Wehrwolfen
Senior Member
- May 22, 2012
- 2,750
- 340
By Charles C. W. Cooke
July 25, 2013
In our discussions of the Stand Your Ground principle, bogeymen and shadows predominate. We hear much of the National Rifle Association, of the conservative nonprofit ALEC, of the South, and, particularly ludicrously, of white supremacy. Disinformation and hyperbole, too, are rife. To take the more extravagant of the rules critics at face value would be to conclude that permissive self-defense regimes are recent inventions a hijacking of the justice system by would-be vigilantes and their enablers. But all of this is rather silly. In truth, the Stand Your Ground principle, which holds only that one may fight back without the duty to retreat if attacked, has been restored as the American norm after a short and naïve hiatus. What we are witnessing now is the resurrection of an old and valuable principle. As Andrew Branca of Legal Insurrection notes, the first explicit reference to the notion comes not in 2005 with the passage of Floridas now-infamous law, but instead in the case of Runyon v. State, all the way back in 1877.
[Excerpt]
Read more:
National Review Online | Print
July 25, 2013
In our discussions of the Stand Your Ground principle, bogeymen and shadows predominate. We hear much of the National Rifle Association, of the conservative nonprofit ALEC, of the South, and, particularly ludicrously, of white supremacy. Disinformation and hyperbole, too, are rife. To take the more extravagant of the rules critics at face value would be to conclude that permissive self-defense regimes are recent inventions a hijacking of the justice system by would-be vigilantes and their enablers. But all of this is rather silly. In truth, the Stand Your Ground principle, which holds only that one may fight back without the duty to retreat if attacked, has been restored as the American norm after a short and naïve hiatus. What we are witnessing now is the resurrection of an old and valuable principle. As Andrew Branca of Legal Insurrection notes, the first explicit reference to the notion comes not in 2005 with the passage of Floridas now-infamous law, but instead in the case of Runyon v. State, all the way back in 1877.
[Excerpt]
Read more:
National Review Online | Print