Mediaboss Marketing

PALM BEACH COUNTY, Fla. - This week lawmakers in Tallahassee are discussing changes to the Stand Your Ground bill that is making its way through lawmakers.

"So, people who are claiming that they stood their ground in a shooting incident, normally they would have to prove that defense. the law would shift that burden to the prosecution which would make it very difficult to get convictions in shooting cases," said Attorney Gary Lesser.

Stand Your Ground became a hot issue in 2012. Seventeen year old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman. He claimed self defense.

"In that case, Mr. Zimmerman made all of these statements about why he felt compelled and threatened, so perhaps it would not have been a different outcome there," added Lesser.

But Lesser says if a new Stand Your Ground law is put in place, we could see different verdicts.

"If you have a marital dispute, if you are in a bar room fight, any situation. Someone pulls a gun and shoots they are going to claim stand your ground." He adds, "It will make convictions a lot more difficult to get, and we are going to see more people claiming the shooting they are doing are legally justified, and that's bad."

"We have opposed this and have been trying to make it more legally palatable than it originally was. We anticipate that it will pass and increase 'Stand Your Ground' cases as a defense," said the spokesman for the State Attorney's Office.

See the original post:
Local Reaction as Lawmakers discuss changes to Florida Stand ... - WPTV.com

The Stand Your Ground law is most widely associated with the Feb. 26 shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old killed in Florida by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain who claimed he was acting in self-defense.

But as a recent Tampa Bay Times investigation indicates, the Martin incident is far from the only example of the laws reach in Florida. The paper identified nearly 200 instances since 2005 where the states Stand Your Ground law has played a factor in prosecutors decisions, jury acquittals or a judges call to throw out the charges. (Not all the cases involved killings. Some involved assaults where the person didnt die.)

The law removes a persons duty to retreat before using deadly force against another in any place he has the legal right to be so long as he reasonably believed he or someone else faced imminent death or great bodily harm. Among the Stand Your Ground cases identified by the paper, defendants went free nearly 70 percent of the time. Although Florida was the first to enact a Stand Your Ground law, 24 other states enforce similar versions. Using the Tampa Bay findings and others, weve highlighted some of the most notable cases where a version of the Stand Your Ground law has led to freedom from criminal prosecution:

In November 2007, a Houston-area man pulled out a shotgun and killed two men whom he suspected of burglarizing his neighbors home. Joe Horn, a 61-year-old retiree, called 911 and urged the operator to 2018Catch these guys, will you? Cause, I aint going to let them go. Despite being warned to remain inside his home, Horn stated he would shoot, telling the operator, 2018I have a right to protect myself too, sir. The laws have been changed in this country since September the first, and you know it.

Two months earlier, the Texas Legislature passed a Stand Your Ground law removing a citizens duty to retreat while in public places before using deadly force. In July 2008, a Harris County grand jury declined to indict Horn of any criminal charges.

In Louisiana early this year, a grand jury cleared 21-year-old Byron Thomas after he fired into an SUV filled with teenagers after an alleged marijuana transaction went sour. One of the bullets struck and killed 15-year-old Jamonta Miles. Although the SUV was allegedly driving away when Thomas opened fire, Lafourche Parish Sheriff Craig Webre said to local media that as far as Thomas knew, someone could have jumped out of the vehicle with a gun. Thomas, said the sheriff, had decided to stand his ground.

Louisianas Stand Your Ground law was enacted just a year after Florida introduced its law.

In March 2012, Bo Morrison was shot and killed by a homeowner in Wisconsin who discovered the unarmed 20-year-old on his porch early one morning. According to friends, Morrison was trying to evade police responding to a noise complaint at a neighboring underage drinking party. The homeowner, thinking Morrison was a burglar, was not charged by the local district attorney.

While Wisconsin doesnt have a Stand Your Ground law that extends to public spaces, Gov. Scott Walker signed an intruders bill in December 2011 that presumes somebody who uses deadly force against a trespasser in their home, business or vehicle acted reasonably, whether or not the intruder was armed. Before the law was enacted, homeowners could only use deadly force if their own lives were at risk.

