The National Rifle Association, as we all know, is a benevolent group that just wants to make sure that every American gets the chance to marry the gun or guns of their choice. So it's not too surprising to learn that the NRA literally wrote the text for a new bill that would expand Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law to protect people who fire warning shots or wave a gun around, just as long as they have a really good reason to do so. Like, for instance, being white and seeing some scary black teenagers who might do the knockout game all over you, we guess.
The bill was drafted by gun lobbyist and former NRA president Marion Hammer, who also brought us the original Stand Your Ground law; she generously allowed two actual members of the Florida legislature, Sen. Greg Evers and Rep. Neil Combee, to sponsor it in their respective houses. Hammer also brought the world the original Stand Your Ground law back in 2005, and has pushed expansions of concealed-carry laws in Florida and other states.
So what would this new bill allow Responsible Gun Owners to do?
The current bill would amend the state's expansive Stand Your Ground law—which permits residents to use deadly force in numerous circumstances—so that it also allows the nebulous "threatened use of force." In effect, it means that gun owners could walk free for brandishing their gun in a threatening manner or firing a shot indiscriminately to "warn" a potential assailant.
No, we can't imagine any scenarios at all where people would abuse that law, not a one. This should do a lot to de-escalate testosterone-fueled arguments, don't you think? Considering that Florida is rapidly becoming a state where brandishing a gun takes the place of a handshake in everyday social interactions, this may not be such a surprising development.
The new measure would also exempt gun owners from the state's "10-20-life" law, which requires a minimum 10-year sentence if a gun is used in the commission of a felony -- a law that the NRA supported at the time, but which it now feels is too restrictive, because some uses of guns might still be considered illegal, and don't you people know what "shall not be infringed" even means?
And just to add an extra bit of WTF to the mix, the proposal is being pushed in supposed support of the case of Marissa Alexander, the woman who was sentenced to 20 years for firing shots while trying to escape from her abusive husband -- in that case, "stand your ground" was deemed inapplicable, because obviously the law doesn't apply to black ladies. The new proposal would address the injustice of that case by putting in place new protections for shooters that black ladies will also not be able to invoke.
Instead of expanding the pro-death Stand Your Ground law, they should return to the traditional duty to retreat principle before using deadly force. And anyone claiming self-defense should face a jury. Let them decide if it was justified instead of the police or a prosecutor.
And the invulnerable ubermensch that's laughed in the face of your bullets has to duck the thrown gun.