Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:35 pm
Time: 11:35 pm
Results for stand your ground laws
9 results foundAuthor: McClellan, Chandler B. Title: Stand Your Ground Laws and Homicides Summary: Since 2005, eighteen states have passed legislation that has extended the right to self-defense, with no duty to retreat, to places a person has a legal right to be, and several other states are debating to introduce similar legislation. The controversies surrounding these laws have captured the nation’s attention recently. Despite significant implications that they may have on public safety, there has been little empirical investigation of the impact of these laws on crime and victimization. In this paper, we examine how Stand Your Ground laws that extend the right to self-defense to areas outside the home affect homicides using monthly data from the U.S. Vital Statistics. We identify the impact of these laws by exploiting the variation in the effective date of these laws across states. Our results indicate that Stand Your Ground laws are associated with a significant increase in the number of homicides among whites, especially white males. According to our estimates, between 4.39 and 7.44 additional white males are killed each month as a result of these laws. We find no evidence to suggest that these laws increase homicides among blacks. Our results are robust to a number of specifications and unlikely to be driven entirely by the killings of assailants. Taken together, our findings raise serious doubts against the argument that Stand Your Ground laws make America safer. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2012. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper No. 18187: Accessed June 26, 2012 at: http://papers.nber.org/papers/w18187?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://papers.nber.org/papers/w18187?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw Shelf Number: 125397 Keywords: HomicidesSelf-DefenseStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: Finegan, Sharon Title: Watching the Watchers: The Growing Privatization of Criminal Law and the Need for Limits on Neighborhood Watch Associations Summary: On the night of February 26, 2012, George Zimmerman, a member of a neighborhood watch program, was patrolling his community in Sanford, Florida when he spotted Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old African-American high school student, walking through the neighborhood. Zimmerman called 911 and indicated that he was following "a real suspicious guy." Zimmerman then disregarded the police dispatcher's request that he discontinue following Martin and approached the teenager. In the resulting confrontation, Zimmerman used his legally-owned semi-automatic handgun to shoot and kill Martin. Martin had been returning from a local convenience store to his father's fiancée's house, where he was spending the night. He was unarmed. George Zimmerman is currently being charged with second-degree murder. It is unclear whether Zimmerman will be proven guilty of the offense, but what is certain is that despite the fact that Zimmerman was engaged in law enforcement activities, Zimmerman's conduct in approaching and confronting Martin is not governed by the same constitutional restrictions that limit the actions of police. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments that restrict police in detaining, searching, and interrogating suspects do not apply to neighborhood watch organizations. At the same time, in many states neighborhood watch members can carry firearms and are protected under Stand Your Ground laws from having to retreat when confronted by a suspect. Thus, neighborhood watch members wield significant authority, but with neither the training that police officers receive nor the restrictions that govern their conduct. While neighborhood watch groups, just like police, perform a valuable service to the community, they are also in need of statutory oversight and restrictions, just like the police. This Article proposes statutory provisions that could effectively address the problems posed by the growing privatization of criminal law enforcement as it relates to neighborhood watch associations. By enacting statutes that limit the abilities of neighborhood watch members to confront suspects, mandate training for those engaged in law enforcement activities, and expand the exclusionary rule to bar evidence seized illegally by private citizens engaged in law enforcement functions, legislatures would better ensure that due process guarantees are not abandoned when private actors participate in law enforcement activities. Details: Houston: South Texas College of Law, 2012. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2012 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2139591 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2139591 Shelf Number: 126396 Keywords: Gun ViolenceNeighborhood Watch (Florida, U.S.)PrivatizationStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: Florida. Governor's Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection Title: Report of the Governor's Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection Summary: The Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection was established by Governor Rick Scott on March 22, 2012. Governor Scott appointed Lieutenant Governor Jennifer Carroll as Chairwoman and Reverend R.B. Holmes, Jr. as Vice Chairman. The 19 member Task Force was comprised of a diverse group of people from across the state. The Task Force held public hearings, took public testimonies, solicited ideas, reviewed all matters related to the rights of Floridians to feel safe and secure in the state, and drafted a report to present to the Governor and the Legislature. After holding seven public meetings across