Stand Your Ground Laws Vs. What Is Right

Stand Your Ground Laws Vs. What is Right

A recent fatal shooting of a Florida teen, Trayvon Martin, has called into question the Stand Your Ground laws as well as the right to bear arms. This tragedy happened on the night of February 26, 2012. Seventeen year old Trayvon Martin was walking home late at night when George Zimmerman, a volunteer neighborhood watch member, spotted the young boy. Zimmerman follows Trayvon, because he does not recognize him as a member of the community and Trayvon seemed suspicious. Eventually there is a confrontation, Zimmerman fatally shoots Trayvon. Zimmerman claims he acted in self-defense and was set free without charges or any jail time. The controversy over this cause has resulted in many arguments and formed opinions.

One such article, "Focus Must Be Narrower" by Adam Winkler, argues that Florida's Stand Your Ground Law is too broad in allowing a person to use deadly force if they feel their life is threatened in any location. Winkler is a professor of constitutional law at the University of California. He is also the author of "Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America." Legislators, Senator Peadon and state Representative Dennis Baxley disagree, and argue that the law does not allow a person to pursue and confront people. Baxley in his article, "A Necessary Law, but Not in This Case," says the law is a good law allowing people the right to protect themselves and not retreat when being attacked. Winkler will argue the Florida Law as written does not clearly define this but rather broadly states that a person may use deadly force when there is reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary to prevent death or bodily harm to himself or others.

Winkler shows strong examples of logos but is weak in pathos and ethos. Winkler's opinion makes a lot of sense, it is very logical. He explains the Stand Your Ground laws well, and ties it together by using the Trayvon Martin case. He lacks pathos because he does not use emotional appeal to enhance his argument. Winkler lacks creditability because he does not show his strong authority on the subject. The ethos of "Focus Must Be Narrower" would have been stronger if he had referred to his book "Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America." In his book he talks about the individual right to bear arms and the importance of effective gun control. He writes about needing a balance between the right to bear arms and laws to improve gun safety.

Yes, sometimes it is acceptable to bear arms for self-defense. But, what exactly is considered reasonable self-defense. It can be argued that Zimmerman escalated the situation to a confrontation by following Trayvon Martin. For all we know Trayvon could have felt threatened or in danger and acted out the way he did because he was defending himself. Trayvon's side of the story