A different study of stand your ground cases in Florida from also found that the law is not applied equitably based on the race of the victim. The authors of this Florida study found that in self-defense cases with similar circumstances, when the victim is white the defendant is twice as likely to be convicted when compared to cases where the victim is non-white.
Both the national and Florida-specific studies highlight that stand your ground laws are not equitably enforced. Instead, they exacerbate already existing disparities embedded within the criminal justice system. These laws almost exclusively serve white Americans, providing protections and immunity to white Americans who claim self-defense, while not affording the same protections to Black Americans.
Stand your ground laws are not designed to protect survivors of domestic violence. Gun rights groups including the NRA continue to push for stand your ground laws under the pretense that they empower women. This is far from the truth. Instead, many scholars note that stand your ground laws reinforce existing gender disparities in self-defense laws by expanding the protections for White men and fostering a toxic and violent form of masculinity.
They create a culture that normalizes and praises male violence against strangers. Conversely, stand your ground laws are rarely successfully invoked by women defending themselves in domestic abuse situations; this is especially true for women of color. Most violence against women is perpetrated by a known acquaintance or partner and occurs in the home.
Likewise, the self-defense statutes that apply to domestic violence situations in the home make it hard for victims of domestic abuse to successfully claim self-defense. This is especially true for Black women who face both the gender and racial discrimination that is rooted in the criminal justice system.
The actions of Black women to defend themselves are viewed through a racialized and gendered lens, and are thus more likely to be viewed as aggressive. Consequently, while white men who escalate conflicts benefit from stand your ground laws, Black women defending themselves from domestic violence do not.
Brittany Smith was charged with murder for shooting and killing a man who just hours earlier had raped, strangled, and assaulted her, leaving Brittany with more than 30 injuries. She was subsequently changed with murder. Repeal state-level stand your ground laws, which run counter to centuries of self-defense doctrine and make it legal for individuals to kill another even when they can easily and safely retreat.
Randolph, Paula A. Gant, and Richard P. Benson, Bruce L. S2, , pp. Berk, Richard A. Betz, M. Barber, and M. Miller, C. Barber, B. Beaty, I. Camargo, Jr. Bichler, G. Norris, J. Dmello, and J. Bice, Douglas C. Birckmayer, J. Black, Dan A.
Blair, Janet M. Fowler, Shane P. Jack, and Alexander E. Blair, J. Pete, and Katherine W. Department of Justice, Blattman, C. Green, D. Ortega, and S. Blau, Benjamin M. Bohnert, A. McCarthy, R. Ignacio, M. Ilgen, A. Eisenberg, and F. Borowsky, I. Resnick, M. Ireland, and R. Bose, Jonaki, Sarra L. Hedden, Rachel N. Braga, Anthony A. Parisi, ed. Braga, A. Hureau, and L. Hureau, and A.
Hureau, and C. Kennedy, E. Waring, and A. Papachristos, and David M. Turchan, and L. Wintemute, Glenn L. Pierce, Philip J. Zimmerman, L. Barao, C. Farrell, R. Brunson, and A. Branas, C. Richmond, D. Culhane, T. Ten Have, and D. Brent, D. Baugher, J. Bridge, T. Chen, and L. Perper, C. Allman, G. Moritz, M. Wartella, and J. Perper, G. Baugher, and C. Schweers, and C. Bridges, F. Stephen, Kimberly M. Tatum, and Julie C. Briggs, J. Britt, Chester L. Bronars, Stephen G. Lott, Jr. Brunson, R.
Braga, D. Hureau, and K. Oppel, Jr. Bukstein, O. Brent, J. Schweers, C. Roth, and L. Department of the Treasury, Department of the Treasury, July Department of Justice, a.
Department of Justice, b. Department of Justice, January 27, Butts, J. Roman, L. Bostwick, and J. Cabrera, Joseph F. Cai, Weiyi, and Jugal K. Cagle, M. Christine, and J. Caldwell, B. Cameron, A. Colin, Jonah B. Gelbach, and Douglas L. Campbell, Jacquelyn C.
Campbell, J. Webster, J. Kozio-McLain, C. Block, D. Campbell, M. Curry, F. Gary, N. Glass, J. McFarlane, C. Sachs, P. Sharps, Y. Ulrich, S. Wilt, J. Manganello, X. Xu, J. Schollenberger, V. Frye, and K. Cantor, D. Kasprzyk, G. Duncan, G. Kalton, and M. Singh, eds. Capellan, Joel A. Carbone, Paul S. Clemens, and Thomas M. Carter, David L. Cavanagh, J. Carson, M. Sharpe, and S. Cavanaugh, Joseph E. Powell, and Kenneth E.
Chaloupka, Frank J. Chapman, S. Alpers, K. Agho, and M. Stewart, P. Alpers, and M. Chaudri, V. Chauhan, P. Cerda, S. Messner, M. Tracy, K. Tardiff, and S.
