Save Your Life Support Self Defense

The Stand Your Ground Laws are becoming a hot topic in today’s news. Headlines are flooded with stories about cases around the country. These laws surround everyone from your everyday citizens to prominent sports figures and entertainers. The Stand Your Ground laws provide individuals with certain rights to protect themselves in events where they may feel threatened. It is also known as the Castle Rule, most of the United States have adopted some form of this law to protect its’ residents who may feel the need to use self-defense in situations where they may feel threatened. These laws spread quickly around the country since Florida passed the first laws in 2005. The law in most states would suggest that a person attempt to retreat

Firstly, what exactly is The Stand You Ground Law? The Stand Your Ground law is a law that expands the Castle Doctrine. For you who are not quite sure what the Castle Doctrine is I will explain. The Castle Doctrine which can also be identified as the make my day or castle law is a doctrine which allows individuals permission to use force, even deadly force to protect themselves against an invader within their home. Previously, as I stated, the Stand Your Ground Law is a law which expands off of the Castle Doctrine. For example, the Stand Your Ground Law provides a person the opportunity to protect themselves if they feel their life is in danger, however unlike the Castle Doctrine, a person can even protect themselves outside of their homes. The Stand Your

Only this month, 59 were killed and over 500 people were injured during a country music concert in Vegas in what is now known as the deadliest mass shooting in American history. Last year, 49 were killed and 58 were injured in a gay nightclub in Florida. In 2012, a mass shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School took 27 lives, 20 of them being first graders. The list of these unthinkable and stomach-churning acts is quickly turning endless, forcing us to rethink why we truly have the right to bear arms. Many defend the second amendment by claiming we need this right for self defense, which is the most wretched part.When we look at what we have lost compared to what we have earned in this fight to keep the right to bear arms, this privilege does not seem worth the sacrifice of so many lives. In today’s world, we do not defense through guns but from them. Our policymakers keep trying to reach a compromise by putting in place certain regulations. “Some states require would-be gun owners to fulfill a firearms safety course in order to obtain their license.” “Such training courses, however, even when not required, are very advisable for the would-be gun owner, as they ensure that he or she has all the necessary information on liability issues, on safety, and even on care and maintenance of the gun” ( How to Get a Gun License 1). This lack of attention illustrates that despite the multiple tragedies that have taken place in our nation, some states do not even require a simple safety course that ensures the safety of our people. Furthermore, it is required that one must pass a background check. The questions asked on the test are the following:

In the past six months, there have been a total of 19,635 gun incidents. Out of those 19,635 incidents, 107 were mass shootings, 829 were home invasions, and 604 were for defensive use, according to Gunviolencearchive.org. It is unbelievable to see the number of gun related incidents that have happened in just the past six months. What is even more unbelievable to imagine is that so many of those incidents could have been avoided if people were allowed to carry concealed guns in certain places. Concealed carry, or concealed weapons, is the practice of carrying weapons, such as a handgun, in public in a concealed manner. All fifty states in the United States allow concealed carry in public places to some degree. But, some places, for example, schools, restaurants, and stores, prohibit concealed weapons. The controversy about whether concealed weapons should be prohibited in certain locations has been debated for years, and more often in the past decade. On one side of the debate, supporters of the “gun-free zones” claim that prohibiting concealed weapons in certain locations will reduce crime and ensure that the location is free of gun violence, allowing concealed weapons can result to more guns landing in the hands of criminals, and some even insist that public safety should be left to professional, qualified police officers, not ignorant citizens with little to no expert training. However, it is absolutely necessary to know that prohibiting weapons in certain locations

There are many loose ends in Stand Your Ground Laws that should not be there. Nine states with the law allow a shooter to shoot in order to defend their property even if their life is not in danger or if the perpetrator is retreating. Four states allow deadly force if there is a need to protect personal property, such as money and electronics. This can lead to justified homicides, even if there is little value in the property (“Mayors Against”). Property is being used as an excuse to shoot someone or to cry out self defense. Homicides are occurring without purpose because of these

The most common reason why people argue that they need to have a gun is for safety, so they can protect themselves against burglars. If a burglar would come into your house, you would have a better chance defending yourself and your family with a gun, than if you did not have a gun. The number of concealed weapon owners is at an all time high. In comparison the number of homicides had drastically decreased alongside the growing rate of legal concealed weapons. This number had been nearly cut in half in the past 20 years(Goldberg).

As of 2014 the only states that still abide by the duty to retreat are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. Due to the elimination of the duty to retreat self-defense concept or the underuse of the duty to retreat self- defense concept in many states; recently the Stand Your Ground Law has become one of the most controversial and infamous laws in the United States(Thomson Reuters,2014).

