This article from today's New York Times discusses how John Locke would view Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law (if you don't know what that is--where have you been living? under a rock? Look it up). It actually quotes several passages from Locke that YOU have read! (Don't you feel smart?)
I'm curious what you all think about the argument being made here...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am personally against the "Stand Your Ground" law. The argument being made is that Locke's writing supports the " Stand Your Grand" law due to the fact that he would believe this is "perfect nature" as said in the article. However, I think for a man to have access to a deadly weapon in public and an excuse to use it. Although someone could say they need this for self defense, this law has been abused in court, just like the Ohio Teen rape case where the teens defended themselves by saying their brains were not mature enough to choose from wrong and right. People are using laws like this to get an exemption from prison; moreover, there is no excuse for murder. To sum up my opinion on the "Stand Your Ground" law, it is a way for man to murder without consequences.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Paul that the "Stand Your Ground" law is ridiculous. Firstly, the law is ethically challenging, because it takes self defense to an extreme level, perhaps making it unjust. Secondly, there are several flaws in this law, which the article exposes using Locke. For example, the law in theory works, however as Locke would say, men cannot be the judges of how to punish. Therefore, somebody could claim to be using this law, but could really have done the action out of revenge which is what Locke says men will do. Therefore, this law doesn't eliminate murder, but rather encourages it, which has been seen with the "Loud Music" case as well as Trayvon Martin. In conclusion, I believe the "Stand Your Ground" law to be ridiculous and supporting murder rather than preventing it.
ReplyDeleteThe Curtis Reeves case is the one that stood out to me as the most outrageous. This is because he is the one that engaged the other man in conflict for merely texting during the start of a movie. The man who was texting threw popcorn at him and so Reeves shoots him. First of all who brings a handgun to the movie theatre??? Secondly how is popcorn being thrown at you a threat to your life? The stand your ground law allows people like Reeves to be the judge of threats on their lives, which in some cases can be beneficial, but in others is completely absurd. For example this law gives me the right to use force (deadly if I deem it necessary) to defend myself if I even see someone give me a look that I deem threatening. I think this law is ridiculous even though it's creators had good intentions. It allows trigger happy people to get away with murder.
ReplyDelete