'Stand your ground' controversy spikes in Trayvon Martin case

Hypothetical Situation:  A young man wanders around an area with which he is unfamiliar. It’s nighttime and he has somewhere to be but he’s not quite sure how to get there. His eyes meet with those of a stranger, wary of his presence. They exchange unfriendly words. Words give way to actions and soon the young man is dead. The older man killed him.

According to Florida’s ‘stand your ground’ law, someone who is being attacked or is facing an imminent threat may forcefully defend himself without the requirement to flee. Therefore, the older man, the one who’s still living in the above scenario, can invoke ‘stand your ground’ and pass the murder off as self-defense without facing any backlash. Many would consider this scenario an unfortunate encounter when an adolescent boy messed with the wrong man.

However, consider that this was perhaps not the older individual’s first run-in with the law. Would his claim of self-defense become less credible if he had a criminal history? What if this history included robbery, assault, or battery? Would he still be capable of cloaking himself in ‘stand your ground’ if he had one previous arrest? Two? Three?

Reporters at the Miami Herald uncovered the statistics behind who exactly was benefitting from ‘stand your ground.’

According to the Herald, “Nearly 60 percent of those who claimed self-defense had been arrested at least once before the day they killed someone… More than 30 of those defendants, about 1 in 3, had been accused of violent crimes, including assault, battery or robbery. Dozens had drug offenses on their records… Killers have invoked ‘stand your ground’ even after repeated run-ins with the law. Forty percent had three arrests or more. Dozens had at least four arrests.”

Legal experts like Kendall Coffey are skeptical of the controversial law. Of course, it is an inherently problematic law, because, as Coffey noted, “It would be impractical to try and apply the law differently between those who do and don’t have records. And frankly, it would be unfair.”

Obviously having a previous criminal record shouldn’t preclude someone from protecting himself when the situation warrants it. However, a guilty man should not be able to so easily invoke a law designed to protect the innocent, and run free.

“The legislators wrote this law envisioning honest assertions of self-defense, not an immunity being seized mostly by criminal defendants trying to lie their way out of a murder,” said Kendall Coffey.

Though the law would work well to protect an innocent person defending himself, it appears as though more guilty individuals have benefitted from its enactment. Legal experts like Kendall Coffey and a significant amount of Florida citizens would prefer that the law be curtailed. Time will tell whether ‘stand your ground’ has a future in Florida.