DiscussMormonism.com

Posted: **Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:22 am**

He went on to say, “and if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, then it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.”

But the Illinois Review says Obama didn’t seem to have any of those concerns when in 2004 he co-sponsored S.B. 2386, which broadened the state’s Stand Your Ground law “by shielding the person who was attacked from being sued in civil court by perpetrators or their estates when a ’stand your ground’ defense is used in protecting his or her person, dwelling or other property.”

S.B. 2386 passed the Illinois state senate by a 56–0 vote on March 25, 2004. It sailed through the state house with only two “nay” votes. Both chambers were controlled by Democrats.

Stand Your Ground laws weren’t always much of a partisan issue. Florida’s law passed in 2005 after being approved unanimously in the state senate and on a 94–20 vote in the state house.

There was little outcry about the change from minority communities. Perhaps that’s because, as The Daily Caller discovered, “African Americans benefit from Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground” self-defense law at a rate far out of proportion to their presence in the state’s population, despite an assertion by Attorney General Eric Holder that repealing ’stand your ground’ would help African Americans.”

A third of Florida’s Stand Your Ground claims in homicide cases are made by African-Americans, a rate nearly double the black percentage of the state’s population. The majority of those claims have been successful, a success rate that exceeds that of Florida whites.

The Democratic Senate will be holding hearings on state Stand Your Ground laws in September. Here’s hoping some witnesses will be allowed to clear the air about the reality surrounding such laws.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354059/obama-voted-strengthen-illinoiss-stand-your-ground-law-2004-john-fund

Posted: **Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:16 am**

In regards to Obama, it's not always possible to predict unintended consequences of new laws. A good representative of the people will be willing to modify his or her stance in regards to new laws once data are gathered.

In regards to the often touted claim that African Americans benefit more from SYG in Florida, that's oversimplification. It may even be too early to draw valid conclusions, but there are some interesting data. One piece of information that seems pretty clear is that the race of the victim is more important than the race of the killer.

1. In states with SYG, the rate of murder and non-negligent manslaughter have increased by 8 percent.
2. In nonSYG states, whites who kill blacks are 250% more likely to be legally found justified than a white who kills another white. In SYG states, that rises to 354%.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... ound-laws/

In Florida in specific:

A Tampa Bay Times analysis of nearly 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in "stand your ground" — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/cri ... aw/1233152

I don't have a problem with people defending themselves with deadly force when necessary. The problem is that SYG is so vague that necessity is so subjective it becomes problematic.

What is interesting about these sorts of debates is that, aside from Catholics who tend to be consistent on "pro-life" issues, conservatives who label themselves "pro-life" in the abortion debate don't seem to be as concerned about the sanctity of life once outside the womb. It would seem to me that people who truly view all human life, at no matter what stage of development, even a blastocyst, as sacred would want extreme caution to be exercised in regards to what "necessary" really means in regards to taking another human life.

Posted: **Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:44 pm**

Of course the OP claim is not true, which should come as a surprise to absolutely no one.

This was a tweak to the "castle doctrine," which the president still does not oppose. That's a far cry from "Stand Your Ground," which first appeared a year later, in Florida.

But let's just say it were true. That certainly puts the lie to all the gun-nut characterizations of Obama as someone who has always wanted to abolish the 2nd amendment, doesn't it?

DiscussMormonism.com

Obama Voted to Strengthen Illinois?????s Stand Your Ground Law

Obama Voted to Strengthen Illinois’s Stand Your Ground Law

Re: Obama Voted to Strengthen Illinois’s Stand Your Ground L

Re: Obama Voted to Strengthen Illinois’s Stand Your Ground L