In the wake of the George Zimmerman trial, gun control advocates (and race hustlers) demanded the repeal of “stand your ground” laws. Although the laws simply remove the legal obligation to retreat when attacked, and Zimmerman’s defense team never evoked SYG, the antis tried to rebrand SYG as the “shoot first ask questions later” and “a license to kill” law. In truth, a SYG defense is subject to the same “reasonable person” standard as any other use of deadly force. Would a reasonable person have done the same thing? In a Montana murder trial where SYG was raised, the jury’s answer was of course not . . .
Just days before he shot to death a 17-year-old German exchange student, Markus Kaarma told hair stylists he had been waiting up to shoot some kids who were burglarizing homes.
He told them they would see it on the news.
Kaarma hoped to bait an intruder by leaving his garage door partially open and placing a purse inside, prosecutors said. And when he did, a motion detector alerted him early April 27. Kaarma took a shotgun outside and almost immediately fired four blasts into the garage. Diren Dede, unarmed, [“scavenging” for alcohol] was hit twice. He died after the final shot hit him in the head.
For those reasons, Kaarma’s “castle doctrine” defense, which allows people to use deadly force to protect their home and family, failed him Wednesday. A Missoula jury convicted him of deliberate homicide.
The AP story reports that 30 states have stand your ground laws. Why not the rest? [h/t Scott I]