In many of the articles and blogs on the "stand your ground" law, people are condemning or defending the Florida law that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman invoked to explain his shooting of the unarmed black teenager. It didn't take long for my students to start debating the issue in class, with the fight coming down along racial lines, over whether the law was right or not. Finally, one student thinking about a career in law asked if we could see the law, which I pulled up from
the Florida legislature page.
Even those most critical of the Treyvon Martin shooting couldn't find a reason to oppose the law. Yet even the most ardent supporters contended it didn't seem the law applied to Zimmerman. If anything, Zimmerman seemed to make up his own law as he disregarded orders not to follow the suspect. Nor has anyone established the presence of a weapon that Martin possessed. He just had Skittles and ice tea.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who was the chief executive of the state who signed the law into effect, was critical of Zimmerman as he defended the "stand your ground" law. At the University of Texas at Arlington,
Bush said, "This law does not apply to this particular circumstance. Stand your ground means stand your ground. It doesn't mean chase after somebody who's turned their back."
Bush also faulted local officials for dragging their feet on the investigation. Zimmerman might not have known about the law, but law enforcement officials who investigated the matter should have known better that
the law was inapplicable to the case. Florida Gov. Rick Scott has been condemned for being slow to take an interest in the matter.
Now folks are pressuring Scott to quickly review, and
possibly dismiss, the law. But the first priority should be to prosecute the case that evidently had nothing to do with the law. Justice for Martin should come more quickly. The review of the law, which is not responsible for the shooting, should be slower and more thorough.