Dear Rick,
I want you to know that I almost never do this, but I am so very frustrated, especially with the self-serving and sensationalizing TV and radio media. In this case, I am very disappointed in you for your IN April 19 Outtakes article equating the subject law with “Shoot at Will.” I much prefer the written media for accuracy and objectivity, but you got this one wrong.
As sometimes happens in real life, we do not and may never know in fact what happened in the Martin case, except it was unfortunate. If the shooter is guilty, a court will find one way or the other. Also, I’m sure you realize that an acquittal could occur, just has it has in other high profile cases that seemed so clear based on the media coverage. That is our judicial system.
However, regardless of the politics as usual in the passing of much legislation, this case has nothing to do with what I see as the intended clarifying effect of the Stand Your Ground law on the already existing Castle Doctrine. The underlying precept remains that if one reasonably feels their life is in danger or they could be very seriously injured, they have the right to defend themselves, otherwise not. One hopes you have not also bought into the politically correct position that fighting back when necessary is a bad thing. I pray that you and I never are in the position of having to fight back, but we should not be burdened with worrying whether we retreated first in an already extremely stressful survival situation.
Perhaps related to this is concealed carried weapon permits, and so called gun control, both of which I’m guessing you and I might also disagree on. Even a national media source this month readily admitted violent crime is much reduced in the world today, but you would not know it from the sensationalized coverage. Ultimately, a baseball bat, kitchen knife, hammer or sharp pencil could have killed Martin, and for example, “licensed” and sober, but reckless or careless drivers make mistakes and kill or hurt many more people with their several thousand pound weapons than virtually anything else. So, this is not a weapon or “permit” problem. Society does not seem to want to diligently deal with the difficult underlying problem, of evil, certifiably crazy, and/or stupid people, whose actions with all types of potential weapons are exacerbated by a highly publicized world. Trying to “control” things which people want or need, and therefore for which there is a market, did not work with alcohol, and is not working with drugs. If one thinks the violence that has resulted from trying to control those things has been bad, you have not seen anything until you try to fully control guns. Common sensed and law abiding people realize guns have always leveled the playing field against evil, that creates one big market.
Sincerely,
Alan Robinson