koch brothers. The same folks that donate to the right wing reelection machine. The buying of democracy so they can kill it and create plutocracy or oligarchy. It's virtually the same.

http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

seenitB4
128340
Points
seenitB4 09/03/13 - 07:02 am
8
2
Excuse me Bod...with this

That doesn't mean if someone walks on your land and tries to steal a gas can you should get to be the judge,

Well...what do you suggest then....maybe invite the punk in & have a cup of tea & "ask" just what his intentions are??
Too many good folks have been killed by trying to do the "giving" thing....sorry bud....or bod...I'm not that trusting!

seenitB4
128340
Points
seenitB4 09/03/13 - 07:04 am
7
2
also

I guess if someone is beating your head into the concrete you would give them a chance to retreat too...that is...if they haven't killed you.

Riverman1
120448
Points
Riverman1 09/03/13 - 07:31 am
9
1
"Instigates" an Attack

If someone is instigated in his mind to physically attack someone, he better be prepared to lose his cajones as happened to Martin. Lots of drug driven crazies take offense at the slightest things.

Riverman1
120448
Points
Riverman1 09/03/13 - 07:34 am
7
2
Evil Corporations Killed That Child

"Written by Exxon, Coors, the Koch brothers."

Ahhhh, I get it now. The evil corporations killed that poor little child, Trayvon.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 09/03/13 - 07:36 am
10
4
"There's a big difference
Unpublished

"There's a big difference between protecting yourself if someone is breaking into your house and walking on the street and being able to instigate a confrontation and blow someone away after you provoke them. "

Bod CLEARLY has never read the law, because it covers just such an occasion. But he never has let the truth get in the way of rhetoric before.

Little Lamb
56740
Points
Little Lamb 09/03/13 - 07:47 am
7
1
Behold

Bodhisattva posted:

. . . and blow someone away after you provoke them.

Provoking is in the eye of the beholder. All these stand your ground laws have provisions that do not offer protection if one is committing some other crime at the time.

Little Lamb
56740
Points
Little Lamb 09/03/13 - 07:52 am
5
1
Content

Bodhisattva posted:

Written by Exxon, Coors, the Koch brothers.

It does not matter who actually wrote it — what matters is the content. Does it ring true?

In fact, the most prolific writer of all time was that famous guy (or gal) Anon.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 09/03/13 - 07:58 am
7
4
You don't understand,
Unpublished

You don't understand, LL....if a rich person wrote it, it's invalid, because to the liberals they don't afford equal protection.

localguy55
5477
Points
localguy55 09/03/13 - 08:00 am
8
2
Leftist are where the true evil resides

Most left wing "Marxist" types hate the fact that there are freedom loving people in this country that are willing to pass laws that allow themselves to not only carry weapons but to use them against thuggs trying to harm them. But also, governments and leftists fear their armed citizen as well. Look to histroy. Hitler took guns from his countrymen and millions were slaughtered. So did Stalin, Mussolini, the Japanese Imperial Military, Pol Pot, the Chinese Commmunist, the former Soviet Union. All were and are Leftist regimes, and tens of millions of people have been slaughtered. This is what happens to a citizenry once disarmed by their government. This fact of Left Wing Atrocities has not been wiped from the history books yet. But make no bones about it, they are trying to hide the truth, and the leftist goal is to disarm, silence, and subjugate the opposition by any means possible. Research the History of the Leftist before it is erased and you will find where the true evil resides.

Topsy Krets
99
Points
Topsy Krets 09/03/13 - 08:44 am
4
8
You guys call the liberals
Unpublished

You guys call the liberals the "true evil" but do you listen to yourselves speak? I stalk these comments way more then I post on them. I notice a lot of you call yourselves Christians and yet the moment someone has even the slightest disagreement with you then they are less then human or evil marxists. Jesus would be SO PROUD to have you all as followers :-/

As for SYG/Zimmerman:

Even though Stand Your Ground (SYG) was not used initially by the GZ defense, the SYG principle was included in the jury instructions and one of the jurors even acknowledged they made decisions based on the jury instructions and SYG: So for anyone to say SYG had nothing to do with the case is NOT TRUE.

There is absolutely no need for Stand Your Ground. Self defense laws already exist. Stand your ground allows people to kill someone with no need to use reasonable judgement whether it is necessary or not. It was introduced by ALEC, backed by the NRA, paid for by both organizations that lined the pockets of the legislatures that proposed it and later passed it. In other words, YOU GET TO USE YOUR GUN MORE. Yippy for the gun manufacturers and bullet manufacturers. Bad for everyone else.

