Stand-your-ground law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A stand-your-ground
law is a type self-defense law
that gives individuals the right to use reasonable force to defend themselves
without any requirement to evade or
retreat from a dangerous situation. It is common in multiple
jurisdictions within the United States. The
concept sometimes exists in statutory law and
sometimes through common law precedents.
One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or
vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations. Under these
legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the
"stand your ground" law would be a defense or immunity
to criminal charges
and civil suit. The difference between immunity and a
defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A
defense, such as an affirmative defense,
permits a plaintiff or the state to seek civil damages or a
criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justify the
accused's conduct.
More than half
of the states in the United States have
adopted the Castle doctrine,
stating that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is attacked. Some
states go a step further, removing the duty of retreat from other locations.
"Stand Your Ground", "Line in the Sand" or "No Duty to
Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to
abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an
assailant. Under such laws, there is no duty to retreat from anywhere the
defender may legally be.[1] Other restrictions may still exist;
such as when in public, a person must be carrying firearms in a legal manner, whether concealed or openly.
"Stand
your ground" governs U.S. federal case law in which right of self-defense
is asserted against a charge of criminal homicide. The Supreme
Court of the United States ruled in Beard
v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550
(1895)) that a man who was "on his premises" when he came under
attack and "...did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable
grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to
take his life, or do him great bodily harm...was not obliged to retreat, nor to
consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his
ground."[2][3]
Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes, Jr. declared in Brown v. United
States (1921) (256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921)), a case that upheld
the "no duty to retreat" maxim, that "detached reflection cannot
be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".[4]
Effect on crime rates
The law's
effect on crime rates is disputed between supporters and critics of the law.
The third edition of More Guns, Less Crime
by John Lott[5] says that states adopting “Stand Your
Ground”/"Castle Doctrine"
laws reduced murder rates by 9 percent and overall violent crime by 11 percent,
and that occurs even after accounting for a range of other factors such as
national crime trends, law enforcement variables (arrest, execution, and
imprisonment rates), income and poverty measures, demographic changes, and the
national average changes in crime rates from year-to-year and average
differences across states.
A study by
Texas A&M economics professors found that the adoption of stand-your-ground
laws caused a statistically significant increase in the raw homicide rate, and
had only a very small positive effect on deterrence of crime. The authors of
the study were unable to determine what percentage of the increase was
justifiable homicide, due to the reporting of homicide to the FBI often lacking
notation whether the homicide was justifiable or not.[6][7]
Another
analysis of stand-your-ground laws by economists at Georgia State, using
monthly data from the U.S. Vital Statistics, found a significant increase in
homicide and injury of whites, especially white males.[8] They also analyzed data from the Health
Care Utilization Project, which revealed significantly increased rates of
emergency room visits and hospital discharges related to gun injuries in states
which enacted these laws.
In a 2007
National District Attorneys Association symposium, numerous concerns were
voiced that the law could increase crime. This included criminals using the law
as a defense for their crimes, more people carrying guns, and that people would
not feel safe if they felt that anyone could use deadly force in a conflict.
The report also noted that the misinterpretation of clues could result in use
of deadly force when there was, in fact, no danger. The report specifically
notes that racial and ethnic minorities could be at greater risk because of
negative stereotypes.[9]
Florida state
representative Dennis Baxley, an
author of the law, notes that crime rates in Florida dropped significantly
between 2005, when the law was passed, and 2012.[10] However, crime rates had been
declining in Florida as well as nationally since at least 2000.[11] Representative Baxley told Politifact
Florida that he does not believe his law is the main reason for the drop in
crime rates in Florida, but may be one of several reasons.
The Stanford Law Review
found that aggravated assaults temporarily increased in those states with
stand-your-ground,[12] and that the data used was not only
unsuitable, but that the methods used to analyze it are susceptible to misuse.[13]
United States
Many states
have some form of stand-your-ground law. Alabama,[14] Alaska,[15] Arizona,[16] California,[17][18] Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa,[19] Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,[16] Maine, Massachusetts (though the term
is used very loosely there),[20] Michigan,[16] Mississippi, Missouri, Montana,[16] New Hampshire,[16] North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,[16] Pennsylvania ,[21], Rhode Island,[22] South Carolina, South Dakota,
Tennessee,[16] Texas,[23] Utah,[24] West Virginia,[16], Wisconsin[25] and Wyoming have adopted Castle
Doctrine statutes, and other states (Iowa,[26] Virginia,[27] and Washington) have considered
stand-your-ground laws of their own.[28][29][30]
For example,
Michigan's stand-your-ground law, MCL 780.972, provides that "[a]n
individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the
time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another
individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat
if . . . [t]he individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of
deadly force is necessary to prevent" the imminent death, great bodily
harm, or sexual assault of himself or another individual.[31] The "reasonable belief"
requirement is different from a sincere belief, meaning that a "reasonable
person" should be able to examine the situation and see a threat to life
or serious injury. For example, a man who is mugged at gunpoint and then shoots
the mugger in the back as he is running away might "sincerely"
believe the mugger was going to turn around and shoot him, but such a belief
would likely not be considered "reasonable" under the circumstances.
Some of the
states that have passed or are considering stand-your-ground laws already implement stand-your-ground principles
in case law. Indiana and Georgia, among other
states, passed stand-your-ground statutes due to possible concerns of existing
case law being replaced by the "duty to retreat" in later court
rulings. Other states, including Washington[citation needed]
and Virginia,[citation needed]
have implemented stand-your-ground judicially but have not adopted statutes.
West Virginia had a long tradition of "stand your ground" in its case
law[32] before codifying it as a statute in
2008. These states did not have civil immunity for self-defense in their
previous self-defense statutes.
Controversy
Stand-your-ground
laws are frequently criticized and called "shoot first" laws by
critics, including the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun
Violence.[33] In Florida, self-defense claims
tripled in the years following enactment.[33][34] The law's critics argue that Florida's
law makes it very difficult to prosecute cases against people who shoot others
and then claim self-defense. The shooter can argue that he felt threatened, and
in most cases, the only witness who could have argued otherwise is the
deceased.[33] This problem is inherent to all
self-defense laws, not just stand your ground laws. Before passage of the law,
Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in
that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of
someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong
house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it
shouldn't be used."[35][36]
In Florida, a
task force specially appointed by the governor issued a report concurring with
the core principles of the state's Stand Your Ground Law, but recommending
further legislative clarification of the requirement that the person asserting
the defense not be engaged in "unlawful activity." The report also
recommended legislative standards for recognized neighborhood watch groups.[37] An independent task force was convened
by a state senator, which issued its own report and submitted it to the
Governor's Task Force.[38] Among its recommendations was the
unanimous conclusion that claims of self-defense be submitted to a grand jury
prior to prosecution. One of the witnesses before the independent task force
complained that the law is "confusing."[39] Those testifying to the independent
task force included Buddy Jacobs, a lawyer representing the Florida Prosecuting
Attorney's Association. Jacobs recommended the law's repeal, feeling that
modifying the law would not fix its problems.
In a July 16,
2013 speech in the wake of the jury verdict acquitting
George Zimmerman of charges stemming from the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, Attorney General Eric Holder criticized stand-your-ground laws,
saying they "senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow
dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods."[40] The relevance of the stand-your-ground
provision of the self-defense law to the Zimmerman case has been questioned,
however, because Zimmerman claimed he was restrained at the time of the
shooting and had no option to retreat.[41]
The entire wiki article on the subject can
be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law
No comments:
Post a Comment