1.0 Introduction The recent homicides of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Eric Garnerrendered “justifiable” generated tremendous controversy and intense scrutiny of “Stand YourGround” laws in the United States. Approximately 23 states extended the legal ability to usedeadly force beyond the home and into the streets, contingent on the reasonable belief thatimminent danger exists and there is a necessity to use deadly force to thwart the danger(Ross, 2007). Both with high levels of justifiable homicide, some states such as Michiganmaintain more expansive Stand Your Ground laws while others, such as California, uphold amore restrictive provision called the Castle Doctrine. The Castle Doctrine, unlike the StandYour Ground provisions, creates a duty that one must retreat when faced with a threat, unlessin their home. Stand Your Ground laws impute no such duty on an individual to retreat froma threat. Thus, this paper will seek to characterize the justifiable homicides that were reportedto have occurred in the two states prior to and following the enactment of the justifiablehomicide laws in 2005. The first section of this report will provide a review of literature on the CastleDoctrine and Stand Your Ground laws, the phenomenon of police militarization, theoccurrence of police and civilian justifiable homicides, as well as the disproportionate numberof Blacks targeted and victimized by police officers and other civilians alike. The next sectionwill explain the methodology of the research conducted for this paper, following with ananalysis of the findings. To conclude, the contribution that this study makes to the existingliterature will be discussed, as well as its implications and limitations.2.0 Review of Literature 2.1 Negative Effects of Stand Your Ground Laws Scholarly research on the effects of the expansion of the Castle Doctrine to StandYour Ground laws provides evidence of escalating violence (Cheng & Hoekstra 2013; andChamlin, 2013). The study by Cheng and Hoekstra (2013) assesses whether expanding thelegal justification for the use of lethal force in self-defence lowers the expected cost of usinglethal force and increases the expected cost of committing violent crime. Results of the studyindicate the laws do not deter burglary, robbery, or aggravated assault. In contrast, they leadto a statistically significant 8 percent net increase in the number of reported murders andnon-negligent manslaughters (Cheng & Hoekstra 2013). Additionally, similar researchevaluating the consequence of the modified justifiable homicide provision in Arizonaadditionally shows no evidence of an enhancement in safety, but instead reveals an increase incrime and the use of weapons (Chamlin, 2013). Furthermore, the body of research by Boots,Bihari & Elliot (2009) indicates that the abolition of the requirement to retreat in theevolution of Castle Doctrine to Stand Your Ground laws signals a strong American traditionof embracing self-defence. It also supports the strengthening of individual protections forone’s self and their possessions by using firearms outside the home (Boots et al., 2009). 2.2 Police Militarization In recent years, concerns have been expressed over the increasingly blurreddistinction between police and military responsibilities for crime control purposes. Theexploration by Kraska (2007) describes in great detail the police militarization phenomenon,which is marked by the increased use of advanced technology, the appearance of camouflage,goggles, and boots; and the patrolling of high-crime areas for intelligence gathering andsurveillance. An analysis by Hiatt (2007) provides that SWAT teams, once reactive, are nowproactive in policing even peaceful demonstrations using various kinds of firearms. Themilitarization of local police forces was made apparent in the wake of a peaceful protestturned violent in Ferguson, Missouri, where a police officer was involved in the fatal shootingof a black teenager, Michael Brown. Military equipment and vehicles were deployed withpolice officers responding forcefully with violence and the use of tear gas and stun grenades &.)&
(Stewart, 2015). Parenti (2008) provides additional evidence that if officers from variousenforcement agencies, such as a Border Patrol, who are trained to handle cases involvingillegal immigrants, work alongside police officers more stops and searches of a particularminority group can result. According to Parenti (2008), interagency collaboration exacerbatesthe militarization of local law enforcement because these other agencies have historically beendesigned to win the nation’s wars by killing and destroying. The sharing of military weaponsand equipment and law enforcement duties between the police and military affects the policein ways that likely make them more hostile and prone to rely on extreme displays of force tomaintain public order. 