# SYG laws Post-Zimmerman **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 14, 2013, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459 "2013-07-14T05:03:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/241 "2013-07-25T15:10:32Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Sure it does. What if only 450 defendants claimed self-defense? I’m having a hard time finding statistics on how many people assert self-defense claims, but [URL=“[Tally of 'stand your ground' cases rises as legislators rethink law](http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/tally-of-stand-your-ground-cases-rises-as-legislators-rethink-law/1221412#)”] indicates that 130 people did so in the last two years in Florida alone. If **Bricker** wants to weigh in with his personal perception that will be good enough for me. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/242 "2013-07-25T15:15:52Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I’m having a hard time finding statistics on how many people assert self-defense claims, but [URL=“[Tally of 'stand your ground' cases rises as legislators rethink law](http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/tally-of-stand-your-ground-cases-rises-as-legislators-rethink-law/1221412#)”] indicates that 130 people did so in the last two years in Florida alone. If **Bricker** wants to weigh in with his personal perception that will be good enough for me. We’d also need to know how the FBI determines what is or isn’t a justifiable homicide. Would Zimmerman count, since he was charged but acquitted and he raised self-defense? Or do only people who weren’t charged with a crime count? All it says is “The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.” The Florida article states: > [@](#): > > In 50 of the cases, the person who used force was never charged with a crime. Another nine defendants were granted immunity by a judge, and nine cases were dismissed. > > In 10 cases, the defendant pleaded guilty to lesser crimes. > > Of the 28 cases that made it to trial, 19 people were found guilty of a crime. > > Twenty-two cases are still pending. (The outcomes of two could not be learned by press time.) So, of the 108 cases that have been resolved, only 29 resulted in a conviction, which is 27%. Based on that, it can’t be said that the majority of people who claim self-defense are lying. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/243 "2013-07-25T15:17:11Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I’m having a hard time finding statistics on how many people assert self-defense claims, but [ indicates that 130 people did so in the last two years in Florida alone. If **Bricker** wants to weigh in with his personal perception that will be good enough for me. If I’m reading [URL=“[http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-5](http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-5)”]this]([Tally of 'stand your ground' cases rises as legislators rethink law](http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/tally-of-stand-your-ground-cases-rises-as-legislators-rethink-law/1221412#)) right, Florida had 984 murders or non-negligent manslaughters in 2011. We could guess they had roughly that many again in 2012 (stats aren’t out yet). 130 out of almost 2000 is like 7%. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/244 "2013-07-25T15:18:56Z")
The FBI’s justifiable homicide data is based on state law enforcement statistics. It includes only those homicides deemed justifiable under the law of the reporting state by the investigating law enforcement agency. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/245 "2013-07-25T15:20:48Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > If I’m reading [this](http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-5) right, Florida had 984 murders or non-negligent manslaughters in 2011. We could guess they had roughly that many again in 2012 (stats aren’t out yet). 130 out of almost 2000 is like 7%. All 130 were not homicides, either: > [@](#): > > The Times analysis shows that more than 70 percent of the 130 cases involved a fatality. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/246 "2013-07-25T15:22:36Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > The FBI’s justifiable homicide data is based on state law enforcement statistics. It includes only those homicides deemed justifiable under the law of the reporting state by the investigating law enforcement agency. So, that’d probably be the 50 where no charges were filed, and possibly the 9 where immunity was granted. Though, not all of those were homicides. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/247 "2013-07-25T15:22:50Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > If I’m reading [this](http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-5) right, Florida had 984 murders or non-negligent manslaughters in 2011. We could guess they had roughly that many again in 2012 (stats aren’t out yet). 130 out of almost 2000 is like 7%. Those are all crimes _reported_. The 130 only includes cases that went to trial. We only have a homicide clearance rate of about 45%, so in more than half those cases there was nobody being charged. