What's Hot
What's Going On


Search thousands of events in our database.


Search hundreds of restaurants in our database.


Search hundreds of clubs in our database.


OW on Twitter
OW on Facebook
Print Email


Gov. Rick Scott unlikely to agree to another review of state’s Stand Your Ground law

Guns don’t kill people, bad public policy does

Photo: , License: N/A

But what Scott seems unlikely to agree to is a renewed examination of the statute now that we know it encourages angry men to run with their guts and guns into a caustic situation that could likely end in the “self-defense” of murder. You know, call a special session and see if cooler heads could prevail in a hotheaded bicameral state legislature, just for the sake of looking like he gives a damn. Nope. Instead, Scott formally issued a statement on Friday calling for a day of prayer, because Jesus will fix this. Inaction now!

“I believe Stand Your Ground should stay in the books,” he told the protesters Thursday night, according to the Tampa Bay Times. “I agree with you, we should not have racial profiling.”

Which isn’t exactly true. Late last month, Scott seemed practically elated with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that gutted the preclearance portion of the Voting Rights Act. Just three weeks after that decision, Scott’s administration worked to have a Tampa case challenging the state’s notorious racially charged voter purge of 2012 dismissed based on that decision, even as a congressional task force is drafting new provisions for preclearance as allowed by the Supreme Court ruling.

That racial line connecting the Zimmerman case and the Voting Rights Act wasn’t lost on U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Boca Raton, who argued before a House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, according to the Palm Beach Post, that perhaps the two issues should be considered in tandem. Because, well, they are political, Governor.

Stand Your Ground laws, he said, “mainly protect white people who shoot a black person. Couldn’t one argue that Stand Your Ground laws and the use of such laws reflect modern racial bias in state laws and should be considered here in this context as we modernize our preclearance for (the) Voting Rights Act?”

Nope, that would make too much sense.

We welcome user discussion on our site, under the following guidelines:

To comment you must first create a profile and sign-in with a verified DISQUS account or social network ID. Sign up here.

Comments in violation of the rules will be denied, and repeat violators will be banned. Please help police the community by flagging offensive comments for our moderators to review. By posting a comment, you agree to our full terms and conditions. Click here to read terms and conditions.
comments powered by Disqus