Today, almost every state that had Jim Crow laws from 1876 to 1965 now has some form of “shoot first” or stand your ground law. In the history of the United States of America, no practice of law has caused more controversy, grief, injustice, and shame than Jim Crow laws, which were state and local laws enforcing racial segregation in the South.
The practice existed for 75 years, until 1965, after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. Jim Crow laws followed the 1800–1866 Black Codes, which had previously restricted the civil rights and liberties of African-Americans.
During it’s time, Jim Crow law encouraged prejudice, enabled discrimination, and deprived Black Americans of even the most basic qualities of life.
Segregation by race affected everything from the U.S. military and federal facilities to all public places, including schools, restrooms, restaurants, housing, and public transportation. Even drinking fountains were segregated.
The goal of this tweet posted on twitter was to show the irony of having stand your ground laws in today’s racially charged society, and many tweeps noticed it. I didn’t do the graphic. Props to the creator.
SB656, a bill designed to change Missouri’s self-defense laws – and make Missouri the first state since the Trayvon Martin incident to pass a stand your ground law – was vetoed by Governor Jay Nixon today (June 27). After sailing through the state’s Senate and the House, the bill had been awaiting approval or veto by Nixon since May 13.
It is possible for a gubernatorial veto to be overridden by the state legislature.
Nixon, a Democrat, faced enormous pressure from the Republican-led Missouri legislature to enact the law. The bill has been widely considered “veto-proof”; however, a bill which faces opposition by the Governor after passing through the legislature can be challenged with a veto override in the next legislative session, and still become law in the future.
SB656 would have allowed deadly force to be used by anyone who has permission to occupy private property, such as a house guest, and also make it a misdemeanor, and no longer a felony, for anyone carrying a concealed weapon into a place that has restrictions on concealed carry.
The bill also would have allowed open-carry without a permit, and expanded the state’s self-defense laws to include the words “does not have a duty to retreat from a dwelling, residence, vehicle, private property that is owned or leased, or anywhere else a person has a right to be – the very definition of stand your ground law – making Missouri the first state since Trayvon Martin incident to pass such a law.
Did you know there is at least one municipality in America that requires the head of household to own a gun? It’s just one of the many “gun laws” that the National Rifle Association (NRA) has pushed to enact across the nation. In fact, Thom Senzee reports on Advocate.com that there are other “crazy” gun laws – like stand your ground – that put our lives at risk.
The NRA has been so effective at defeating just about every proposed gun control measure in the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives, and in state houses across the country that it may be time to replace the term “lobbying” with a new one.
The NRA and its executive director, the unyielding Wayne LaPierre, have been working hard to enact pro-gun laws. For example, according to Mother Jones, LaPierre and company are bent on bringing stand your ground laws to all 50 states.
During the past four decades, the NRA has fundamentally changed the very meaning of the term “gun laws.” If you think “gun laws” refers to laws that limit the availability of guns, think again. This list of absurd legislation (and proposed legislation) shows how some are fighting to extend the right to bear arms to even schools and workplaces. See 7 Crazy Gun Laws That Put Our Lives at Risk on advocate.com
As a bill that would expand the state’s stand your ground law stalled in the Senate, the South Carolina Supreme Court has asked legislators to clarify under what circumstances someone can claim self-defense if they kill a stranger or someone else in their home.
They also asked the state lawmakers to determine if all defendants deserve a stand your ground hearing before a trial.
A bill that would shift the burden of proof in a stand your ground case to require prosecutors to prove there was no threat stalled in the state Senate on Thursday, May 19, when a subcommittee decided not to vote on it. The bill would essentially be an expansion of South Carolina’s existing “shoot first” stand your ground law.
Should the burden of proof shift from defendant to prosecutor, it would make it easier for a defendant to prove self-defense.
In response to the auction, Lucy McBath, mother of Jordan Davis who was killed in November 2012 at a Florida gas station during an argument over loud music (whose killer used stand your ground as part of his defense) penned this oped for the New York Daily News, exposing how both the auction of the firearm that killed Trayvon and NRA-backed stand your ground laws (and the legislators who vote for them) share the same deplorable lack of value for human life.
Stand your ground laws make communities less safe by letting people shoot to kill in public places, even when they can clearly and safely walk away from danger. And now Missouri is on the verge of becoming the first state to pass a new stand your ground law since Trayvon was killed.
The research on how stand your ground laws endanger public safety and in particular, disproportionately affect African Americans, is clear:
Everytown for Gun Safety found that states with stand your ground laws have, on average, experienced a 53 percent increase in homicides deemed justifiable in the years following passage of the law, compared with a five percent decrease in states without stand your ground statutes during the same period—an increase disproportionately borne by the black community. And after Florida passed its stand your ground law, its “justifiable homicide” rate tripled.
