Does Trayvon Martin’s death expose a dangerous law?

I wouldn’t go as far as Eugene Robinson did in his March 27 op-ed column [“Dangerous ‘Ground’ ”], to say the “Stand Your Ground” laws are a “license to kill,” but they certainly are dangerous (if not redundant and pointless). But are they discriminatory?

Mr. Zimmerman, the son of a white father and Peruvian mother, shoots Trayvon Martin, a black teenager, in Florida. Police decide not to file charges against Mr. Zimmerman because of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law.

What if it were the opposite? What if Mr. Zimmerman were wearing a hoodie, carrying a can of iced tea and Skittles, and Mr. Martin felt threatened by him and shot him. Would no charges have been filed if Mr. Martin had claimed an act of self-defense?

Let’s be real. Whether or not the “Stand Your Ground” laws were created to discriminate, they do.

Linda Ho, Great Falls

● 

Self-defense is an inalienable right, and it is instinctive when one is attacked. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, and this has been affirmed to be an individual right by the Supreme Court.