the state, hearing from a broad array of relevant subject matter experts, and considering 16,603 pieces of correspondence, 711 phone calls, 64 comment cards, 160 public comments at Task Force meetings, and over 30 documents, the Task Force recommends the following: 1. The Task Force concurs with the core belief that all persons, regardless of citizenship status, have a right to feel safe and secure in our state. To that end, all persons who are conducting themselves in a lawful manner have a fundamental right to stand their ground and defend themselves from attack with proportionate force in every place they have a lawful right to be. 2. The Task Force recommends the Legislature examine the term “unlawful activity” as used in Chapter 776, Florida Statutes and provide a statutory definition to provide clarity to all persons, regardless of citizenship status, and to law enforcement, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and the judiciary.* *Discussed definition of “unlawful activity” to give guiding language to the courts to ensure uniform application of the law with the intent to protect the innocent person. a) Task Force member State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle proposed the definition of “unlawful activity” should exclude noncriminal violations as defined in Section 775.08(3), Florida Statutes. b) Task Force member Judge Krista Marx proposed that the definition should include temporal proximity of the unlawful activity to the use of force. c) Task Force member Public Defender Stacy Scott proposed that the definition of “unlawful activity” should exclude some county and municipal ordinance violations. d) Task Force member Edna Canino proposed that the definition exclude citizenship status. The Task Force heard a number of examples related to the definition of “unlawful activity” used in Chapter 776, Florida Statutes. Questions were raised including whether the term applied to all unlawful activity including misdemeanors, ordinances, and minor traffic violations. Without a clear definition of the term “unlawful activity” the potential for inconsistent application of the law across the state may occur. Details: Tallahassee: Governor's Office, 2013. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: http://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Citizen-Safety-and-Protection-Task-Force-Report-FINAL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Citizen-Safety-and-Protection-Task-Force-Report-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 127998 Keywords: Guns (Florida, U.S.)Self-DefenseStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: Roman, John K. Title: Race, Justifiable Homicide, and Stand Your Ground Laws: Analysis of FBI Supplementary Homicide Report Data Summary: There are racial disparities throughout the criminal justice system. From stop and frisk, to motor vehicle searches at traffic stops, to sentencing and the application of the death penalty, African Americans disproportionately are contacted by the criminal justice system in myriad ways. Notably, finding a racial disparity is not synonymous with finding racial animus. African Americans are more likely to live in dense, impoverished places, and poverty and segregation are clearly linked to criminal incidence and prevalence. Distinguishing racial animus within racial disparities is exceedingly difficult with existing datasets that do not include such key measures as setting and context. However, it is possible to compare the rates of racial disparity across points of criminal justice system contact. Such an effort could help highlight comparatively disproportionate laws and procedures. One area of possible racial disparity—differences in findings that a homicide was ruled justified—has received little attention and could measurably improve that comparison. This paper addresses three research hypotheses to test for racial disparities in justifiable homicide findings: Do the rates of justifiable homicides differ by the race of the victim and offender? If there are racial disparities in the rates homicides are found justified, how does that disparity compare to other racial disparities in criminal justice system processing? and Are there fact patterns of homicides that increase racial disparities? The purpose of this analysis is to analyze objective national data that could measure the presence of racial disparities in rulings of justifiable homicides. In this analysis, the phrase “racial disparity” is value free: the presence of a racial disparity is a necessary but insufficient condition to identify racial animus in criminal case processing. Racial animus can only be causally identified if all other competing explanations for the existence of a racial disparity can be rejected. Without a prospective, randomized controlled trial—obviously impossible—such causal claims must have caveats. However, a well-designed retrospective study of observational data can identify important correlations between homicide case attributes and the presence of racial disparities. Other research can compare these rates of racial disparities to other racial disparities in the criminal justice system to determine how the rates of racial disparity in self-defense cases differ. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2013. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2013 at: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412873-stand-your-ground.