Holder Challenges Stand Your Ground Laws

Posted by Tina

Eric Holder spoke before the NAACP in response to the not guilty verdict in the George Zimmerman trial> He took the occasion to criticize and challenge “stand your ground” laws that exist in several states including Florida. Odd, since the Zimmerman defense did not base its case on the stand your ground law. But Eric Holder would never let a manufactured crisis go to waste and so remarked:

The laws “sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods,” Holder said, by “allowing – and perhaps encouraging – violent situations to escalate in public.”More than 30 states, including Florida, have passed “Stand Your Ground” laws, which allow people to defend themselves with deadly force, rather than retreating, if they feel they are in danger or a serious felony is about to be committed.

Here’s a simple question for Eric Holder: If retreat is a preferable method for avoiding a violent situation wouldn’t that have been the better option for Trayvon?

Here’s another question: Why not portray breaking into the home or business of a fellow citizen, who may be lawfully and rightly armed, as “sowing dangerous conflict”?

When are you going to name the predator criminal as the most dangerous threat to safety and civility in our neighborhoods?

Bryan Preston of PJ Media observed today that liberal progressives are revisiting the 1970’s when the criminal aggressor was first portrayed as the victim:

From the 1960s well into the 1980s, laws regarding criminal justice and self-defense were stacked heavily against law-abiding Americans. Liberal judges routinely handed down minimal sentences after criminals had been convicted of heinous crimes. Americans who had defended themselves against criminals using force, often in their own homes, faced severe prosecution for exercising their natural right to defend their loved ones, their homes and their property. Crime rates soared and outrage built up as the legal system allowed criminal after criminal to walk free while acting in self-defense could ruin a law-abiding American’s life. Liberals did all of this in the name of “social justice,” on a theory that the system is inherently racist, poverty causes crime, and society is ultimately to blame for criminals. Crime victims by implication had it coming, and criminals are just misunderstood and should be freed after serving token sentences.

Two reactions evolved to stem the power of liberal judges and overzealous prosecutors who were making life easier for criminals. One was mandatory minimum sentencing. Legislatures passed laws tying the hands of judges so they had far less power to unleash violent criminals back onto the streets. Another was passing castle doctrine and stand your ground laws to codify the right of self-defense. These laws made it more difficult for prosecutors to grandstand and persecute Americans who had used force to defend themselves against violent criminals. State after state also passed concealed carry laws to enable Americans to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry firearms to defend themselves. This year, Illinois became the 50th state to pass concealed carry.

Mr. Preston notes that crime rates dropped following the passage of these laws except in the cities where liberal progressives remain in power and create law that favors the criminal over the law abiding citizen.

Eric Holder is wrong. His gun grabbing desires will do nothing to stop violent crime.

It’s time Americans stood their ground against criminality generally. We should let it be known throughout the land that violence or theft against any human being simply will not be tolerated or excused. Criminals, like children, need to know what the boundaries are. It is insane to make the boundaries optional…debatable…squishey…irrelevant! Strong laws and swift justice backed up by personal accountability in the home would end most of the violence in America.