"Safe enough for babies" - I know, irrelevant, but I couldn't resist. |
You may be wondering, what the hell????
Back in 2005, Florida became the first state to adopt a SYG law. Based on British common law on self-defense, SYG eliminates the duty to retreat when using self-defense and expands the “Castle Doctrine.” BUT SYG specifically denies people prosecutorial immunity under SYG if “[t]he person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, [or] residence . . . such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision of no contact order against that person.” (Much of this comes from the American Criminal Review.)
In case you're wondering, the NRA helped write Florida’s SYG law; and most SYG laws are based on Florida's. (See - We Helped Draft It" here) Now the NRA will tell you that SYG allows women to protect themselves from rapists, etc. But that's only from rapists who are strangers. If you know them - well, you're gonna have to figure something else out.
NERD NOTE: 82% of women who have been raped were raped by someone they knew; only 18% by a stranger. (See Rape Statistics here)
So, despite the fact that women are more likely to be victims of domestic violence than of stranger-danger, 82% v. 18%, those violent partners are the specific people women are not allowed to defend themselves against under SYG. BTW, the NRA specifically helped write it this way.
So, okay, you might say, all they have to do is get a protective order. Yeah, well, only 28% of female victims get one. Most victims of domestic violence are afraid, desperately afraid. And rightly so. I've seen cases where the man waited until the woman came out of the courthouse and either killed her in the parking lot and/or followed her to her next destination and beat the crap out of her and/or killed her. (Marissa Alexander HAD a protective order, and was STILL denied SYG.)
And it's not just Marissa Alexander. Take a gander at this blog from Patheos listing dozens of horrendous but true examples of women trying to defend themselves and/or their families, and ending up in prison: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/08/why-is-the-nra-ignoring-this-14-year-old-girl-jailed-for-shooting-her-abusive-father.html.
What in the holy hell is going on? Well, for one thing, the NRA has consistently opposed revoking a person's 2nd Amendment Rights (i.e., the right to own a gun) just because they have been convicted of domestic violence, no matter how heinous and disturbing. And most people who have been convicted of domestic violence and/or have protection orders against them are, sadly, male.
NOTE 1: To be fair, the NRA is beginning to walk back a tiny, tiny, tiny bit on the issue of convicted domestic abusers, mostly because (1) Women have been raising holy hell about it; and (2) women vote; and (3) a high-profile executive of the NRA was in a high-profile domestic abuse case, and the publicity fall-out was bad. BUT - it's still only a little walking back - the NRA still opposes expanded background checks, opposes including things like stalking under "domestic abuse", and opposes giving abused women SYG rights. (It also depends on the state)
SCJ Clarence Thomas
NOTE 2: It also depends on the judge: In February, 2016, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke for the first time in 10 years from the bench - to protest against making a “misdemeanor violation of domestic conduct... result in a lifetime ban on possession of a gun, which, at least as of now, is still a constitutional right.” (See here)So what is going on? Why don't women have the same rights to SYG when their lives are threatened, even if it is a domestic partner?
I think it all goes back to the olden days, when British common law said that acts of petty treason were:
And notice this little detail:
A man (clergyman/servant) convicted of petty treason was punished with hanging.
A woman convicted of petty treason was punished by being burned at the stake.
A significant difference in punishment level even back then, wouldn't you agree?
A man (clergyman/servant) convicted of petty treason was punished with hanging.
A woman convicted of petty treason was punished by being burned at the stake.
A significant difference in punishment level even back then, wouldn't you agree?
This significant difference in punishment level still holds true:
"The average prison sentence for men who kill their intimate partners is 2 to 6 years. Women who kill their partners are sentenced, on average, to 15 years." (University of Michigan study here)
"The average prison sentence for men who kill their intimate partners is 2 to 6 years. Women who kill their partners are sentenced, on average, to 15 years." (University of Michigan study here)
Stand your ground? If only they could...
The denial of SYG laws also applies to children who are threatened by parents. Not sure about parents who are threatened by children. Anyone know about that?
ReplyDeleteA terrific column! And sadly all too pertinent.
ReplyDeleteEye-opening, Eve—and certainly not in a good way. Thanks for sharing all this.
ReplyDeleteThat's important information, Eve, and deeply disturbing. Thanks for letting us know.
ReplyDeleteEve, you could probably trace the roots of this situation all the way back to the beginning of human kind where the male of the species was bigger and stronger, thus more dominant. And, since those in power are reluctant to give up any of their power, the release has been incredibly slow. A few hundred years back, women were considered to be chattel. Look how long it took to get the vote. The U.S. considers itself to be the most enlightened country when it comes to human rights, yet look at all the inequality people still suffer in our nation. So, keep shining that spotlight on these specific problem areas.
ReplyDeleteThanks, everyone, and R.T. - I think you're right. Our rights are very modern and very fragile.
ReplyDeleteEve, as you know, I’ve written about this terrible law before. Proponents selling the law call it “Stand Your Ground”. Opponents call it “Shoot First” and worse names.
ReplyDeleteThis law isn’t especially based on British common law; rather the Castle Defense is. The SF/SYG law is peculiarly American. It’s also, you may note in the lobbying leading up to its promotion and passage, not intended for black people. Last I checked, only 1% of killers invoking the SF/SYG law have been black. Marissa Alexander is black.
Prosecutors and police firmly opposed the law. It’s made prosecution of murders here in Florida extremely difficult. It’s been used to avoid prosecution and convictions in a number of cases including shootings of unarmed, non-violent people (including at least one asking for help). All the law requires (beyond what you pointed out) is that the shooter say he is afraid for his life. Although Don West chose not to use the SF/SYG defense in the Trayvon Martin, he could have.
Although Marissa Alexander had been treated terribly by the Florida justice system and, in my opinion, should not be prosecuted, the answer isn’t to extend the law, but repeal it. The Castle Defense has long been proven effective. The new SF/SYG law simply allows a more cavalier attitude in killing someone.
Leigh, I too would much rather see SYG laws repealed than extended. I just wanted to point out that victims of domestic abuse (mostly women) are specifically excluded from this law. Which is horrendous. And that, no matter what law, etc., is used for conviction, men still get much lighter sentences for killing their domestic partners than women do.
ReplyDelete