What I do find objectionable is the use of this tragedy to raise a general claim against the principle of the "Stand Your Ground" law that Florida has. An extension of the Castle doctrine to all places where one may lawfully be, it simply holds that you cannot be legally forced to flee from criminal violence: you have a right to defend yourself from it.
Our friends on the left have raised this case as an example of the law allowing for the killing of innocents by bullies. Since no decisions have come down on prosecution, that's at best premature: but it is when they try to show this is part of a trend that they go most astray.
The Florida courts have upheld the law and issued some truly shocking findings.That's almost a complete misreading of the actual events. What actually happened in Tallahassee is documented here. You'll notice a few small differences in the judge's account vice Mother Jones' account.
This has led to some stunning verdicts in the state. In Tallahassee in 2008, two rival gangs engaged in a neighborhood shootout, and a 15-year-old African American male was killed in the crossfire.
1) The "15-year-old African American male" was a rival gang member.
2) He was not "killed in the crossfire," but was in fact the target of the bullets that killed him.
3) He was armed, having come to that place with the express intention of engaging in a gunfight, and,
4) He shot first.
That's a little bit different picture, isn't it?
How about a different picture of the statistics in Florida, thanks to the CATO institute?
Between 2004 (the year before the law’s enactment) and 2010 violent crime in Florida dropped sharply, and homicides per capita also dropped, though not sharply.We ought all to hope for justice for Mr. Martin; and it is very early in the process for anyone to despair about such justice being achieved. As for the wider argument that some wish to make out of this case, it does not hold water.