2.3 Police vs. Civilian Shootings Subsequent to the pervasive expansion of the justifiable homicide defence acrossthe US, a dual process has become apparent: the turn to lethal force through themilitarization of police and the securitization of civilians. A study performed in 1963 lookingat cases of police killings of offenders in Philadelphia from 1950 to 1960 suggests that allkillings by police are found justifiable because nobody was convicted and that all of thepeople killed by police officers were, in fact, shot (Robin, 1963). This supports researchexamining the period between 1976 and 1988 conducted by Loftin, Wiersema, McDowall,and Dobrin (2003). The authors additionally discuss the connection between police use ofdeadly force and a large underreporting by some jurisdictions of shootings by its officers. Agrowing body of research indicates that the acquisition and use of firearms by way ofsecuritization explains the prevalence of justifiable homicides among private citizens. Thefocus of much of the discussion by Chamlin (2013) concerns the availability and accessibilityof firearms following the enactment of the Stand Your Ground provision. Chamlin (2013)follows in the path of Hepburn and Hemenway (2004), revealing an increase in the level oflethal violence due to the convenience of acquiring a firearm. Drawing upon an investigationby McDowall (1991), Chamlin (2013) further supports the analysis of firearm use and ease ofaccess in predicting homicide. According to the literature, Stand Your Ground laws in turninfluence the use of lethal force by police and civilians alike. 2.4 Race Much of the discussion on violent crime and police-perpetrated killings is centeredon issues of race, wherein Blacks are disproportionately targeted and killed by police officers(Hagedorn & Chesney-Lind, 2014; Robin, 1963; MacDonald & Parker 2001; Ross, 2007).Prior research by Robin (1963) dismisses race as an issue, ignoring the fact that Whites in thesame circumstances might not have been shot. The author suggests that all killings by policewere found justifiable as nobody was convicted (Robin, 1963). In addition, MacDonald andParker (2001) cite a study by Copeland (1984) examining justifiable homicides in Californiafrom 1957 to 1982 where they found there was an overwhelming majority of Black victims ofjustifiable homicides by both police and citizens. Ross (2007) explains that the Stand YourGround statues allow citizens to execute justice in the streets if “race is relevant to thereasonableness of their belief that they were about to be attacked” (p.36). Real-life instancesillustrating the racial bias in Stand Your Ground by law enforcement and courts are theTrayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases where the assailants in the deaths ofthe Black civilians were acquitted. According to Hagedorn and Chesney-Lind (2014), the legalprovisions and joint law enforcement agencies are a response to a moral panic elicited in fearof personal safety, reflecting deeply embedded racism. This is in contrast to research thatshows violent crime rates are declining (Hagedorn & Chesney-Lind, 2014).3.0 Methodology The current study derives justifiable homicide cases in the United States fromsupplementary Uniform Crime Report data (UCR), which is filed by police services across the &. &
US to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Extensive records were maintained on thedetails of the crime, including where the justifiable homicides took place, when, and who wasinvolved. This paper focuses on all of the reported cases of justifiable homicides thatoccurred in Michigan and California between 1999 and 2001 before the Stand Your Groundlaws were enacted in 2005, and a period of time between 2009 and 2011 after theirenactment. For the purpose of the present study, information was aggregated per state withfocus on justifiable homicides committed by police officers and civilians, offender-on-victimrace, and the types of firearms used. The race factor comprised of White-on-White, White-on-Black, Black-on-White, Black-on-Black, and Other/Unknown. The categories for type offirearms used include Firearm Type Not Stated (FTNS), Handgun, Shotgun, Rifle, and Otherguns. An advantage of using the UCR data on justifiable homicide is that it provides detailedinformation on each incident noting the characteristics of each event. The UCR data is moreaccurate in accounting for cases of self-defence while representing available national-leveldata with some uniformity in classification (MacDonald & Parker 2001).4.0 Findings 4.1 Police vs. Civilian Shootings The data for California in Table 1 shows that the number of justifiable homicidescommitted by police and civilians remained around the same for both time periods; however,there is a significantly large amount involving police officers. Of the 373 justifiable homicidescommitted in 1999-2001, 292 were caused by police officers (78%), and 81 by private civilians(22%). Similarly in 2009-2011, police officers perpetrated 294 justifiable homicides (75%) and99 were committed by private civilians (25%). Data for Michigan for the 1999-2001 timeperiod shows that 33 justifiable homicides were carried out by police officers (52%) and 30by citizens (48%). In 2009-2011, however, police officers committed 26 justifiable homicides(27%) and 70 were committed by private citizens (73%). There is a substantial increase in theamount of justifiable homicides committed by citizens in Michigan, 25% more in 2009-2011.This is a significant change considering Stand Your Ground Laws were introduced a fewyears prior to that in 2005. Results of the police vs. civilian justifiable homicide data suggestthat private citizens are more likely to commit justifiable homicides in Michigan after theStand Your Ground provisions were enacted. The reverse goes for California, where policeofficers are more likely to commit justifiable homicides. 