Make us your home page
Instagram

Today’s top headlines delivered to you daily.

(View our Privacy Policy)

Florida panel's 'stand your ground' report is no surprise

Experts! Correspondence! Public meetings and phone calls!

From the opening pages of a recently released report, the governor's task force on Florida's "stand your ground'' law wants you to know its members were exhaustive in their quest for truth and justice.

And why does this need pointing out?

Because otherwise you might never know they existed.

After months of studying a statute that has been criticized, dissected, challenged and ridiculed, the task force came to this conclusion:

Um, yeah, cool law.

There might have been a few other details in the report, but that's the gist of it.

No major reforms. No substantial recommendations. No indication they saw anything wrong with the obvious ambiguities and misapplications of "stand your ground.''

"The problem with this law is it creates opportunities for abuse,'' said Stetson University law professor Charlie Rose. "And if they have not made any affirmative suggestions to tighten it up, you will be seeing more and more cases of abuse.

"The Legislature has a responsibility to get this right, and they're choosing not to do that.''

This wasn't unexpected. The task force was stacked with people who either helped draft the law or were clearly inclined to support it.

And, to be fair, hardly anyone was clamoring for the entire law to be struck down. An unofficial, liberal-leaning task force convened earlier hadn't even gone that far.

But for anyone who followed the Tampa Bay Times' analysis of "stand your ground'' cases this summer, it's hard to argue some type of reform isn't necessary for a law that has excused gang shootouts, domestic violence and drug deals gone bad.

The problem is not that "stand your ground'' has turned Florida streets into the Wild West, as some early critics had predicted. The problem is the language is so broad that "stand your ground'' is being invoked in cases that lawmakers never envisioned.

Back in 2005 when he introduced the legislation, former state Rep. Dennis Baxley insisted it was merely a way to protect law-abiding citizens.

"You can only do what somebody does to you,'' Baxley said at the time.

Except that's not how the law is being interpreted. There are cases of unarmed people being shot. Cases of people shot in the back while trying to flee. Cases interpreted one way over here and another way over there.

The task force made some token recommendations, but it's still not too late for the Legislature to take a hard look at the law's unintended consequences.

Lawmakers need to look at changing the language to ensure there is real evidence of imminent danger, and not just a presumption of fear before someone kills in self-defense.

There also needs to be a way to prevent someone from initiating a confrontation and then killing in the name of self-defense.

As it stands now, the law asks only three questions: Did a defendant have a right to be there? Was he breaking any law? Was there a reasonable fear he was in grave danger?

If you consider the neighborhood watch case in Sanford, it's easy to see how you can make a case for "stand your ground'' under those absurdly vague guidelines.

Not just for George Zimmerman, but for Trayvon Martin, too.

Florida panel's 'stand your ground' report is no surprise 11/17/12 [Last modified: Saturday, November 17, 2012 7:12pm]
Photo reprints | Article reprints

© 2017 Tampa Bay Times

    

Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours

Loading...
  1. Report: Trump asked intel chiefs to push back against FBI collusion probe after Comey revealed its existence

    National

    President Donald Trump asked two of the nation's top intelligence officials in March to help him push back against an FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government, the Washington Post reports, citing current and former officials.

    From  left, CIA Director Mike Pompeo; Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats; and National Security Agency Director Adm. Michael Rogers take their seats on Capitol Hill on May 11 before  testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on major threats facing the U.S. [Associated Press]
  2. Trump asked intelligence chiefs to push back against FBI collusion probe after Comey revealed its existence

    National

    President Donald Trump asked two of the nation's top intelligence officials in March to help him push back against an FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government, current and former officials said, according to the Washington Post.

    After President Donald Trump fired James Comey, shown here, as FBI director, the Washington Post is reporting, Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.
  3. For Gov. Rick Scott, 'fighting' could mean vetoing entire state budget

    State Roundup

    Every day, Gov. Rick Scott is getting a lot of advice.

    The last time a Florida governor vetoed the education portion of the state budget was in 1983. Gov. Bob Graham blasted fellow Democrats for their “willing acceptance of mediocrity.”
  4. Romano: Time is up chief, make a call on police body cameras

    Crime

    Excuse me chief, but it's time to take a stand.

    St. Petersburg police Chief Tony Holloway
  5. Potential new laws further curb Floridians' right to government in the Sunshine

    State Roundup

    TALLAHASSEE — From temporarily shielding the identities of murder witnesses to permanently sealing millions of criminal and arrest records, state lawmakers did more this spring than they have in all but one of the past 22 years to chip away at Floridians' constitutional guarantees to access government records and …

    The Legislature passed 17 new exemptions to the Sunshine Law, according to a tally by the First Amendment Foundation.