Letters to the Editor
Newsday
THE EDITOR: At the post-cabinet press conference on May 29, the Homeland Security Minister had the lights switched off and narrated a home invasion scenario. It was chilling. His performance Queen’s Hall worthy.
We all read the headlines daily, and no one wants to be the next victim of crime. The government is thus offering a proposed solution, one which it campaigned on.
Like many others, my emotions were indeed stirred by the presentation at that media conference. But I was reminded of a quote by American astronomer Carl Sagan: “Where we have strong emotions, we’re liable to fool ourselves.” This made me realise that I did not understand stand-your-ground and its impacts.
As a researcher I reviewed some of the top academic publications on stand-your-ground. As an educator, I share this evidence overview with the population for public education as consultation on the proposed law begins on July 22. As I have previously advocated, real reform requires real evidence.
What is stand-your-ground legislation? Stand-your-ground allows someone to defend themselves against attack (no duty to retreat) anywhere they have a legal right to be. This makes it different to the castle doctrine principle in common law, which allows someone to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. Stand-your-ground extends beyond the home.
Some have argued that the castle doctrine may be sufficient for cases of home invasion. For example, in a 2023 column, the current Speaker of the House of Representatives noted: “A fair, reasonable, proportionate and sensitive application of the common law already provides a comprehensive framework in this area of the law” (Express, May 3 2023).
How common is stand-your-ground legislation?
Internationally, stand-your-ground is not very common, more common is the castle doctrine principle. In the US this is the opposite. In 2024, 35 of 50 (70 per cent) of US states had stand-your-ground laws or statutes that expand the castle doctrine to apply beyond the home.
Utah was the first to pass stand-your-ground laws in 1994. Florida did it in 2005. The Florida model triggered a wave of legislative changes across other states. The UNC government has noted its intention to draw on the Florida model.
What is the impact on homicides? In a study published in 2017, researchers associated with the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research used state-level data from the US to show that stand-your-ground laws lead to an increase in homicides – about 30 deaths more per month on average across states. There was also an increase in hospitalisations related to firearm-inflicted injuries.
This study was one of the first robust studies done to establish a causal relationship between stand-your-ground laws and crime.
Another study by researchers from the University of Oxford (also published in 2017) focused on Florida only and found that the implementation of its stand-your-ground law was associated with a 24.4 per cent increase in homicides and a 31.6 per cent increase in firearm-related homicides. As noted above, Florida is the state after which TT’s stand-your-ground legislation will be modelled.
Since 2017, more studies have been done. RAND, a US-based research institute with over 75 years’ experience, has published four reviews on the effects of stand-your-ground legislation in the US. The fourth and most recent iteration was published in 2024, and reviewed and assessed 22 academic papers. The conclusion from this comprehensive review was that stand-your-ground laws are likely to increase homicides – both firearm and non-firearm-related homicides.
One obvious counter to these high-level findings is that they do not indicate whether the increase in homicides is because of people defending themselves against criminals – what the literature calls “justifiable homicides.” The researchers from the National Bureau of Economic Research separated these effects. They found that stand-your-ground was associated with a 47 per cent increase in justifiable homicides and a 23 per cent increase in non-justifiable homicides. In other words, it’s not just the bad guy who is more likely to be killed.
What is the impact on other crimes? The evidence is less clear here and best described as inconclusive. One 2013 study found no effect of stand-your-ground laws on burglary, robbery, and aggravated assault. A more recent 2023 paper found no effect of stand-your-ground on assault, rape, burglary, robbery, auto theft and larceny.
On the other hand, a 2016 paper found that stand-your-ground was associated with an increase in the robbery, aggravated assault and rape rates (per 100,000 people). From these papers it can be concluded that evidence for stand-your-ground deterring crime (ie reducing crime rates) is not strong.
From this, stand-your-ground may not be the silver bullet that some may hope in addressing crime. It may make some feel safer, but the evidence does not suggest a decline in crime rates.
DR JAMELIA HARRIS
via e-mail
