Add more pages to this paper for me

Stand your ground laws essentially replace the duty to retreat laws. State your ground came into existence to remove any confusion on when a person can use self-defense. It also eliminates prosecutions for people who legitimately used self-defense (McClellan, & Tekin, 2012). Stand your ground laws offers immunity in a claim of self-defense, an individual could claim self-defense under the states “stand your ground” law and escape trial altogether (Yu, 2014).The relevant section of the Florida statutes (FS 776.013(3) reads: “A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat, and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony (Citation )

II. Problem identification and Agenda setting

Stand your ground law stems from Castle Doctrine. The Castle Doctrine laws come from the English common law that states that if an intruder breaks into your home you are allowed to use force to defend yourself and your property without retreating. Lawmakers and gun-right activist saw a greater need to expand the castle doctrine law. Over the years, many states have expanded the castle doctrine law. The new laws extend beyond the home in places such as vehicle, vehicle or anywhere else a person have the right to be.

Several factors contribute to the states expanding the castle doctrine. Several of those factors are:

· A weakened sense of public safety after the terrorist attacks in 2001;

· A lack of confidence in the criminal justice system’s ability to protect victims;

After the attack of Sept 2011, the perception of public safety changed. The attack caused many citizens to doubt the government ability to protect them from future terrorist attacks. Many people felt they need to be proactive in their own defense.

Florida was one of the first legally to expand the castle Doctrine on 1 October 2015. The National Riffle Association (NRA) was very instrumental in getting the act passed. It used is political donations, lobbying and outreach to make sure the bill passed. More significantly, there were allegations that legislators who might have otherwise opposed the law were afraid to vote against it because of the NRA's power (Cheng & Hoekstra, 2013)

III. Formulation of Policy Proposal and Policy legitimation and adoption

The legislation was adopted in October 1, 2005, to become official state law. In the senate March 23, 2005, the total vote was 39-0 while, in the house on April 5th, 2015, the bill passed 92-to 20. The law radically extended self-defense parameters in Florida, giving citizens the right "force with force" in places such as home, car, work or anywhere they are legally entitled to be (CS/CS/SB 436, 2005). The NRA pushed hard for passage of this particular law. According to Wayne LaPierre the group, they will use the Victory in Florida to pursue similar measures in other states. Representative Dennis K. Baxley of Ocala, who sponsored the bills states this action, will reduce violent crime while making citizens feel safer. Mr. Baxley states, "It's a clear position that we will stand with victims of violent attacks when the law is in their favor," (Cheng & Hoekstra, 2013)

The bill received favorable referral from Criminal Justice committee as well as the Judiciary Committee in the Senate. On the house side, the bills received favorable recommendation from the Judiciary Committee and the Justice Council. The bill will have no financial impact on Florida revenue. After several drafts and revision bill was adopted into law. County or municipal governments are not affected by this bill.

IV. Implementation

At least 22 other states have, and each state is responsible for implementing their version of the law. Stand Your Ground laws provide law enforcement with little to no guidance on how to assess the legitimacy of a suspect’s self-defense claim. The laws put officers in a place where the officers can possibly arrest someone wrongfully that have claimed self-defense. The “Stand your ground” statute has changed the way in which law enforcement officers investigate self-defense cases.

Before the passage of “Stand your ground,” if someone used deadly force outside their home, the burden of prof to show that they used deadly force in self-defense was on them. Since the passage of “Stand your ground” now the burden is placed on law enforcement. Officers must now prove very early in their investigation that the suspect acted unlawful before they can detain or arrest the suspect as stated by Section 776.013(2), Florida Statutes (citation )

Stand Your Ground laws in eight states protect a shooter from criminal prosecution even after an arrest is made. State courts have construed these criminal immunity provisions to entitle a shooter to a pretrial “immunity hearing: a procedure during which each party presents evidence to a judge who determines if the shooter acted in self-defense” (McClellan & Tekin, 2012).The case is dismissed if the judge find that the defendant acted in self-defense and is free from prosecution. If the judge found that the defendant did not act in self-defense, the case goes to trial. The immunity hearings take place of the traditional procedure that usually requires a jury. The judge using factual information to make the decision.

V. Policy evaluation

The Florida "stand your ground" came under attack after the acquittal of George Zimmerman int he case of Trayvon Martin Death. According to a paper, by Cheng and Mark homicide significantly increased by eight percent that is 600 homicides a year in states that passed stand your ground law. The study also found that these laws do not prevent robberies, burglaries or aggravated assaults.

In the wake of such tragedies many states with “Stand Your Ground” laws are now reviewing their laws. The rise of justified homicides nationally since 2005, have also create a need for an analysis of “Stand Your Ground” laws (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2010).

The total number number of justified homicides According to data from the Uniform Crime increased from 196 in 2005 to 278 in 2010. In contrast the number of overall totall killings have declined during the same period. It could also be that more citizens are killing each other and using “stand your ground” to claim self defense (Palazzolo and Barry, 2012). Nonetheless, the coincidence between expansion of these law and justifiable homicides sugest there might be a link between them too and should be investigated.

The success of Stand your ground law is questionable at the time. States that had passed "stand your ground" had seen a 53% in justifiable homicide in comparison before they had the law implemented. These laws have negatively affected especially people of color. Researched showed that when white shooters kill black victims at least 34% of the homicides is such case are deemed justifiable while on the other hand only 3.3 % when the shooter is black and the victim is white. States that enacted “Stand your ground” law saw an increase in justifiable homicides. Such increase shows that there is a direct association between justifiable homicides and “Stand your ground” law (Cheng & Hoekstra, 2013)

VI. Conclusion

The “stand your ground" law have created more of a state of vigilante justice then helping law enforcement to decrease crime. This law have increased racially motivated attacks under the guise of self-defense. There is substantial evidence that Stand Your Ground laws weaken public safety and increase overall homicide rates. Due to the impact of public safety, many states have considered some kind of reforms that would bring back many of the traditional principles of self-defense back.

According to the “stand your ground” statue in Florida, a shooter legally can shoot to defend themselves as long as they have a right to be there in any places including public places even if leaving the place could prevent harm from themselves or others. Someone could claim self-defense in some situations even if the shooter was the aggressor. Once a shooter claims self-defense, they are immune from criminal prosecution and therefore cannot be arrested or detained. Only way the person can be detained is if police have probable cause jury.

References

Dahrendorf, R. (1981). Studying policy, planning policy, making policy. Policy Studies, 2(2), 59-61.

Cheng Cheng & Mark Hoekstra, Does Strengthening Self-Defense Law Deter Crime or Escalate