The laws of shooting first allow a person to kill another person in a public place, even though they could have clearly and surely defused the confrontation by withdrawing and overturning the traditional right of self-defense.1 See, for example, Fla. Stat. §776.012(2). Under the traditional right of self-defence, a person can use force to defend himself anywhere, at any time. However, when they are outside their homes, they cannot use force that could kill or seriously injure someone if there is a sure way to avoid it.2Francis Wharton, A Treatise on the Law of Homicide in the United States (Philadelphia: Kay and Brother, 1855); Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 497-98 (1896); Teal v. Staat, 161 So. 422, 422 (fla.1935); Beyer v. Birmingham, Ry., Light & Power Co., 64 So. 609, 611 (Ala. 1914). Shoot-first-first laws are often misrepresented as mere adaptations or codifications of the common law, but in reality they aggressively alter criminal procedure in a way that makes it difficult to arrest, prosecute or convict a person invoking the law for lethal force.
In addition to these legal mechanisms, these laws distort the public perception of legal self-defense and encourage people to shoot first and ask questions later. In Johnson County, Kansas City, District Attorney Steve Howe cited the law in 2018 when he refused to charge an Overland Park police officer for shooting and shooting a 17-year-old boy who had pulled out of his family`s driveway. While other legal experts and supporters of the law don`t believe Bennett is right, critics of stand-your-ground laws in about 30 states say they are increasingly being used by law enforcement agencies to protect officials who use lethal force. Kansas law eliminated the requirement for people to retreat before using lethal force against attackers if they believe it is “necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm” to themselves or others. Another section grants them immunity from prosecution or civil suit. 21-5222. Ibid.; the defence of a person; No obligation to withdraw. (a) Everyone has the right to use force against another person if and to the extent that he has reasonable grounds to believe that such use is necessary to defend himself or another person against the imminent use of unlawful force by that other person. A couple was driving to a mosque in Houston during Ramadan when they nearly collided with another car. The person in the other car stopped next to the couple and both parties rolled down their windows. The other driver shouted, “Go back to Islam.” The husband opened his door and got out of the car. He was shot by the other driver within seconds.
A few months later, a Harris County grand jury declined to charge the shooter with murder after invoking the Shoot First Act.1Leah Caldwell, “When Hatred Collides With Texas` Stand Your Ground Law,” Texas Observer, p. 4. January 2016, bit.ly/2LXQsaw. Police have not yet said whether the shootings fall under the Stand-Your-Ground Act. An Arizona man shot and killed a 22-year-old man after the two men had a verbal altercation along the way. Although the 22-year-old did not have a gun and did not leave his car, the shooter was acquitted of murder charges after invoking self-defense under the state`s “first shooting” law.1Tim Steller, “In Arizona, if you`re afraid to death, you can kill the person who scares you,” Arizona Daily Star, September 26, 2017, bit.ly/2Nfrvb6. Sedgwick County District Attorney Marc Bennett said all criminal charges would likely be dismissed by a judge because Bennett concluded that youth center staff believed they were acting in self-defense during the Sept. 24 altercation with Lofton. He said Kansas courts have expanded self-defense rights to the point, “How could a police officer be prosecuted for shooting someone?” In all states, homicides in which white shooters kill black victims are much more likely to be considered justified than when the situation is reversed.14John Roman, “Race, Justifiable Homicide, and Stand Your Ground Laws: Analysis of FBI Supplementary Homicide Report Data” (Urban Institute, July 2013), urbn.is/3mHnU1E. In early shooting states, these homicides are five times more likely to be considered justified than when the shooter is black and the victim is white.15 Each city`s analysis of the FBI`s Supplementary Homicide Report, 2014 to 2018. Under control of other factors – such as who initiated the confrontation and whether or not the victim was armed – Florida Shoot First cases involving minority victims are only half as likely to be convicted as white victim cases.16 Nicole Ackermann et al., “Race, Law, and Health: Examination of `Stand Your Ground` and Accused Convictions in Florida,” Social Science & Medicine 142 (2015): 194–201, doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.08.012.
Kansas and Missouri have the law in place, Missouri recently enacted it in 2017. This means that people have the right to kill someone if they reasonably feel that their life is threatened, without having to withdraw first. I have a similar situation to Mr. Flint and was convicted, although I 1) tried to run away from the attacker, when we were arrested, I was a quarter mile in front of him, who was the real aggressor? 2) The perpetrator threatened me four times, three times during an interview with detectives and the other time before the judge (for which he was only reprimanded) 3) I had no previous violent criminal convictions, while the perpetrator had drug and assault charges (which he sort of dropped). I mistakenly thought that under a law passed in 2010, I had the “right to protect myself when I was in a place where I had a legal right,” which I was. Once again, it seems that the state apparatus has the right to interpret laws and monopolize the right to self-defence as it sees fit, not the blind justice required. The bill should not apply to cases like Lofton`s, said spokesman John Milburn, a spokesman for Schmidt who helped draft it and is now running against Kelly in this year`s gubernatorial race. Kelly declined to comment Friday when asked about Bennett`s comments.
This incident may fall under the castle doctrine, which states that an owner or guest in someone`s home has the right to kill an intruder in self-defense. Sounds weird? Well, it seems even stranger when you know the actual facts of the case. Flint and his fiancée were in a bar when his fiancée©©got into an argument with two male bar patrons. The argument eventually moved outside the bar and became more heated. Then there was a “fight” somewhere on the line and Flint`s fiancée©landed on the ground. Flint then grabbed a gun from his car and pointed it at the men, who then pulled out. In Florida and across the country, stand-your-ground laws encourage people to shoot first and ask questions later. In 57% of Shoot First cases in Florida, there was clear evidence that the person invoking the Shoot First Act could have safely withdrawn to avoid confrontation.
Recent Comments