Let me get this straight. George Zimmerman, who has no legal authority over anyone, stops Trayvon Martin, who was doing nothing illegal, and demands that he account for himself. Martin, who has no idea why someone significantly larger than himself is accosting him, is understandably frightened and chooses to defend himself. Zimmerman, who initiated the conflict, kills Martin in response.
I thought “stand your ground” laws were intended to allow the person who is placed in a dangerous situation to take whatever steps they see fit to protect their life.
Isn’t this precisely what Martin did? So why are advocates of these stand your ground laws insisting that it’s Zimmerman, and not Martin, who was in the right here? I can only assume that there’s a “no blacks allowed” clause in these bills that hasn’t been properly conveyed to the public.
— David A. James