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412873-stand-your-ground.pdf Shelf Number: 129589 Keywords: Gun ViolenceGunsHomicides (U.S.)Racial DisparitiesStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: American Bar Association. National Task Force on Stand Your Ground Laws Title: A Review of the Preliminary Report & Recommendations Summary: In 2013, the National Task Force on Stand Your Ground Laws was convened by the American Bar Association entities identified below, to review and analyze the recently enacted Stand Your Ground laws in multiple states and their impact on public safety and the criminal justice system. The ABA sponsors of the Task Force include the Coalition on Racial & Ethnic Justice, the Center for Racial and Ethnic Diversity, the Commission of Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession, Council for Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Educational Pipeline, the Section on Individual Rights & Responsibilities, the Criminal Justice Section, the Young Lawyer's Division, the Standing Committee on Gun Violence, and the Commission on Youth at Risk. The Task Force members are a diverse array of leaders from law enforcement, government, public and private criminal attorneys, public and private health, academic experts, and other legal and social science experts. Further, the Task Force's membership includes appointees from the above co-sponsoring ABA entities and strategic partners, including the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, the Urban Institute, the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children. Additionally, the Task Force has an Advisory Committee of leading academic and other legal and social science experts as well as victims' rights advocates. The Task Force has conducted a comprehensive legal and multidisciplinary analysis of the impact of the Stand Your Ground laws, which have substantially expanded the bounds of self-defense law in over half of the jurisdictions in the United States. The study detailed herein is national in its scope and assess the utility of previous, current, and future laws in the area of self-defense across the United States. In examining and reporting on the potential effects Stand Your Ground laws may have on public safety, individual liberties, and the criminal justice system, the Task Force has: 1. Examined the provisions of Stand Your Ground statutes and analyzed the potential for their misapplication and their risk of injustice from multiple perspectives, e.g. the individual's right to exercise self-defense, the victim's rights, and of the rights of the criminally accused. 2. Analyzed the degree to which racial or ethnic bias impacts Stand Your Ground laws. Particular attention was paid to the role implicit bias. First, the analysis focuses on how implicit bias may impact the perception of a deadly threat as well as the ultimate use of deadly force. Second, it looks at how implicit bias impacts the investigation, prosecution, immunity, and final determination of which homicides are justified. 3. Examined the effect that the surge of new Stand Your Ground laws had on crime control objectives and public safety. 4. Reviewed law enforcement policy, administrative guidelines, statutes, and judicial rulings regarding the investigation and prosecution of Stand Your Ground cases. 5. Conducted a series of regional public hearings to learn about community awareness, perceptions of equality in enforcement and application, opinions concerning the utility of the laws, and reactions to individualized experiences involving interactions with Stand Your Ground laws. 6. Prepared a final report and recommendations. Details: American Bar Association, 2014. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 9, 2014 at: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/racial_ethnic_justice/aba_natl_task_force_on_syg_laws_preliminary_report_program_book.authcheckdam.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/racial_ethnic_justice/aba_natl_task_force_on_syg_laws_preliminary_report_program_book.authcheckdam.pdf Shelf Number: 133195 Keywords: Crime ControlGun Control PolicyGun ViolenceGuns (U.S.)HomicidePublic SafetySelf-DefenseStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: Pittell, Harlan Title: "Stand your ground" laws and the demand for legal firearms Summary: Since 2005, 23 states have passed Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws: allowing a person to use deadly force in self-defense, even in situations where one can safely flee from an assailant. This study investigates whether SYG laws increased the demand for firearms by using data on background checks for firearms purchases as a proxy for the demand for legal firearms. Results from three alternative difference in differences estimates provide evidence that the passage of SYG laws generally led to an increase in the demand for legal firearms. Details: Ithaca, NY: Department of Policy Analysis & Management Cornell University, 2014. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Analysis & Management Honors Thesis: Accessed April 20, 2015 at: https://ecommons.library.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/36335/2/Pittell_Thesis.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://ecommons.library.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/36335/2/Pittell_Thesis.pdf Shelf Number: 135273 Keywords: Gun-Related ViolenceGunsHomicides (U.S.)Self-DefenseStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: American Bar Association Title: National Task Force on Stand Your Ground Laws: Report and Recommendations Summary: In examining and reporting on the potential effects Stand Your Ground laws may have on public safety, individual liberties, and the criminal justice system, the Task Force has: 1. Examined the provisions of Stand Your Ground statutes and analyzed the potential for their misapplication and the risk of injustice from multiple perspectives, e.g., the individual's right to exercise self-defense, the victim's rights, and the rights of the criminally accused. 