In April, 22-year-old Cordell Jude shot and killed Daniel Adkins Jr., a pedestrian who walked in front of Judes car just as Jude was pulling up to the window of a Taco Bell drive-thru in Arizona. Jude claimed Adkins had waved his arms in the air, wielding what Judge thought was a metal pipe 2013 it was actually a dog leash. Jude shot the 29-year-old Adkins, who was mentally disabled, once in the chest. As of May, an arrest had not been made in the April 3 shooting. Arizona passed a Stand Your Ground law in 2010.

In January, a judge in Miami tossed out a second-degree murder charge against Greyston Garcia after he chased a suspected burglar for more than a block and stabbed him to death. The judge decided the stabbing was justified because the burglar had swung a bag of stolen car radios at Garcia 2013 an object that a medical examiner at a hearing testified could cause serious harm or death. The judge found Garcia was well within his rights to pursue the victim and demand the return of his property.

Read more here:
Five Stand Your Ground cases you should know about ...

State Rep. Ras Smith

In 2012, Florida teen Trayvon Martin became a poster-child for the states contested Stand Your Ground law, which granted residents like neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman the authority to use lethal force to defend himself in certain situations.

With proposals for similar legislation popping up in states across the country, Black lawmakers are now fighting to ensure that more of these laws dont pass and that there are no more Trayvon Martins.

As the Iowa State Legislature weighed theenactment of a Stand Your Ground lawfor the 11thyear in a row, Democrat State Rep. Ras Smith hoped he might put a stop to the considerations of his Republican colleagues. Smith, who represents a portion of Waterloo, Iowa, that holds the states largest Black population, made his case against the contested measure early last month when he took the floor and changedout of his dark tailored suit into a gray hoodie and bright red headphones.

Its been stated that [HF517] was crafted in a way that applies to all Iowans equally, Smith said. While I agree that we are all created equal, I do not agree that all Iowans are treated equally or protected equally.

Like many other Black legislators, the Iowa Democrat believes that Stand Your Ground laws have disproportionately justified the shootings of Black people. To test the moral compass of his fellow lawmakers on the matter, Smith turned himself into a threat [they] can perceive every day.

My colleagues say they respect me, he told The Trace, an independent news org covering all-things-guns in theU.S. So, I wanted to show them what I wear on a daily basis and to ask are they willing to pass legislation that could negatively impact my life?

The answer to the question was a resounding yes. Smiths demonstration wasnt enough to win over the Republican-controlled legislature, as the bill was passed on April 13 and later signed into law by Gov. Terry Branstad, according to the new site.

For four years, between 2012 and 2016, every state that tried to pass Stand Your Ground measures failed, a result of Martins fatal shooting. Thats no longer the case, however, as Black Democrats power to influence legislation that directly impacts their constituents has diminished greatly.

The states that passed Stand Your Ground early on were low-hanging fruit, Christopher Mooney, the Director of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois told The Trace. As Republicans gain strength in states like Missouri and Iowa, the odds of it passing go up.

So far, 33 states have enacted some form of Stand Your Ground law, while13 states have pending legislation to strengthen or enact said laws, according to American Bar Association data. Defenders of the measure argue that it simplyprotects the right to self defense, but critics say it has increasingly protected people who shoot and kill minorities. A 2013 study conducted by the Urban Institute also showed that in stand your ground cases where the shooter is white and the victim is Black, homicides were 281 percent more likely to be ruled justified than if the roles were reversed.

If youre white and not learning the value of minorities, then youre reacting to your own narrow frame of reference, which is usually soundbites on TV about criminals and drug dealers, said Representative Ako Abdul-Samad (D), one of many Black lawmakers who opposed the self-defense law. If thats all you have to go on, you will react with fear.

Black legislatorsalsoattribute the resurgence of Stand Your Ground laws to race-based segregation, arguing that the lack of diversity in both rural and suburban communities breeds irrational fear and ignorance of people who look different.