There is something SERIOUSLY WRONG with the Judicial System if someone (of ANY RACE, any party, etc.) can stalk a person, start an altercation, then when you find yourself on the losing end of a fight that you started, you shoot the person and ‘claim’ self-defense, allowed to go free and have your gun returned to you. The jury was made up of 6 women (5 white from the heavily racist town), no men, no Blacks, and it was NOT a jury of Martin’s peers - the Judicial System laws needs to be changed to make the system (jury selection and instructions, trial location, laws, self-defense, etc.) more equitable for everyone.

Topsy Krets
99
Points
Topsy Krets 09/03/13 - 08:43 am
2
7
Also none of your "stuff" is
Unpublished

Also none of your "stuff" is truly worth a human life. If you're willing to kill over a TV or something please stop calling yourself a follower of Jesus Christ.

t3bledsoe
14291
Points
t3bledsoe 09/03/13 - 08:52 am
0
6
SOOO good of paper to mention

"It’s bad enough that the
nation’s series of “Stand Your Ground” laws are under attack since the George Zimmerman acquittal"

Since "we were not there", how do we know that Martin WAS NOT standing his ground!! I mean, a lot of people "around here" speak as if they were there!!

KSL
186301
Points
KSL 09/03/13 - 08:55 am
4
2
Topsy, from which institution

Topsy, from which institution did you get your law degree?

KSL
186301
Points
KSL 09/03/13 - 08:56 am
3
2
Including you, Bledsoe.

Including you, Bledsoe.

Topsy Krets
99
Points
Topsy Krets 09/03/13 - 09:01 am
3
5
KSL, When did God die and
Unpublished

KSL,

When did God die and make you all his people to cast judgement?

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 09/03/13 - 09:02 am
7
4
t3bledsoe...why do you ONLY
Unpublished

t3bledsoe...why do you ONLY defend Martin when the subject comes up? Could it be his race? Why do you ignore ALL of the available evidence and replace it with "what if" situations?

nofanofobama
8269
Points
nofanofobama 09/03/13 - 09:02 am
6
1
Again we are arguing the

Again we are arguing the merits of the case..they have been well established in a court of law. T.3. You have stated your opinion repeatedly, and that is good. However they always go against the facts that they were presented in court under sworn testimony. I'm sorry you don't get it, Trayvon beating the day lights out Zimmerman is not the intent of the law stand your ground.

Topsy Krets
99
Points
Topsy Krets 09/03/13 - 09:03 am
3
5
And self defense laws already
Unpublished

And self defense laws already exist and existed WAY before SYG. You have every right to defend yourself if someone comes at you or your loved ones in a threatening way. You don't have a right to start a fight and then when it goes sour for you blow someone away and then claim self defense. If someone steals a TV...doesn't harm anyone...keeps running. You have no right to shoot them.

You people are the problem. You value "stuff" more then human lives apparently.

KSL
186301
Points
KSL 09/03/13 - 09:03 am
3
2
I don't bring religion into

I don't bring religion into my comments. Why do you?

Topsy Krets
99
Points
Topsy Krets 09/03/13 - 09:04 am
2
6
"Trayvon beating the day
Unpublished

"Trayvon beating the day lights out Zimmerman is not the intent of the law stand your ground."

You were there and saw the whole thing then? Why didn't they have you as a witness at the trial?

Topsy Krets
99
Points
Topsy Krets 09/03/13 - 09:05 am
1
5
"why do you ONLY defend
Unpublished

"why do you ONLY defend Martin when the subject comes up? Could it be his race? Why do you ignore ALL of the available evidence and replace it with "what if" situations?"

Why do you and everyone else admittedly jump to defend Zimmerman as if you were there and saw the whole thing? We're all human and we all have our prejudices. I admit I have mine. When will you admit you have yours?

KSL
186301
Points
KSL 09/03/13 - 09:06 am
3
2
And you know for a fact that

And you know for a fact that Zim started the fight?

t3bledsoe
14291
Points
t3bledsoe 09/03/13 - 09:07 am
0
5
Quote from editorial

"The irony is that the movement to recognize your right to stand your ground in the law has turned the discussion upside down"

Moderate liberals DON'T HAVE a problem with self-defence, it is letting a murderer go free after the fact that the victom MOST LIKELY used this law and was wrongly killed by using it!!

Back to Top
loading...
Top headlines

Woman found in river identified

NORTH AUGUSTA -- A woman was found dead Tuesday morning in the Savannah River has been identified as Suzanne E. Dyke, 61, of North Augusta.
Search Augusta jobs