What I wrote:
As you know, the recent incident in Sanford, FL, in which a man possessing a lawfully concealed weapon allegedly shot and killed another man has provoked much heated debate about Florida statute 776.012, otherwise known as the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law.
While certain groups seem intent on deflecting attention towards their own agendas, and away from the real issue in this case – namely, whether a crime was committed – there is no doubt that the case has focused the nation’s attention on Florida and the freedom its citizens enjoy with respect to the use of a firearm for self-defense.
Did Mr. Zimmerman ‘Stand His Ground’ and defend himself against attack? Or did he pursue Mr. Martin, and inexcusably violate the letter and intent of our self-defense statutes? The fact is that no one knows at this point in time what really happened. Yet many are wont to either support Mr. Zimmerman, or condemn him. Either choice is premature and serves only to incite passions against this state’s many law-abiding and responsible citizens.
Governor Scott has appointed a panel to review Florida Statute 776.012, and I believe very strongly that this is, in and of itself, a very dangerous path. The ‘Stand Your Ground’ law was never intended to permit anything more than the right to not retreat when confronted with what is believed to be the threat of great bodily harm. As such, the status of the law should not be called into question. Either Mr. Zimmerman was attacked as he stood he ground, and he defended himself, or he was the provocateur, and pursued Mr. Martin, thus voiding his protection under the statute. In the case of the former, he was within his rights, and blame must be placed where it belongs – on Mr. Martin. In the case of the latter, Mr. Zimmerman should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The death of any man is not to be taken lightly, but responsibility must be accepted, no matter who is to blame.
There is nothing wrong with Florida Statute 776.012, and in fact it is an important piece of legislation that helps to protect law-abiding citizens from an ever-increasing number of violent criminals on our streets.
My greater fear, as a law-abiding citizen who understands that the police cannot always protect me, is that any presumption that 776.012 should be repealed could lead to equally faulty reasons for striking 776.013 (Castle Doctrine) and 776.032 (Immunity from Civil Prosecution,) which are equally important statutes that serve to protect our citizens when they choose to defend themselves against violent criminal attack.
I trust that you will continue to stand up for the law-abiding citizens of your District, and speak out against the rush to judgment that threatens both the legal standing of this case, and the freedom that is afforded our citizens by Florida’s sensible and protective firearms statutes.
Matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration; we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. And now...the weather! ---- Bill Hicks
Last edited by eracer; 04-03-2012 at 13:35..