Stand Your Ground

I live in one of those states that has adopted a variation on the “stand your ground” law. This law allows an individual to own and carry a concealed firearm once they have completed the proper training and testing. It allows a person to use deadly force in defending their person against assault when that person fears for their life. There are several things the law does NOT do. It does not allow the permit holder to banish a firearm without cause. Cause is a lot more than an obnoxious waiter in a restaurant of a loud neighbor that gives you the binary salute because you don’t like his loud music. In every case, the owner and user of that hand gun is held responsible for their actions so pulling a gun and using it better have some significant and verifiable reasons. A good law with good intent, but like any other law, there are gray areas where it could be abused.

The recent shooting in Florida shows one of those large gray areas that should not be happening. When a person on a neighborhood watch patrol not only carries a gun, but tracks a suspect and ignores the direction of a 911 operator to cease that action, all protections disappear. It’s no longer a matter of self defense, it’s the action of a stalker that is looking for trouble rather than just trying to assist the police.

Firearms in the United States have certainly had a checkered past. Since the writing of the bill of rights, the “right to bear arms” has been hotly contested in some circles. Only after being directly addressed by the Supreme Court in 2008 was their a clear standard, but even today that standard is subject to much debate and interpretation. Types of guns, use of guns, the simple ownership of some guns, number of bullets in guns, types of bullets …. The issues are endless. Some states claim that gun ownership has decreased crime while others argue the opposite is true. The only real fact of the matter is, much like the cold war, when both sides have equal levels of weapons and the ability to retaliate, a sort of stalemate exists until one side makes a move; and in doing so they must recognize their could be an equal or greater response. Small comfort, but comfort all the same.

It is reasonable to question some weapons. A .50 cal Barrett, while a really neat weapon with amazing power, really has only one purpose. At $8 a shot, it’s certainly not a matter of economy and if somebody is breaking into your house, this mammoth isn’t exactly the ideal for storming through the house, looking for the bad guy. Every gun has it’s purpose and it is reasonable to restrict certain weapons based upon their high performance, long range killing capabilities, and ability to do a lot more than defend the average citizen against home invasion, armed robbery, etc, etc. Frankly, I don’t know anyone that would carry that thing around for hunting bear much less rabbits or other “varmints” as some claim, unless of course your back yard is infested with a few T-Rex and the like.

Let’s face it; guns are the very foundation of this countries creation, foundation, and survival. We all want the right to protect ourselves from oppression, unlawful treatment, and the list goes on. Guns give us the feeling that we have regained some of the control we have lost in this country. Perhaps the fact that the rights of gun ownership will remain hotly contested is a good thing. It will keep us from becoming too lackadaisical and remind us of the need for us to fight for each and every right we hold dear.