Cherney, Samantha, Andrew R. Morral, and Terry L. Morral, Terry L. Chesnut, Kelsie Y. Choe, J. Teplin, and K. Coben, J. Steiner, M. Barrett, C. Merrill, and D. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 27, Section Code of Federal Regulations, Title 28, Section Code of Federal Regulations, Title 38, Section 1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 39, Section Cohen, Amy P.
Collazos, D. Collins, T. Greenberg, M. Siegel, Z. Xuan, E. Rothman, S. Cronin, and D. Colquhoun, D. Conley, Timothy G. Conwell, Y. Duberstein, K. Connor, S. Eberly, C.
Cox, and E. Cook, Philip J. Cook, P. Braga, B. Harcourt, ed. Ludwig, and A. Ludwig, S. Venkatesh, and A. Parker, and Harold A. Pollack, and K. Cooper, Alexia, and Erica L. Department of Justice, November Cordner, G. Corrigan, P. Corsaro, N. Cox, D. Snell, Analysis of Binary Data , 2nd ed. Cox, Georgina R. Crafton, R. Eliot, Jane G.
Gravelle, and William J. Cramer, Clayton E. Crifasi, Cassandra K. Doucette, Emma E. McGinty, Daniel W. Webster, and Colleen L. McCourt, Marisa D. Booty, and Daniel W. Vernick, Garen J. Wintemute, and Daniel W. Crifasi, C. Meyers, J. Vernick, and D. Pollack, and Daniel W. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Csere, M.
Cummings, P. Grossman, F. Rivara, and T. Koepsell, D. Grossman, J. Savarino, and R. Curtin, Sally C. Czyz, Ewa K. Dahlberg, L. Ikeda, and M. Daigle, M. McCarty, Zain G. Hashmi, Molly P. Jarman, and Adil H. Degeling, M. Desai, R. Dausey, and R. DeSimone, J. Markowitz, and J. Desmarais, S. Van Dorn, K. Johnson, K. Grimm, K. Douglas, and M. Dezhbakhsh, Hashem, and Paul H. Diamond, Peter A.
Kurland, Emily F. Ross, Bindu Kalesan, Kristin A. Dixon, L. Donohue, John J. Cook, eds. Doob, A. Draper, Norman R. Duda, M. Fish and Wildlife Service, Grant 14—48——92—, Duncan, O. Durlauf, S. Wilson, ed. Eck, J. Elbogen, Eric B. Elder, Randy W. Naimi, Robert D. Brewer, Sajal K.
Several states have provisions in their shoot first laws which prevent law enforcement from arresting a person who claims self defense. Texas allows the use of deadly force against a person fleeing after a burglary if the person using force reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means.
The legislative goals in this policy area are to resist the expansion of, and repeal, stand your ground laws in states that already have them, and resist their enactment in states that do not have them. Guns carried in public pose a danger to public safety, and lax concealed carry laws increase the risk of violent confrontations. As more laws are weakened to allow the carrying of openly visible firearms in public, the threat of violence to the public rises alarmingly.
States that allow firearms in sensitive or dangerous places are needlessly endangering the lives of their residents. In any given month, 30 to 50 people across the United States are killed as a result of Stand Your Ground laws. States with Shoot First Statutes. Guns in Public. Because Stand Your Ground legislation leads to an increase in the number of gun deaths and injuries, these laws add to the financial toll of firearm violence in states that pass them. In Stand Your Ground states, homicides in which white shooters kill Black victims are deemed justifiable five times more frequently than when the situation is reversed.
Across all states, homicides in which white shooters kill Black victims are deemed justifiable far more frequently than when the situation is reversed. In Stand Your Ground states, these homicides are deemed justifiable five times more frequently than when the shooter is Black and the victim is white. Controlling for other factors—such as who initiated the confrontation and whether or not the victim was armed—Florida Stand Your Ground cases involving minority victims are half as likely to lead to conviction, compared to cases involving white victims.
It is no accident that white people who shoot and kill Black people out of fear are frequently given immunity through Stand Your Ground laws. We know that in this country, minorities are implicitly associated with crime and danger.
Since Stand Your Ground permits people to shoot and kill others based on a perceived threat, it follows that individuals in Stand Your Ground states would be more likely to avoid culpability for murder if their victim was a person of color.
People with a legitimate reason to defend themselves are already fully protected under traditional self-defense law. In , Florida adopted its Stand Your Ground law. This law is the blueprint for the Stand Your Ground laws subsequently passed in dozens of states. It has garnered significant media attention and has been extensively studied. Humphreys, Antonio Gasparrini, and Douglas J. This impact included significant increases in homicide rates in suburban communities.
Wiebe, and David K. In Tallahassee, a man was involved in a shootout in which one person was shot and killed.
0コメント