4.2 Race The data presented under Table 2 summarizes the number of the total offenders-on-victims by race for the justifiable homicides that were recorded for the two study periods.In Michigan – where the Stand Your Ground framework is broad in scope and maintainsrelatively lenient laws for issuing gun licences – the data illustrates more Black-on-Blackjustifiable homicides by private citizens. The police vs. civilian shooting data in Table 1compared to the race data for Michigan shown in Table 2 demonstrates that when policeofficers were committing most of the justifiable homicides in 1999-2001, there was morelethal force used by Black perpetrators on Black victims with a total of 45 incidents. Whereascivilians were largely involved in the occurrence of justifiable homicides in 2009-2011, Black-on-White homicides remained at 1 incident while White-on-Black increased from 7 incidentsto 17. Despite this change, Black offenders were still committing a majority of the jusifiablehomicides on Black victims during this period, rising to 62 incidents while White-on-Black,White-on-White and Black-on-White remained fairly stable after the Castle Doctrineexpansion. In contrast, the result of the data from California between 1999 and 2001 pointtowards more White-on-White homicides for both years. From the 1999-2001 to the 2009-2011 time period, White-on-White justifiable homicides increased by 12% from 197 incidentsto 254, while White-on-Black increased by 2 incidents from 59 in the former time period to &. &
61in the latter. Justifiable homicides committed by Blacks occurred to a lesser extent, asBlack-on-White incidents decreased from 9 to 4, yet Black-on-Black incidents remained lowwith only a slight increase by 8 incidents from 20 in 1999-2001 to 28 in 2009-2011. In bothtime periods police officers were responsible for 75% of the justifiable shootings. The racialdynamics of justifiable homicides in California can be attributed to the state’s more restrictiveCastle Doctrine. Underlying the trend of more White-on-White and White-on-Black thanBlack-on-White and Black-on-Black justifiable homicide may be an internal reflection ofsystematic racism in police practices and racist victimization of Black Californians. 4.3 Firearms Justifiable homicides involving firearms occur at an alarming rate as data in Table 3shows firearms were predominantly used in California during both time periods. Meanwhile,only a small number of other weapons were used. Table 4 displays handguns were used inmost justifiable homicides in 1999-2001, with FTNS, rifles, and shotguns operated the least.In 2009-2011, however, the number of deaths occurring using “other weapons” increased. Inthe same time period, there is a decrease in the use of handguns in justifiable homicides andan increase in rifles and FTNS. The various types of firearms used in justifiable homicides inrecent years were deployed mostly by police officers, which follows the establishment ofStand Your Ground laws. In other words, the data suggests that after the expansion of theCastle Doctrine police officers were more empowered with sophisticated technology for onthe job use and no longer relied solely on handguns. In Michigan, where firearms were used 58 times in reported cases of justifiablehomicides between 1991 and 2001 (Table 3), there were only 5 instances of other weaponshandled. The types of weapons used were, handguns 42 times (72%), rifles and shotguns both5 times (9%), FTNS 5 times (8%), and other types of guns were used only once (2%). In thelatter time period, Table 3 reveals an increase in the instances of firearms used from 58 to 86.The weapons used in 2009-2011 remain relatively the same across all categories except for theusage of handguns which increases significantly from 42 in 1999-2001 to 82 in 2009-2011.The predominant use of weapons by civilians that are typically associated with the police (i.e.handguns) may be attributable to the fact that the civilians who commit most of thehomicides use police weapons for their own security. On the contrary, in the 1999-2001period various kinds of firearms were deployed as police were behind most of the homicides.5.0 Discussion 5.1 Contribution to Existing Literature After the establishment of Stand Your Ground law in 2005, it is imperative tounderstand the effects of the law when it expanded to more lenient provisions which do notimpute any duty on citizens to retreat or avoid the use of force. In addition, it is important toidentify whether police officers or private civilians commit most justifiable homicides,determine if the policies are based on a disproportionate targeting of minority groups insociety, and whether