Representative Janet Cruz, the Democratic minority leader in the Florida House, pointed out that what the disputed lawmeans to someone in northern Florida could be totally different from what it means to someone from Tampa.

Although someone in a rural area may see Stand Your Ground as a tool to ensure theyre able to keep their family safe, for many in the urban parts of Florida, they see it as a threat to their family, Cruz said.

Rep. Smith didnt respond to request for comment.

The rest is here:
How Black Politicians Are Fighting the Resurgence of 'Stand Your Ground' Laws - Atlanta Black Star

By Isabella Rosario

isabella-rosario@uiowa.edu

Earlier this month, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad signed a bill that foresees major changes to the states firearm laws including a new Stand Your Ground provision. Following the bills signing, Rep. Matt Windschitl, R-Missouri Valley, declared Iowans got their freedoms back today. But studies showing the ugly truth of Stand Your Ground laws may reflect the exact opposite.

Since Florida passed the first Stand Your Ground law in 2005, the controversial law has been adopted in more than 20 states. The provision authorizes a person to use lethal force in self-defense of any perceived threat. Specifically, the Iowa law states, A person may be wrong in the estimation of danger or the force necessary as long as there is a reasonable basis for the belief.

When George Zimmerman saw a black kid in a hoodie walking around his Sanford, Florida, neighborhood, he wrongly perceived 17-year-old Travyon Martin as a threat. Zimmerman shot and killed him in self-defense, and a jury found him not guilty of murder under Floridas Stand Your Ground law. This verdict incited heated protests nationwide; activists argued that Martins blackness was directly correlated to Zimmerman being found not guilty. And unfortunately, statistics dont indicate they were wrong.

An in-depth report from an American Bar Association task force found Stand Your Ground laws have done nothing to decrease violent crime rates in fact, they incentivize people to shoot because they believe they will be legally protected. And if theyre a white person shooting a black person, they probably will be. A study from the Urban Institute found white-on-black homicides were 281 percent more likely to be justified by courts than black-on-white homicides. In states with Stand Your Ground laws, this gap only increases.

This data become even more troubling when you consider how black people, especially black men, are often dehumanized by society. The shooting of black teenager Mike Brown by white police Officer Darren Wilson is a prime example of this. Despite the fact that Wilson and Brown were of comparable size, Wilson described himself as a 5-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan. One study included in the task-force report determined that just showing a person a black face made that person more likely to believe that person had a weapon. Furthermore, the report indicated this biased fear of African Americans becomes more dangerous when there is no legal provision to constrain the use of force. Stand Your Ground laws only enable this reckless, deadly behavior.

The NRA likes to tout the phrase The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But the problem with Stand Your Ground laws is that they enable good guys to shoot bad guys before even determining if their target is a real threat. If the bad guy they end up killing turns out to be an unarmed civilian such as Martin, especially if the unarmed civilian is black like Martin, they can escape a guilty verdict claiming they had reasonable basis. Stand Your Ground laws arent about legalizing self-defense in life-threatening situations. Theyre about people especially white people having the right to take an innocent persons life, then get away with it by claiming self-defense.

Stand Your Ground laws have been statistically proven to encourage impulsive shooting, fuel racial bias, and not actually make anyone safer. The provisions granted in the Iowa law will only incentivize more violence, especially against communities of color. Branstad may be proud that this legislation makes Iowa one of the most pro-Second Amendment states in the country, but he shouldnt be proud that he has signed a bill that will inevitably jeopardize the safety of Iowans.

See more here:
Rosario: Stand Your Ground bad - The Daily Iowan

On July 12, 2013, the Honorable Judge Debra S. Nelson addressed the jury in the second-degree murder trial ofGeorge Zimmerman in Florida and read her instructions to the jury (pdf). They included the following:

In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony ...

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty.

Nelsons jury instructions mirrored Florida Statute 776.012, which describes the justifiable use of force:

(1) A person is justified in using or threatening to use force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the others imminent use of unlawful force. A person who uses or threatens to use force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat before using or threatening to use such force.