2. Analyzed the degree to which racial or ethnic bias impacts Stand Your Ground laws. Particular attention was paid to the role of implicit bias. First, the analysis focuses on how implicit bias may impact the perception of a deadly threat as well as the ultimate use of deadly force. Second, it looks at how implicit bias impacts the investigation, prosecution, immunity, and final determination of which homicides are justified. 3. Examined the effect that the surge of new Stand Your Ground laws has on crime control objectives and public safety. 4. Reviewed law enforcement policy, administrative guidelines, statutes, and judicial rulings regarding the investigation and prosecution of Stand Your Ground cases. 5. Conducted a series of regional public hearings to learn about community awareness, perceptions of equality in enforcement and application, opinions concerning the utility of the laws, and reactions to individualized experiences involving interactions with Stand Your Ground laws. 6. Prepared a final report and recommendations. Details: Chicago: ABA, 2015. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 25, 2016 at: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/diversity/SYG_Report_Book.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/diversity/SYG_Report_Book.pdf Shelf Number: 137651 Keywords: Gun PolicyGun ViolenceHomicidesPublic SafetyRacial DisparitiesSelf DefenseStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: Gerney, Arkadi Title: License to Kill: How Lax Concealed Carry Laws Can Combine with Stand Your Groud Laws to Produce Deadly Summary: The shooting death of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman's subsequent acquittal have focused the nation's attention on expansive self-defense laws - so-called Stand Your Ground laws - that enable an individual to use deadly force even in situations in which lesser force would suffice or in which the individual could safely retreat to avoid further danger. Leaders from around the country, including President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, have questioned how Florida's law - which is similar to laws enacted in 21 other states-may have contributed to the circumstances that led to Martin's death. Yet the Martin case also implicates another set of laws: the state laws governing who may carry concealed firearms - the laws that put a gun in Zimmerman's hands in the first place. Under Florida law, even individuals such as Zimmerman, who have a criminal history and a record of domestic abuse, are generally entitled to a concealed carry permit, as long as they are not barred from gun possession under federal law and as long as their offense does not meet a very narrow range of additional exclusions under state law. If Zimmerman had applied for a permit in one of the many states with stronger permit requirements, his history of violence and domestic abuse would likely have disqualified him from obtaining a concealed carry permit. This case might then have had a very different outcome. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2013. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 19, 2016 at: https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/StandYrGround.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/StandYrGround.pdf Shelf Number: 130127 Keywords: Concealed Carry LawsDeadly ForceGun ControlGun PolicyGun ViolenceGun-Related ViolenceStand Your Ground Laws |
Author: Gruber, Aya Title: Equal Protection Under the Carceral State Summary: McCleskey v. Kemp, the case that upheld the death penalty despite undeniable evidence of its racially disparate impact, is indelibly marked by Justice William Brennan's phrase, "a fear of too much justice." The popular interpretation of this phrase is that the Supreme Court harbored what I call a "disparity-claim fear," dreading a future docket of racial discrimination claims and erecting an impossibly high bar for proving an equal protection violation. A related interpretation is that the majority had a "color-consciousness fear" of remedying discrimination through raceremedial policies. This Essay argues that the primary anxiety exhibited by the McCleskey majority was a "leniency fear" of death penalty abolition. Opinion author Justice Lewis Powell made clear his view that execution was the appropriate punishment for McCleskey's crime and expressed worry that McCleskey's victory would open the door to challenges of criminal sentences more generally. Understanding that the Court's primary political sensitivity was to state penal authority, not racial hierarchy, complicates the progressive sentiment that McCleskey's call-to-action is securing equality of punishment. Derrick Bell's "interest convergence" theory predicts that even conservatives with an aversion to robust equal protection law will accept racial-disparity evidence when in the service of crime-control values. Indeed, Justice Powell may have been more sanguine about McCleskey's discrimination claim had mandatory capital punishment been an option. This Essay cautions that, outside of the death penalty context, courts and lawmakers can address perceived punishment disparities through "level-up" remedies, such as mandatory minimum sentences or abolishing diversion (which is said to favor white defendants). It analyzes examples of convergence between antidiscrimination and prosecutorial interests, including mandatory sentencing guidelines, aggressive domestic violence policing and prosecution, and the movement to abolish Stand-Your-Ground laws. Details: Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Law School, 2018. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 30, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3179707 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3179707 Shelf Number: 150388 Keywords: Capital PunishmentDeath PenaltyDomestic ViolenceRacial DisparitiesSentencingSentencing GuidelinesStand Your Ground Laws |