NRA must push to change law that frequently 'works against people of color': Today's talker 'Does anyone believe a black shooter would escape arrest due to "stand your ground," much less avoid getting fatally shot by police?'

USA TODAY

Show Caption Hide Caption Fla. shooting victim's family happy with charge Family members of an unarmed black man who was shot and killed at a Florida convenience store say they are pleased the suspect was charged with manslaughter. (Aug. 14)

On Monday, prosecutors charged Michael Drejka with manslaughter in the July 19 shooting death of Markeis McGlockton. The two men argued over a parking spot in front of a store in Clearwater, Florida, and Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri originally used a controversial "stand your ground" law to avoid charges.

Problems with 'stand your ground' not in doubt

It’s time the NRA addressed Florida’s "stand your ground" statute.



The nation’s premiere gun-rights group flashed a brief spark of common sense in reacting to a decision by Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri, who cited the controversial law as his reason for not making an arrest in a fatal shooting that followed a dispute over a parking space.

Instead of pushing a confusing and controversial statute, the NRA can show some leadership by working with law enforcement, lawmakers and the courts to rein in stand your ground and bring some clarity to the self-defense law in Florida and other parts of the country.

If you still doubt that stand your ground has its problems, take the recent shooting out of Clearwater that has Florida and its controversial self-defense statute back in the spotlight.

The tragedy began with an argument between Michael Drejka and Markeis McGlockton’s girlfriend, Britany Jacobs. McGlockton had parked in the store’s handicapped space, which irritated Drejka and led to a confrontation.

Told that a man was shouting at his girlfriend, McGlockton rushed from the store and pushed Drejka to the ground in an apparent effort to defend Jacobs and his young children inside the car. As McGlockton backed away, Drejka drew his gun and fired.

Drejka is white. He has a concealed carry permit and a history of confrontation, but the sheriff who is also white dismissed Drejka’s past as irrelevant to the shooting. McGlockton and Jacobs are black.

Florida’s stand your ground statue gives a person the right to use deadly force — without a “duty to retreat.” Drejka told deputies he had to shoot to defend himself, Gualtieri said. Citing the high burden of evidence on the state to show that Drejka was unable to use stand your ground as a legal defense, the sheriff opted against making an arrest.

Imagine if Drejka had been black and McGlockton a white man defending his family? Does anyone believe a black shooter would escape arrest due to stand your ground, much less avoid getting fatally shot by police? That’s another problem with the law: its inconsistent application, which usually works against people of color.

Sean Pittman is the senior partner of Pittman Law Group, a Tallahassee-based law firm with statewide operations that specializes in government, administrative and corporate law. This was excerpted from a column that originally appeared in the Tallahassee Democrat, a part of the USA TODAY Network.

What our readers are saying

Letter edited for clarity and length:

I’m very glad that Michael Drejka has been charged in the shooting death of Markeis McGlockton and that he was put behind bars. He is a genuine menace to society. I live in Clearwater, Florida, and I work close to where the incident took place. According to reports, this isn’t the first time that Drejka has been aggressive.

I can’t help but wonder if Drejka would have acted out in such a bold fashion if former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush hadn’t signed “stand your ground” into law in the first place.

Bush did that in 2005, standing right next to National Rifle Association lobbyist Marion Hammer.

I would love the opportunity to ask Bush if he had it to do all over again (given all the that has happened), whether he would still sign it into law.

JoAnn Lee Frank; Clearwater, Fla.

Facebook comments edited for clarity:

Michael Drejka should have been charged immediately in the death of Markeis McGlockton. This is the correct course of action. He should be found guilty.

Michael Poquette

It’s called “stand your ground” because you don’t have to retreat.

If you feel threatened, and you aren’t doing anything illegal, then you should be able to use lethal force instead of retreating.

He will not be found guilty.

Robert Thompson

McGlockton was moving away and had no weapon. The shooter could easily have pulled the gun and used it just as a deterrent. He didn’t have to fire!

Larry Stonebridge

What others are saying about 'stand your ground'

Jacob Sullum, New York Post: "Markeis McGlockton and Michael Drejka both overreacted during their brief, fatal encounter in the parking lot of a Florida convenience store. McGlockton overreacted by pushing Drejka to the ground, and Drejka overreacted by drawing a pistol and shooting McGlockton in the chest. Although it is hard to see how Drejka’s use of lethal force could have been justified, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri declined to arrest him, claiming his hands were tied by Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. But that is not true, and Gualtieri’s misrepresentation of the law has renewed misguided criticism of Florida’s approach to self-defense, which contrary to popular misconception does not give a free pass to armed hotheads who claim to have fired out of fear. ... The signature feature of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, as the moniker suggests, is that people attacked in public places do not have a duty to retreat. But that rule, which most states have adopted and Gualtieri said he supports, did not figure in the sheriff’s decision. Gualtieri emphasized that someone who legally uses force in self-defense is immune from arrest under Florida law. But he never satisfactorily explained why that description applies to Michael Drejka."

Marion Hammer, the NRA, Politico: "Nothing in either the 2005 law or the 2017 law prohibits a sheriff from making an arrest in a case where a person claims self-defense if there is probable cause that the use of force was unlawful. ... Nothing in the law says a person can sue the sheriff for making an arrest when there is probable cause.”

Tampa Bay Times, editorial: "Before a jury ever hears the evidence against Drejka, he will be entitled to an immunity hearing if he claims self-defense in the case. Last year, the legislature amended the stand your ground law and made it even more insidious, flipping the burden of proof in such hearings to the prosecution. Now the state must show with 'clear and convincing evidence' why a person should not be immune — instead of requiring a defendant who has killed someone to show why he shouldn’t have to stand trial. That’s both backward and dangerous. Monday’s decision to bring a criminal case against Drejka is a positive step that will allow the public to see all the evidence and hear both sides of what led to McGlockton’s death. Like all criminal defendants, Drejka is entitled to a presumption of innocence and a fair process. But the process in Florida, as it stands now, has been tilted out of balance and needs correcting. Lawmakers should start by scrapping the stand your ground law."

To join the conversations about topics on USA TODAY, email letters@usatoday.com, comment on Facebook, or use #tellusatoday on Twitter.