Few positives can come from the recent shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, nor can many positives come from the vast outcry surrounding his alleged killer, George Zimmerman.
We’d do well to remember, however, that Zimmerman is only the alleged killer, as our law dictates a person is assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
While the tragedy has already occurred, and the public interest and outcry have been vocal and swift, we can use the death of Martin to have an adult discussion about guns, violence and the so-called “Stand Your Ground” laws across this land.
“Stand Your Ground” laws, also known as Castle Laws, dictate that a person has justification in using force, sometimes deadly force, if they feel imminently threatened or witness a felony being committed.
The law, clearly, may allow for both good and bad deeds – one could claim “self-defense” even when it was unjustified; however, one could also use deadly force on a home invader or criminal committing a crime in front of one’s own eyes without fearing prosecution. This is clearly a slippery slope, but let us recognize one fundamental precept of the law: it is designed to protect people’s property and their rights to life.
It is not designed to smokescreen vigilantes, but rather to adequately provide cover for citizens who are protecting themselves.
The law has equal power to do both good as it does to facilitate evil – just as the duality exists within us all, the power to act for good or ill purposes.
When law-abiding citizens take up arms for their defense, the law serves its purpose, but when criminals who’d be committing crimes anyway try and use “Stand Your Ground” as a shield for crimes, they destroy the intent of the law. We need to make sure that the law is being implemented in a way that protects individuals while weeding out “bad guys.” One’s position on this law also derives itself from one’s belief in humanity; is man fundamentally good or bad?
If one believes what I do, that people are, at a basic level, good, well-intentioned and smart, then this law is a good one; it is used in the right instances to rectify a sticky situation.
Regarding the shooting of Trayvon Martin, I would suggest we wait to rush to judgment until every single fact in the case comes out. There are many conflicting stories, changing narratives and now, after all the media pressure, the truth may never even come out.The media control of this story has been astounding, to witness their admitted doctoring of 9-1-1 tapes and biased analysis of the incomplete facts and eyewitness reports.
Overall, the case is controversial, but the law itself should not be. Americans should always have a right to self-defense if provoked, and the state of Florida should not have this right taken away simply because of a case that has yet to be thoroughly explored and resolved.