A 2012 study by researchers at Texas A&M found that stand your ground laws are associated with an increase in homicides, resulting in 600 more homicides nationwide each year.
The Urban Institute also examined racial disparities in justified gun homicide rulings that involve a single shooter and victim who are strangers. The researchers found that when white shooters kill black victims, 34 percent of the resulting homicides are deemed justifiable, while only 3.3 percent of deaths are ruled justifiable when the shooter is black and the victim is white.
Beyond all of that, Missouri’s SB 656 would also dismantle the state’s concealed carry permit requirement and allow people – including some violent criminals – to legally carry hidden, loaded handguns in public without a permit or any safety training. Missouri legislators passed this despite opposition from 76% of Missourians.
These are all reasons why hundreds of volunteers with the Missouri chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, part of Everytown for Gun Safety, have made phone calls, sent emails, met with their lawmakers and testified to defeat SB 656. The bill is now on the Governor’s desk.
Source: Everytown for Gun Safety/Moms Demand Action press release
With ownership of a car comes the responsibility to drive it safely and properly. Why is it easier in some places to get a license to own a gun than a license to drive a car? For a gun owner, there should also be a responsibility to use a gun safely and effectively. Do you think everyone should own a gun?
Democrats filibustered and put up a bold, powerful fight against SB656, a bill that will make Missouri the first since the Trayvon Martin case to become a stand your ground state. In the end, after a Senate vote of 28-8, the bill passed through the House with a vote of 114-36, disappointing many opponents. With the Senate majority vote, the bill cannot be vetoed by Democratic Governor Jay Nixon.*
SB656 changes several things in Missouri’s laws on self-defense, use of weapons, and concealed carry. The laws already included a castle doctrine, which covers protection of home & property.
Stand your ground was added under the unlawful use of weapons portion of the bill, when words were changed to state that now a person does not have a duty to retreat from a dwelling, residence, vehicle, private property that is owned or leased, or anywhere else a person has a right to be, as long as that person is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and not unlawfully entering or unlawfully remaining.
Here are some other key points in the legislation:
The act provides that any unexpended funds in a Sheriff’s Revolving Fund, which usually accumulate from year to year, will no longer be required to remain in the fund, and now may be used for other purposes or transferred to discretionary funds for the sheriffs.
The law will now allow deadly force to be used by anyone who has permission to occupy private property, such as a house guest. Previously it applied only to the property owner or someone leasing it.
UNLAWFUL USE OF WEAPONS
It’s will now be only a misdemeanor, and no longer a felony, to carry a concealed weapon into a place that has restrictions on concealed carry.
CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT FEES
Caps the CC permit fee at $100. Also provides options of a $500. lifetime fee rather than every five years; $200 to receive a Missouri extended concealed carry permit that is valid for 10 years or $250 for an extended permit that is valid for 25 years. To renew an extended permit, the permit holder must pay $50.
* It’s posssible for a gubernatorial veto to be overriden by a state legislarure.
Most movie theaters have a policy that forbids firearms, and you may think anyone would be a little uneasy in a dark theater where open carry is allowed, but results of an unscientific recent twitter sample poll indicate that some people would feel comfortable in a theater which allows open carry.
Surprisingly, some respondents (11%) appear to indicate they’d be fine with open carry and voted “Yes”, while a few (3%) indicated they don’t know how they would feel. Nonetheless, a majority of participating respondents -86% – voted “No” to the question “Would you be comfortable in a movie theater that allows open carry of guns?.” The twitter poll, conducted May 6-13, 2016, was offered to approximately 590 followers by the movement to change or repeal stand your ground laws.
Other questions asked in recent quick twitter polls by the movement include, “Should a blind person be allowed to own and use guns?” (the result was undoubtedly 100% ‘no’), a 3-day poll, and “Would guns on campus make colleges drop sensitive topics or be cautious discussing them?” (the result was 67% yes and 33%no), in a 5-day poll.
Check out final results of the movie theater poll below, and post what you think in the comments. You just might be a Floridian or Texan – if you are comfortable watching a movie in a theater that allows open carry.
Would you be comfortable in a movie theater that allows open carry of guns?
