Stand Your Ground’s Moving Goalposts

(photo: p4nc0np4n/flickr)

Well, it’s certainly nice to hear that the Republican presidential candidates don’t think that Stand Your Ground covers following someone and then shooting them to death as they beg for their life, but I think they’re not so much condemning George Zimmerman and the Sanford PD (both of which richly deserve it) as desperately trying to defend this horrible law.

The right wants the conversation to be about whether Stand Your Ground legalizes cold-blooded murder (“Of course not!  What kind of bloodthirsty animals do you think we are?”), instead of the much more important question of whether it emboldens it, or about how often it provides de facto protection for murderers when there are no living witnesses to contradict their version of events.

Crossposted from Multi Medium

Comments are closed.