They give people the freedom to use the "stand your ground" plea, then a woman who has public record of being physically abused, "cannot" stand her ground. Corey states the gun "could have" killed the children upstairs and that the defendant went outside and came back in, therefore she deemed she was angered not fearful. ? An abused woman grabbing a gun is a fearful woman. Could a woman be fearful and angered? Certainly. If your angered, does this over-ride your fearfulness? No.? It is subjective and the next person that encounters a similar situation may be found to be justified in using the "stand your ground" plea. We see this a lot with cases, well like little Jordan Brown. Only 11 years old and an automatic charge as an adult. Then the next child that is accused or prior children, their cases go directly to juvenile court. It is wrong. It is politically motivated and prejudice in all ways, shapes, and forms. We can't just speak up about the racial inconsistency, we see it anytime you have mandatory charges where the D.A. has the power to over-charge. They need accountability.
Here is what I do not like to see. Now that Zimmerman is "also" facing "political" motives in the charges and treatment he is receiving, will he be "over-sentenced" due to the political pressure that surfaced because of his case. I mean, clearly the state made the "stand your ground" law easy for people like Zimmerman to "shoot first". The problem Zimmerman had was that he wrongly "assumed" Martin had a gun. The state is still a little guilty for promoting the freedom to shoot first.
Point being, you have these laws that now have clear incidents proving they lack merit. Nothing that involves a gun, should ever be considered "black and white". No pun intended. There is a lot of gray zones. Any law that uses the word "mandatory" violates a person's constitutional rights. We see it here.