This is an excellent on-point article about a shameless, out-of-touch politician. As an example, he actually retweeted this:
UPDATE: On the weekend after the Legislative Session closed, Schaefer also retweeted a tweet onto his twitter profile which advised voters to say “No to Kurt Schaefer.” How much more out of touch can a politician get?:
In the gun-toting society that we live in, doesn’t it sometimes feel as though we’re all under the gun and we need to wear armor? The goal of two new gun-themed documentary movies, which debut on television this week, appears to be an attempt to shed light on America’s culture of guns and help us explore ways to reduce gun violence. I haven’t seen either one yet, but “Armor of Light” focuses on religion vs. guns and “Under the Gun” asymmetrically explores the gun debate.
Armor of Light premieres on the PBS “Independent Lens” series at 8:00 p.m. ET, Tuesday, May 10. It whisks us into the pulpit of evangelical minister Rob Schenck, an anti-abortion activist, and on a part of Lucia McBath’s journey, fighting for the legacy of her son, Jordan Davis, murdered by a misguided gun owner over loud music as he sat in the back seat of a friend’s SUV.
The film explores the balance of religion vs. guns. Schenck breaks with religious tradition and risks alienating his longtime friends when he questions if being pro-gun is consistent with being pro-life.
Under the Gun, produced and narrated by Katie Couric, premieres at 8:00 p.m. ET, Sunday, May 15 on EPIX, and dives head-first into the gun debate, examining events and people who have kept the gun debate fierce and the progress slow, even as gun deaths and mass shootings continue to increase.
The documentary looks at why politicians find it difficult to act and what’s being done on the state and local levels. It features families impacted by mass shootings in Newtown, Aurora, Isla Vista and Tucson, as well as people in other cities who experience gun violence on a daily basis.
Be sure to tune in and watch each one of these ambitious projects, then please come back and leave your thoughts below.
In the U.S., Florida’s “stand your ground” law is only promoting brutal murder and is disguised as self-defense there and in many other states nationwide. Instead of Americans just running away from danger, they face it and pull the trigger, claiming that the person they shot dead was killed because they feared for their life, using the gun in self-defense.
Ever since the groundbreaking incident happened between shooter George Zimmerman and now deceased Trayvon Martin, Americans have been acting quite differently after the court ruled in Zimmerman’s favor, claiming that the “stand your ground” law protected him from being convicted of murder.
In fact, the controversial law has been in place for at least 10 years in 26 states. After the ruling in Trayvon’s case, aggressors took note of how to get away with the harshest crime yet – murdering someone in cold blood during an altercation, then claiming to be in fear for their life, and that it was in self-defense.
Taking into account all of the incidents in which people have invoked stand your ground law, it becomes clear that an unarmed person can be shot dead in America, just because somebody thought the other person might possibly be armed.
To make it even less of a blur to understand, Florida’s self-defense statute states that, “A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.”
Sadly but true, “stand your ground” defenses have been on the rise in Florida in recent years. Research found that it has happened over 200 times since the introduction of the policy in 2005 and has been used 70 percent of the time. Unsurprisingly enough, a Tampa Bay Times 2012 study pointed out that not only have “stand your ground” cases been on the rise in Florida, but so have gun sales.
Americans could be on the brink of losing their lives if they make a naturally aggressive person angry, who also happens to be in possession of a firearm. If a person disagrees with the manner in which someone else is acting, they can shoot them, as maybe many think irrational or unexplainable behavior must mean violent, deadly behavior.
Sadly enough, it is unknown how many more states will introduce a type of “stand your ground” law or how many Americans will take advantage of this “free pass”, allowing them to get away with murder, granted they fear for their lives.
Unfortunately, we cannot ask people killed by someone invoking the law if he was in fear of his life and knew what the person using the law – who got off the hook – really had in mind. Society will never know their accounts of the day they were killed.
So, one matter remains clear: as long as the notorious “stand your ground” law stands strong in America, more innocent lives will be lost due to someone else’s exaggerated fear.
This article was originally published on March 26, 2014 by Voice of Russia, and is used according to terms set forth by Voice of Russia/Sputnik News. It has been edited and condensed from its original version for literary, interpretative, grammatical & timely relevance.
The year was 1967. The Vietnam War was raging. The Doors released their debut album. Elvis Presley & Priscilla got married. America was near the tail end of the civil rights movement with Lyndon B. Johnson as president, and future U.S. President Ronald Reagan had just become Governor of California.
On May 2, as the California State Assembly convened for a hearing on the Mulford Act – which made open carry of loaded weapons illegal in the state – 26 members of the Black Panther Party, a revolutionary group of African-Americans, armed with handguns and shotguns, strolled into the chambers to protest the proposed law, which was introduced as a result of the Panthers penchant for open carry. In the end, the law was passed and six Black Panthers pleaded guilty to disrupting a legislative session.
With open carry gaining popularity in a few states today, would this type of protest succeed? Check out one of the most popular tweets ever posted on @endyourstand