The Perfect Storm

In his book, The Perfect Storm, Sebastian Junger used this metaphor to depict the convergence of weather variables that produced incredibly dangerous conditions. Still, the fishing boat captain had a choice. He made the wrong one and people died. 
We have a perfect storm brewing in the United States. And more people are making bad choices facilitated by certain variables. I believe Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were two of its most well-known victims.
Even though there are good reasons to think about race relations in the case of that  incident in Sanford, FL. I believe there is another set of variables that should be examined.
The storm variables I’m writing about are 1) concealed carry laws. 2) The “weapons effect”. 3) “Stand your ground laws”, which subvert our system of justice.
Every state, except Illinois, allows carrying a concealed weapon by qualified citizens. Some states take the “qualification” issue more seriously than others.
The "weapons effect" is the finding that the presence of a weapon or even a picture of a weapon can cause people to behave more aggressively. Although once a controversial finding, the weapons effect is now a well-established phenomenon.
And this from Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE, specifically section 776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force which says, “A person who uses force as permitted or is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer […]As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant. (emphasis added) Since enactment of this law, fatal “self-defense” incidents have increased 300 percent in Florida.
Currently 25 states has similar laws. Five more are considering them in this year’s legislative sessions.
Consider for a moment, that if Zimmerman had not carried a weapon, would he have pursued Martin against the directive of the 911 operator? Without a weapon would he have felt the urge to take matters into his own hands by placing himself in the situation? Without the “stand your ground” would he have been so emboldened?
There are the compounding variables: Zimmerman’s apparent need to find trouble (46 previous 911 calls) – the trend of recent break-ins in his neighborhood – the controversial suspicious look of a young person in a hoodie.
I do not know whether  race was an issue but I contend that the event was facilitated by the three variables that I mentioned above.
I am a gun owner, so please don’t mistake my position. I believe a citizen has the right to own guns for home protection or in the field for hunting. Although America is armed to the teeth, I’m not arguing for its disarmament for one simple reason: if we tried, the criminals would still have guns.
But make no mistake, we are heading in the wrong direction with regard to those three factors I mentioned above. One cannot read a newspaper or watch a news show without being reminded of gun violence every day.
There is something in the American psyche that celebrates violence. Our entertainment is filled with it. Our heroes wreak of it. Our fascination thrives on it.
There are 90 guns for every 100 U.S. citizens. “We own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.” When you consider just the single factor of the “weapons effect”, it’s no wonder that among modern industrialized countries, we are the most violent.
Robert DeFilippis   

Comments

  1. I do not understand how "stand your ground" laws subvert our system of justice... how? What do you mean? The Florida statutes seem fairly reasonable to me: I think you should have cited 776.012 and 776.041 as well, 776.032 implies that if force was NOT justified given the context of the related statutes, then the person who used force could face criminal and/or civil actions.

    With regards to the Martin-Zimmerman case, it seems way too early to draw any dispassionate facts let alone conclusions as to what really happened that night, especially in light of all of the media histrionics and celebrity grandstanding that's churned-up those already murky waters.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Normally I wouldn't publish an anonymous comment but I want to answer this one. It subverts our system of justice because it allows a determination of guilt or innocence without a trial process based on how the perpetrator felt about the incident. You said I should have quoted the other sections of the laws because they could justify criminal charges. Once again, how is that determined without a trial. It seems to me that these laws allow a bit too much leeway for personal action. They've increased 300 % since the law was enacted. Regarding the Martin-Zimmerman case, I'm not drawing any conclusions.I am proposing that certain causal variables exist that might shed light on the incident.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts