what does it all mean? find out below...

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Stand Your Ground, Check Your Facts

Only two people really know what transpired the night Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida, and only one of those is still alive.  There has been no proven account released about the events of that evening, though many on both sides would like to fill in the blanks with what they think they know due to each party’s background and culture.  

On one hand, a black kid wandered into the wrong neighborhood and got targeted by an overeager neighborhood watchman in yet another racially motivated killing.  On the other, a community protector was threatened and assaulted in an act of aggression, and took the appropriate measures to defend himself.  Race, discrimination, justice, fear, protection, defense, and aggression--all apparently play a significant role in the unofficial record of that evening.  For some, “a Mexican killed a black kid” is enough to compartmentalize the whole affair.  Others seek to find meaning behind the shooting, while others use the exchange to further their journalistic or political careers.

For all the allegations, we only truly know a young man is dead, and the shooter is seeking protection behind a controversial legal standing known as “Stand Your Ground."  But with all of the controversy surrounding race, inequality, and social justice surrounding the shooting, what is the real issue at hand?  

In 2005, Florida’s first female NRA president Marion Hammer pushed for and won a vote on the now widely publicized Stand Your Ground Law.  According to its preamble, the law is intended to  provide direction regarding “Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.”  But how does it apply to issues of protection outside the home, or where perception of harm cannot be proven?  

According to preliminary reports released on 911 calls, Zimmerman pursued Martin through his neighborhood on suspicion of looking unfamiliar and sketchy.  That’s where the official record ends, and it’s not the public’s role to speculate about events after this point.  Because of the official photos circulated of Zimmerman and Martin, we’re left to see Zimmerman as a heavyset Mexican with a past criminal record, and Martin an innocent young kid with his whole life ahead of him.  But according to a March 31st article by US News, both photos are out of date, and neither image fairly represent either.  Based on public outcry and the limited factual record,we’re left with a skewed perspective on the case.  It’s simply not fair to either party to engage under the auspices of pretending we have the moral high ground of knowing all the facts.

Apart from the events of that evening, one issue which remains unclear is the interpretation of the SYG law.  If records of Zimmerman pursuing, and then initiating, a conflict with Martin are founded in truth, then this law fails to be an accurate statute behind which a plausible legal defense can be made.  As a practical point, picking a fight precludes the use of SYG as a realistic defense strategy.  It is meant to protect the weak, attacked, and infringed upon, and provide a means to both deter criminal aggression and allow a potential victim to defend himself when necessary, by whatever means necessary.  

In a society where criminal’s rights too often trump those of the victim, SYG allows a person to legally protect themselves when faced with the presumption of great bodily harm.  Whether the law is correctly or incorrectly applied to the Trayvon Martin shooting remains to be seen, but the principle is sound.  As a society so quick to assign blame and innocence in the court of public opinion, we only stand to cause greater damage when we arrogantly rush to say we know best without first being knowledgeable of all the facts.