Are "Stand Your Ground" Laws Constitutional and Productive?

Twisted Fairytale

Retired Administrator
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
5,384
Reaction score
28
FP$
26,235
States holding "Stand your Ground" laws allow residents to use whatever force necessary against an opponent should they be attacked. This includes deadly force and use of weapons. One of the most notable cases where these laws have come into play is the shooting of Trayvon Martin. These laws have caught heat, especially after the case just mentioned. Some believe that the use of deadly force should be left exclusively to law enforcement, and no citizen should be allowed to take the life of another. However, a study has shown that, by adopting these laws, murder rates have dropped nine (9) percent in certain places (source).

tfvLcNi.jpg
 
Read more about "Stand your Ground" and "Castle Doctrine" laws: here.

So what do you think? Is allowing citizens to use deadly force if attacked constitutional and productive?
Taken from previous debate written by myself (as Kali) here: source at Open Carnage.
 
Re: Are "Stand Your Ground" Laws Constitutional and Producti

The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place close by me. Every single news channel just talked about this nonstop. Back on topic; I don't think citizens should be able to use deadly force if they were about to get attacked. I'm talking guns, bombs, and any other type of weapon out there. Maybe pepper-spray would do, but no weapon should be used in any state without a permit for it. Yes, self-defense is very important in today's society, but guns are even worse! The "Stand Your Ground" laws should NOT be constitutional and productive in The United States.

That's just my opinion. 🙂
 
Re: Are "Stand Your Ground" Laws Constitutional and Producti

If not for this Trayvon Martin, black kid gets shot nonsense, no one would even say a word about this. ANYONE who is being attacked by another individual, has the legal right to defend themselves by any means necessary as long as they don't become the aggressors. As an example, guy breaks into a house. Home owner is armed, and fires at the assailant. Home owner is within his legal rights to fire at the intruder. However, if the assailant leaves the house and is running down the street, and the home owner begins chasing him, the home owner is now the aggressor.

Now, does that mean I condone killing every attacker? No, it depends on the situation. However, if it's a very violent situation where the perpetrator is intending to cause you physical harm or worse, by all means, defend yourself by possibly injuring or killing him.

What people don't understand, or what they refuse to accept, is that this is no longer a nice, peaceful world where you can take an evening stroll outside and not worry about ANYTHING. There's a lot of crazy and bad people here. Everyone should either have some sort of self defense/martial arts training, or buy themselves a self defense weapon. Does that mean I want everyone running around with a Glock? No. My point is that you can be a victim today, tomorrow, or at any point. That is why I've taken up a hobby of buying pocket, hunting, and tactical knives. I never leave the house without something either clipped to my belt or my pocket. You never know when having a weapon will come in handy.

Practical said:
The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place close by me. Every single news channel just talked about this nonstop. Back on topic; I don't think citizens should be able to use deadly force if they were about to get attacked. I'm talking guns, bombs, and any other type of weapon out there. Maybe pepper-spray would do, but no weapon should be used in any state without a permit for it. Yes, self-defense is very important in today's society, but guns are even worse! The "Stand Your Ground" laws should NOT be constitutional and productive in The United States.

That's just my opinion. 🙂

Practical, I hope you realize Stand Your Ground not existing doesn't mean people will stop using guns to defend themselves. Zimmerman was a wannabe, failed police officer who carried around a gun to live a fantasy. He didn't care about Stand Your Ground.
 
Back
Top Bottom