Self-defense claim rings hollow in Martin case
In the recent weeks, the debate over “stand your ground” laws has taken over the national stage after Trayvon Martin of Sanford, Fla., was fatally shot while talking on his cellphone and walking home from 7-11 in February. Martin was shot by a neighborhood watchman, George Zimmerman, who police claim cannot be arrested because of his use of “justifiable” force.
The public outcry over this issue is extremely justifiable. The fact that a man can walk down the road, shoot someone with no witnesses and then claim he feared for his life should terrify all of us, especially because these laws are on the books in 23 states — including South Carolina.
The “stand your ground” laws were put into place in Florida in 2005 after a man was shot and killed while attempting to rob a man’s RV in the wake of Hurricane Irene, when police responders could not be contacted. This instance is an appropriate use of the law, because, unlike the situation in Sanford, the absence of emergency services forced the man to defend himself and his property. It should be on rare occasion that this law should ever be used as defense in court.
I understand that there needs to be some law in place that does allow people to defend themselves if they or, in some cases, their property is being jeopardized. However, Martin — a 17-year-old boy snacking on Skittles, talking on his cellphone and walking through a gated community — presents very little danger to anyone and would not likely cause anyone to fear for his or her life. We need to take a step back from what the legal systems of these states are doing.
It is absolutely absurd that this happened. Whether Martin was a victim of racism, profiling or just plain fear, Zimmerman, a 28 year-old man, should not have shot and killed a teenager unless Martin was armed and expressed the intention to cause harm. He should have listened to the police officers and let them handle the situation, because it turns out that the self-proclaimed captain of the neighborhood watch was wrong about Martin.
The biggest problem with the entire situation is the fact that Zimmerman had reported a suspicious person to the authorities and was explicitly told to stop following Martin while the police investigated the matter.
Despite the need for many of us to be free to defend ourselves, we should leave the true pursuit of criminal acts to the public forces that serve us. Zimmerman did not do this, and as a result, whether purposeful or not, a young man is dead. A mother is going to have to bury her son because he wanted a box of Skittles.
More Like This
In Brief: 10/20/15
By Patrick Ingraham | Oct. 19, 2015#blacklivesmatter cofounder Alicia Garza discusses pain, progress
By Eleanor Mooney | Sep. 15, 2015