Stand your ground, Trayvon Martin, and George Zimmerman

In this post, I will ignore race. I know this might be the first time in this deal where this has happened (but I will touch on this at a later time) but I think from the conservative point of view, there are two separate issues I find in this story that should be addressed. This will address the Stand Your Ground law and while conservatives need to follow the lead of the Florida GOP and say that Stand Your Ground does not apply in this case.

Why run away from using this case to defend “Stand Your Ground”? Because any application of it in this particular issue hurts the cause. Why? Because Zimmerman did not actually stand his ground.
Looking at the very few actual facts in the case, Zimmerman does not look good. Listen to the 9/11 call Zimmerman makes..

1. George sees a suspicious person and calls the police.
2. He shows some concern that the individual is looking at him and was reaching in his waistband. This the only point where “Stand your ground” might be valid is right here and this is not where it happens.
3. He tells the operator that the individual is running away.
4. He gets worried that the person will get away and follows – operator informs him that he doesn’t need to do that.

Anything that happens after that is still murky but just to make my point, let’s assume that the story the Zimmerman camp is putting out is 100% accurate.

1. Zimmerman pursued Martin on foot.
2. Zimmerman started to returned to his vehicle.
3. Martin approached him from behind and asked him if had a problem.
4. Martin put him on the ground with a single punch and began beating his head on the sidewalk.
5. Zimmerman shoots Martin during the fight.

There are probably a million ways to look at the story put out. Looking at the Florida law, it is unknown if Martin knew that Zimmerman was armed. If so, he may have had the protection of the “Stand Your Ground” law. For Zimmerman, section 776.013 does not apply as Martin was acting within the law. The only portion Zimmerman can claim is:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
 
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony
 
We will assume that Zimmerman is telling the story 100% as it happened. If the conservative position is that you can follow someone armed, get your ass kicked, and legally shot them; then the “stand your ground” laws have no future. That is not a winning position and the liberals will claim victory on getting rid of these laws.

It doesn’t help that the police really screwed this up from jump. There was never any attempt to investigate what happened. They did not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol and that allowed the story to lead to where it is now. I cannot defend the actions of the police in this case and I cannot allow George Zimmerman to abuse the use of what I feel is a great enhancement to liberty and the right to self defense by making “Stand Your Ground” mean that anyone can shoot anyone for any reason and claim that they believe that was what was need to save their life.