(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

The law was based on a legal precept called the castle doctrine, which does not require a person with a gun to retreat in the face of danger, but most people know the law by its more famous nickname: Stand your ground.

The jury eventually acquitted Zimmerman of the murder of Trayvon Martin, and for three years, no state could pass a version of the law. It was politically toxic in the age of Black Lives Matter, and every state that tried to pass similar legislation failed.

But in the last few months, under Republican legislatures, Stand your ground has made a quiet resurgence. In September, Missouri became the first state to enact it since Trayvons death. Iowa passed a sweeping gun measure April 13 that lets children handle firearms, allows citizens to sue cities that have gun-free zones and makes Stand your ground state law.

Now Florida is back at it again. According to the New York Times, the Sunshine State is set to strengthen its law by shifting the responsibility of proving immunity from the defendant to prosecutors. In shortin Florida, if you kill another person with a gun and claim that you were defending yourself, it is up to the state to prove that your use of force was not justified.

While this may seem like the usual conservative political gambit, there is something larger than the singular murder of Trayvon Martin at issue. Stand your ground laws have repeatedly been shown to be biased. In fact, study after peer-reviewed study on the issue shows that Stand your ground laws result in more homicides, and there is no doubt who benefits. Research shows that white men who shoot black men are more likely to benefit from such laws, which means that the resurrection of the castle doctrine will most likely mean that more white men will get away with killing black men.

In 2012 John Roman of the Urban Institutes Justice Policy Center conducted a study of Stand your ground data using FBI statistics. He found that states with Stand your ground laws reflect the same disparities in homicide convictions found in states without such lawswith one significant exception:

Whites who kill blacks in Stand Your Ground states are far more likely to be found justified in their killings. In non-Stand Your Ground states, whites are 250 percent more likely to be found justified in killing a black person than a white person who kills another white person; in Stand Your Ground states, that number jumps to 354 percent.

Romans findings were still deemed inconclusive because he used data from 2005 to 2009 and had a very low number of comparable white-on-black homicides in Stand your ground states to compare (25). So Roman doubled back and completed a full, more thorough study and found that when the shooter is black, the homicide is justified in about 1 percent of cases in Stand your ground states. When a white person kills a black person in a Stand your ground state, the murder is justified 17 percent of the time (versus 11 percent in states without such laws).

More from Roman:

Finally, I tested whether these racial disparities remained when we controlled for whether the victim and perpetrator were strangers, the state where the incident occurred, the year of the homicide, and whether the shooting occurred in a SYG state. The racial disparities remain large and significant. In fact, the odds that a white-on-black homicide is ruled to have been justified is more than 11 times the odds a black-on-white shooting is ruled justified.

In another Stand your ground study that looked solely at cases in Florida, researchers discovered that between 2005 and 2013, Florida juries were twice as likely to convict the perpetrator of a crime against a white person as they were to convict in a crime against a person of color. These results are similar to pre-civil rights era statistics, with strict enforcement for crimes when the victim was white and less-rigorous enforcement with the victim is non-white, the report said.

The data is clear: Stand your ground laws benefit white people who kill blacks.

Maybe youve heard the story of Trevor Dooley, the 69-year-old man who said he was protecting his neighborhood, like another certain neighborhood watchman. Dooley went across the street to shoo away a skateboarder and got into a fight with David James, who was 28 years younger, 6 inches taller and 70 pounds heavier.

Dooley pulled out his gun, James lunged for it, they wrestled on the ground and James ended up dead. It sounds eerily similar to the Zimmerman case, except that a judge denied Dooley the use of the Stand your ground defense. There is one other big difference in the Dooley case: James, the dead man, was white, and Dooley was black.

This illustrates the larger point of the racially biased Stand your ground law. Despite all the statistical and mathematical evidence, America has yet to answer one simple scientific question:

Which weighs more: a dead black body or a little white lie?

Michael Harriot is a staff writer at The Root, host of "The Black One" podcast and editor-in-chief of the daily digital magazine NegusWhoRead.

Follow this link:
States Are Quietly Resurrecting a Law That Makes It Easier to Kill Blacks - The Root