Stand your Ground law states that a person may use deadly force in self-defense without the duty to retreat when faced with a reasonable perceived threat. When Stand your Ground laws were advocated in Florida and other states, their proponents marketed them as a reestablishment of a natural right, arguing “the duty to retreat has not always been a part of the common law”. The historical context may be misleading, allowing self-defense only when reasonably necessary, and a duty to retreat when attacked outside one’s home. The National Rifle Association seek to influence the Stand your Ground Law as a away for people to protect themselves. Though opponents who were against this law worried it would encourage the use of deadly force. For example, a 2004 case James Workman, a seventy-seven year old retiree who was sleeping in his RV, where an intruder busted into the trailer. James shot the intruder and had to wait months for the verdict. Prosecutors then decided the shots he

The United States’ Stand Your Ground law, states that any and all individuals have no duty to retreat from any place they have lawful right to be, and may use any level of force, including lethal, if they reasonably believe they face an imminent and immediate threat of serious bodily harm, or death. Forty-six states have adopted a type of “Castle Doctrine,” meaning that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is under attack. Twenty-two states have removed that duty to retreat from other places in public as well. In those states the Stand Your Ground law thus states that a person has no duty to abandon a place that they have the right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. These descriptions leave quite a large gray area, and many questions to be asked. So then, do Stand Your Ground laws need to be redefined, providing a clear answer to any and all questions that are asked about these laws?

The United States Constitution is a social contract between the U.S. government and its citizens, which promises their [the citizens’] rights and liberties will be protected. The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that every citizen has the Right to Bear Arms; moreover, it means that an individual has the right to defend him or herself from physical harm. States are passing Stand Your Ground laws, which are similar to the Castle Doctrine (one has the right to defend oneself in the confines of his or her home), but the Stand Your Ground laws extend the range; instead, people may defend themselves using deadly force in any area they are permitted access (Jealous, 2013; Cox, 2013; Moore, 2012). Stand Your Ground laws contain flaws wherein predators or vigilantes may twist the law to their benefit, yet the Stand Your Ground laws are meant to justify the deeds victims must perform in order to defend themselves. Stand Your Ground laws are beneficial through their fundamental purpose, but how defendants are abusing the laws and how critics claim that the presence of a gun influences the victim’s decisions during an attack are detrimental to the enhancement of the laws.

“Stand your ground” law is beneficial to the state of Florida. “Stand Your Ground is a form of self-defense law that allows individuals to meet force with deadly force without an affirmative duty to retreat (standyourground.org).”The stand your ground law was adopted by Florida in 2005. additionally, twenty-two other states adopted this law, which is used in different situations in each state, but are very similar. The law was adopted from a 17th century English common law called Castle Doctrine. In the court case Lovett v. State, rather than creating a new defense law the stand your ground law broadens the scope of self-defense by establishing no duty to treat. Prior to the passing of broadening law, a person would first have to use every

The Stand Your Ground laws are placed into effect as a measure to protect the honest American citizens in cases of self-defense. They allow citizens to defend themselves using deadly means without an attempt to retreat from the situation. The laws remove the “duty to retreat” when a person is attacked in public. In turn, they allow the citizen to meet their attacker, using force against force. In Florida, victims can declare immunity from trial under Stand Your Ground—however they have to prove to a judge at a preliminary hearing (with a mass of evidence) that they acted in self-defense.

What are “Stand your ground” laws? This is accurate in the United States; there are current states with different options on “stands your ground” laws; and the different perspectives on how it’s viewed, why it’s a law and why it’s proficient to have. Stand your ground laws states that, a person may use deadly force in defense without the duty to retreat, when faced with a reasonable perceived threat. Retreat is when a person doesn’t back down, doesn’t run away, or try to defeat the enemy. Only under certain circumstances that deadly force is used; is readily capable of causing death or serious physical injury. “Stand your ground laws” have taken different directions in certain areas, but isn’t a law in others. In this

2. It protects families and their property from intruders. You cannot defend your loved ones from an armed intruder if you are unarmed. Guns are used as self-defense and are needed whenever the police fail to provide the services of protection to the general public.

In 2011, a homeless woman, Jaime Caetano, was severely beaten by her ex-boyfriend and was transported to a hospital. After she was released from the hospital, her friend gave her a stun gun to protect herself just in case any situation like this ever re-occurred. During a shoplifting incident later that year police found Caetano’s stun gun inside of her purse, she told officers she had it to defend herself from her ex-boyfriend against who she had restraining orders. Caetano now has found herself in the highest court in Massachusetts, at the center of a second amendment case. The Supreme Judicial Court is being asked to determine if the state’s law infringes on a person’s second amendment right to bare arms. They are also being asked whether or not the rule stating “you have the right to defend yourself in your own home”, applies to a homeless person.