Thesis: Despite the ostensible need for Stand Your Ground laws as an effective means of self-defense, the issues and complications related to their implementation are far too problematic to be workable.
II. DEFINITION OF STAND YOUR GROUND LAWS
Evolved from English Common Law (Wallace, 2006)
Expansion of Castle Doctrine in Florida
Provides protections from prosecution if citizen defends themselves from “presumed criminal attack” (Wallace, 2006)
If person is not involved in unlawful act, and is attacked, they are given the right to fight back with deadly force (Roberts, 2012).
III. BENEFITS OF STAND YOUR GROUND
Stand Your Ground Laws permit people who practice self-defense to be acquitted for taking actions they believed would save their life
Extension of general right to self-defense
Rooted in Constitutional right to ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,’ 2nd Amendment (Fair, 2014)
Natural laws justify killing in self-defense
Stand Your Ground laws are simply extension of existing right to self-defense
Psychological justifications
SYG deters aggressors by offering possibility of deadly consequences
SYG encourages victims to stop cycle of criminal activity (Fair, 2014)
IV. DISADVANTAGES OF STAND YOUR GROUND
No empirical support for increased public safety from SYG laws (Laird, 2015)
Onus is placed on law enforcement to discern difference between reasonable fear and deadly force (Wallace, 2006)
Forensic difficulties in determining this difference
Moral questions about justification for killing
Utility of non-lethal ways to stop intruders
Justification of taking another person’s life in general
Possibility of shooter panicking and killing someone innocent/someone they know
Prevalence of guns in Stand Your Ground cases, significance from 2nd Amendment perspective
SYG allows for conflicts to escalate to the point of death (Megale, 2014)
Persons involved much more likely to stand ground on their issue, immunizing offenders from prosecution under particular circumstances (Megale, 2014)
V. SOCIOCULTURAL CONTEXT
SYG used to acquit Zimmerman (Fradella, 2013)
Role of race relations
Justice system unfairly punishes African-Americans at all aspects
Racial bias considered factor in Zimmerman’s profiling of Martin
Role of gun culture in America
SYG further encourages the use of guns in self-defense, which can lead to disastrous consequences (Fradella, 2013)
British context
Crime and Courts Act of 2013
Allows citizens to use disproportionate force to dispatch intruders
Amendments vague and open to uncertainty and interpretation
Both UK and Australian jurisdictions allow for complete defense of murder charges in cases of “disproportionate, but not grossly disproportionate force” (Dobinson and Elliot, p. 96).
VI. EFFECTIVENESS TO DATE
Stand Your Ground leads to higher homicide rates
8% increase in homicides in SYG-friendly states, despite lowered national homicide rates (Laird, 2015)
Racial disparities in SYG defense outcomes
350% higher likelihood of whites getting SYG acquittals for shooting African-Americans than white-on-white events (Laird, 2015)
Black person shooting white person is only found justified in 3% of cases (Laird, 2015)
SYG laws unlikely to be repealed
Near-majority of states passed various versions of FL’s SYG laws (Fair, 2014)
VII. CONCLUSION
Stand Your Ground laws ultimately do more harm than good, as they provide greater license and leeway for accidental homicides to occur.
Homicides have increased, significant proportion of SYG-related homicides involve white-on-black violence
Sociocultural factors make it easier for blacks to be killed without white shooters facing justice
Prevalence of gun culture on Stand Your Ground, increased willingness to kill because of defense laws
References
Cavell, H. G. (2014). Reasonable Belief: A Call to Clarify Florida's Stand Your Ground
Laws. Criminal Law Bulletin,50(1), 153-187.
Dobinson, I., & Elliott, E. (2014). A Householder's Right to Kill or Injure an Intruder under
the Crime and Courts Act 2013: An Australian Comparison. Journal Of Criminal
Law, 78(1), 80-97. doi:10.1350/jcla.2014.78.1.894
Fair, M. (2014). Dare Defend: Standing for Stand Your Ground. Law &
Psychology Review, 38153-176.
Fradella, H. F. (2013). Thoughts on the State V. Zimmerman Verdict:
Everything That’s Right and Wrong with the U.S. Justice
System. Western Criminologist, 5-8.
Laird, L. (2015). ABA opposes controversial 'stand your ground' laws. ABA Journal, 1.
Li, V. (2014). Report links stand-your-ground laws to higher homicide rates. AB
A Journal, 100(10), 1.
Megale, E. B. (2013). Disaster Unaverted: Reconciling the Desire for a Safe and Secure State
with the Grim Realities of Stand Your Ground. American Journal Of Trial
Advocacy, 37(2), 255-314.
ROBERTS, J. K. (2012). Deadly Force and the Right of Self-Defense
Stand Your Grand Laws. Forensic Examiner, 22(1), 89-92.
Wallace, P. A. (2008). Stand Your Ground, Revisited: Measuring Reasonable Fear. Forensic
Examiner, 17(1), 74-77.
Wallace, P. (2006). Stand Your Ground: New Challenges for Forensic
Psychologists. Forensic Examiner, 15(3), 37-41.
