Is it just me or is this interesting? It’s now six days since the New York Times published Adam Liptak’s story reporting that in the past year, 15 states have adopted “stand your ground” laws, allowing victims to use deadly force in cases where they might otherwise have been required to retreat. I saw the story the day it came out, but I had other fish to fry so I let it pass. It occurred to me tonight (six days later) that I hadn’t seen much commentary. A Google Blog Search assured me that others had weighed in—but wait. My search calls for “15 states” and “self defense.” I limited myself to stories after August 6 (the story came out in the paper dated August 7). As of
Say what? Only 203 hits? This is gun control we’re talkin’ here, one of (I would have thought) the hottest of hot button issues, ripe to yield talking points from either side at the scratch of an itchy trigger finger. People, this isn’t very much. Is there just too much else going on? Or the dog day doldrums? Or--? (I reject the suggestion of “nothing new to say”—it hasn’t ever stopped anybody yet).
A desultory skim suggests the predictable responses on each side. Volokh perhaps gets the prize, not for their ultimate stance (Guess what? They think the Times got it wrong)—but for “giggle test” argumentation:
[A]t most 15 states have adopted what was already the rule in most states.
(I say "at most 15 states" because it is quite possible that some of those states never had the retreat rule and only adopted the FL statute because they liked other aspects of it, not to make a substantive change in the law of homicide. … )
Well, sure. But it at least as likely that legislators adopted the rule without the least notion whether it altered existing law or not, but out of supine subservience to the gun lobby. But think twice before you step on my toe in the airport security line. I may be packin’ heat.
No comments:
Post a Comment