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/248 "2013-07-25T15:29:01Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > We’d also need to know how the FBI determines what is or isn’t a justifiable homicide. Would Zimmerman count, since he was charged but acquitted and he raised self-defense? Or do only people who weren’t charged with a crime count? All it says is “The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.” [Here](http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/murder) is what the FBI says: > [@](#): > > The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program defines murder and nonnegligent manslaughter as the willful (nonnegligent) killing of one human being by another. > > The classification of this offense is based solely on police investigation as opposed to the determination of a court, medical examiner, coroner, jury, or other judicial body. The UCR Program does not include the following situations in this offense classification: deaths caused by negligence, suicide, or accident; justifiable homicides; and attempts to murder or assaults to murder, which are scored as aggravated assaults. > > Data collection > > Supplementary Homicide Data—The UCR Program’s supplementary homicide data provide information regarding the age, sex, and race of the murder victim and the offender; the type of weapon used; the relationship of the victim to the offender; and the circumstance surrounding the incident. Law enforcement agencies are asked—but not required—to provide complete supplementary homicide data for each murder they report to the UCR Program. Information gleaned from these supplementary homicide data can be viewed in the Expanded Homicide Data section. > > Justifiable homicide—Certain willful killings must be reported as justifiable or excusable. In the UCR Program, justifiable homicide is defined as and limited to: > ◾The killing of a felon by a peace officer in the line of duty. > ◾The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen. > > Because these killings are determined through law enforcement investigation to be justifiable, they are tabulated separately from murder and nonnegligent manslaughter. Looks like it’s just the police investigation, which sort of makes sense since courts can take years to reach a determination. Zimmerman’s case was originally determined, by the police in Sanford, to have been justifiable homicide, so I suspect that’s how they reported it. In your example, of 108 cases, the police probably report the findings like this: 50 justifiable homicides and 56 murders (9+9+10+28), and the two unknown outcomes. What I’m driving at here is that the FBI’s UCR probably understate justifiable self-defense. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/249 "2013-07-25T15:33:04Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > So, that’d probably be the 50 where no charges were filed, and possibly the 9 where immunity was granted. Though, not all of those were homicides. I doubt it. In those 9 cases, that immunity was granted by a judge, which means murder charges were filed, which probably means the police determined that they thought it was murder and that’s likely how they reported it to the FBI. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/250 "2013-07-25T15:40:45Z")
Also, the Times article figure of 130 cases in which Stand Your Ground was “invoked”, whatever they intend for that to mean, is for the period 2005-1Q 2012, not the last two years: > [@](#): > > The controversial law that police have cited in their decision not to charge the man who shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin has been invoked at least 130 times statewide since 2005. Setting aside the 22 pending cases, we are left with 108 cases. 70% of the 130 involved a fatality, assuming the pending cases aren’t disproportionately ones with fatalities, that leaves 76 cases with a fatality that have been resolved one way or another, in the period 2005-1Q 2012. So, we need to compare 76 self-defense claims against all homicides in that time period, and the clearance rate, to have some idea of what percentage of homicides involved a self-defense claim, right? Statistics are not my strong suit. > [@HurricanDitka](#): > > I doubt it. In those 9 cases, that immunity was granted by a judge, which means murder charges were filed, which probably means the police determined that they thought it was murder and that’s likely how they reported it to the FBI. Not necessarily, remember that there is civil immunity as well. Someone whom the police declined to charge might still pursue the immunity hearing, to fend of a wrongful death suit, or in case a change in the local police department’s leadership or local pressure led them to change their minds and charge a crime later on. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/251 "2013-07-25T15:57:11Z")
I think we’re getting a bit sidetracked here. I’m not married to the “most self defense claims are lies” theory, and it seems that even if I was right it’s a close thing. Either way, I don’t think that detracts from the point I was making to **jtgain** , which is that there are certainly _lots_ of false self-defense assertions. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/252 "2013-07-25T16:11:17Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > No. The standard jury instructions at the time (based on prior FSC cases) established that “a person placed in a position of imminent danger of death or great bodily harm to himself by the wrongful attack of another has no duty to retreat if to do so would increase his own danger of death or great bodily harm.” State v. Bobbitt, 415 So. 2d 724, 725 (Fla. 1982). > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Again, no. This standard of “if to do so would increase his own danger of death or great bodily harm” isn’t clearly fleshed out. Bricker stated that it has to be preponderance (\>50%). What if I legitimately believe that retreating will increase my chance of death by 1%, am I required to flee under the standard set in Bobbitt? In other words, the evaluation of that chance of successful retreat is the determining factor in whether or not I’m guilty of a crime, correct? That is precisely what SYG is supposed to mitigate, the second guessing of both the person defending themself and later the jury tasked to do the same. > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I hadn’t really thought it through. It seems so obvious to me that I was really quite surprised he asked. Look at it this way. It’s fair to say that the vast majority of people who kill claim self defense, right? And the majority of people who kill [are not acting in self defense](http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl15.xls)? Ergo, the majority of people who claim self defense are lying. A couple points - SYG doesn’t just protect those who kill, it protects anyone who defends themself. The comparison to FBI justifiable homicide statistic is not inclusive of that. In addition I would not assume that the majority of people who kill actually claim self defense - is there a basis for that assumption? Given the quantity of defensive gun use I question your assumption that the majority of those people do so not in self defense. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/253 "2013-07-25T16:12:06Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I think we’re getting a bit sidetracked here. I’m not married to the “most self defense claims are lies” theory, and it seems that even if I was right it’s a close thing. Either way, I don’t think that detracts from the point I was making to **jtgain** , which is that there are certainly _lots_ of false self-defense assertions. There aren’t none, but neither do they appear to be the majority, more like 1-in-4, going by the Florida data. The law shouldn’t assume that all are truthful, or that all are false. I sympathize with **jtgain** ’s point that the aggressor can choose not to be aggressive just as readily as the threatened can choose to retreat, but the law should promote the ideal outcome, in which no one’s dead in the street. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/254 "2013-07-25T16:22:41Z")
I find the outcome of bad guys who try to kill me dead in the street to be an ideal outcome in a bad situation. I’m opposed to the death penalty because I think the criminal justice system is fallible. However if someone is actively breaking into my home and I shoot and kill them as they come through the window there is no doubt whatsoever as to their guilt and I would feel zero remorse. I do not deny that with SYG there would and are people who claim defense and are actually lying. There are definitley tradeoffs here. As I stated earlier, I’m comfortable with the concept that guilty men must go free to ensure innocent men do not get imprisoned, executed, or otherwise financially ruined. SYG puts into practice the concept of the whole 10 guilty go free rather than 1 innocent go to prison and all that. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/255 "2013-07-25T16:31:44Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I find the outcome of bad guys who try to kill me dead in the street to be an ideal outcome in a bad situation. Really? Even if you could safely remove yourself from the situation and leave everyone alive? [QUOTE=Bone] I’m opposed to the death penalty because I think the criminal justice system is fallible. However if someone is actively breaking into my home and I shoot and kill them as they come through the window there is no doubt whatsoever as to their guilt and I would feel zero remorse. [/quote] In your home, sure. Keep the Castle Doctrine exceptions, you shouldn’t have to retreat from your home. [QUOTE=Bone] I do not deny that with SYG there would and are people who claim defense and are actually lying. There are definitley tradeoffs here. As I stated earlier, I’m comfortable with the concept that guilty men must go free to ensure innocent men do not get imprisoned, executed, or otherwise financially ruined. SYG puts into practice the concept of the whole 10 guilty go free rather than 1 innocent go to prison and all that. [/QUOTE] To some degree, but it also encourages the outcomes that lead to a trial in the first place. If no one gets wounded or killed, no one has to worry about being convicted, do they? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/256 "2013-07-25T16:50:23Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > This standard of “if to do so would increase his own danger of death or great bodily harm” isn’t clearly fleshed out. Bricker stated that it has to be preponderance (\>50%). What if I legitimately believe that retreating will increase my chance of death by 1%, am I required to flee under the standard set in Bobbitt? In other words, the evaluation of that chance of successful retreat is the determining factor in whether or not I’m guilty of a crime, correct? That is precisely what SYG is supposed to mitigate, the second guessing of both the person defending themself and later the jury tasked to do the same. The preponderance standard he is talking about is the burden of proof. It refers to the weight of evidence, not the chances of successfully retreating. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/257 "2013-07-25T16:52:02Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > To some degree, but it also encourages the outcomes that lead to a trial in the first place. If no one gets wounded or killed, no one has to worry about being convicted, do they? Of course they do. See the case of [Marrisa Alexander](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/) for an example. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/258 "2013-07-25T16:52:05Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > SYG puts into practice the concept of the whole 10 guilty go free rather than 1 innocent go to prison and all that. You wouldn’t need as many instances if letting the guilty go free if you disincentivized the use of deadly force in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/259 "2013-07-25T16:56:29Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Of course they do. See the case of [Marrisa Alexander](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/) for an example. Even a cursory look at the Alexander case reveals it had nothing to with self-defense. She went back into the house after retrieving a gun and her “warning shot” hit the wall six inches from her ex’s head. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2013, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459/260 "2013-07-25T16:56:40Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Of course they do. See the case of [Marrisa Alexander](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/) for an example. Fair point. Rephrase: “If no one uses force, no one has to worry about being convicted, do they?” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syg-laws-post-zimmerman/663459.md?page=14)