the increased use of firearms is contributing to the levels of justifiablehomicides. Upon reviewing the results, there is evidence of a correlation, on one hand,between justifiable homicides and police use of deadly force through military weapons inCalifornia, and on the other hand, civilians obtaining handguns for security in Michigan. Thepolice officer’s fear today appears to be that perpetrators may have more sophisticatedweapons, and that they themselves need to be more assertive by relying on military styleweapons. There was a substantial increase of justifiable homicides committed by privatecitizens when the perceived threat to private citizens was made to appear particularly high. Inboth Michigan and California, there is an observable trend of this kind of homicide followingStand Your Ground laws, where there are more White perpetrators of justifiable homicide inCalifornia, and more Black perpetrators in Michigan. This may be attributed to the restrictive &.,&
Stand Your Ground law in California which leads to the disproportionate targeting of Blacksby police officers, more often than in the latter, more lenient state. 5.2 Potential Impact of Study Determining whether police or civilians are more likely to be the perpetrators of,and what race and through what weapons justifiable homicides are committed by, has policyand program implications. Active police patrols and responses to citizen complaints may beeffective in diverting the reliance on self-defense for protection. Strategies may beimplemented at the local, state, and federal level to prevent certain high-risk groups fromcommitting crime, such as creating social programs rather than applying cutbacks ingovernment funding for police budgets. In addition, programs which encourage networkingand mentoring opportunities that seek to improve core skills, provide confidence and fosterand develop a sense of belonging to the community is an effective means of preventingcitizens from entering into high risk situations. To prevent police officers from abusingpowers and relying on military weapons, it would be helpful to place police officers throughtraining in crisis solution and conflict management to put them in a position where they areable to deescalate situations without resorting to lethal violence. 5.3 Limitations One possible limitation of the present study is the possibility of undercountingcrimes in the UCR. The lack of background context of the incidents, coupled with the non-existent legal category for ‘justifiable shootings’ creates the possibility that it might omitcases. In addition, state agencies in the United States are not required to submit data on suchcases to the FBI, thus incidents are likely omitted as some jurisdictions fail to file reports oromit justifiable homicides committed by police officers (Loftin, Wiersema, McDowall, &Dobrin 2003). Other methodological errors include discrepancies in how race was determinedand how the delay in the use of fatal force was measured. Furthermore, an issue underlyingpolice vs. civilian shootings is how off-duty police officers are quantified as there iscomplexity regarding whether they would be counted as citizens in this circumstance. Thisstudy also calls for future exploration on the intersectionality of gender and age with otherfactors in the justifiable homicide incidents, as well as inquiry into the amount of policepatrol in areas where there are high rates of justifiable homicides committed by civilians.6.0 Conclusion The present research has found that both Michigan and California faced an increasein justifiable homicides committed by private citizens after the expansion of the Stand YourGround laws. Despite this increase, justifiable homicides committed by police in Californiaare still predominant. The police practices proceeding the Stand Your Ground provisiondeployed various kinds of firearms suggesting a militarization of policing in California. Incontrast, the majority of citizens who committed justifiable homicides in Michigan did sowith handguns at their disposal, which entails a civilian securitization. Furthermore, trends inthe data after the expansion of the Castle Doctrine in California reveal racial disparities injustifiable homicide rulings as more White perpetrators are vindicated of criminal liability forhomicides than Blacks. The implications of these findings are far reaching but further inquiryis required to determine additional factors that contribute to the increased rates of justifiablehomicides and how their incidence can be reduced. &.-&
7.0 AppendixTable 1: Police vs. Civilian Justifiable Homicides California MichiganJustifiable Homicides by: 1999-2001 2009-2011 1999-2001 2009-2011 33 (52%) 26 (27%)Police officers 292 (78%) 294 (75%) 30 (48%) 70 (73%) 63 (100%) 96 (100%)Private citizens 81 (22%) 99 (25%)Total 373 (100%) 393 (100%)Table 2: Offender-Victim Race California MichiganRace: 1999-2001 2009-2011 1999-2001 2009-2011White-on-White 197 (53%) 254 (65%) 10 (16%) 16 (17%)White-on-Black 59 (16%) 61 (15%) 7 (11%) 17 (18%)Black-on-White 9 (2%) 4 (1%) 1 (2%) 1 (1%)Black-on-Black 20 (5%) 28 (7%) 45 (71%) 62 (64%)Other/Unknown 88 (24%) 46 (12%) 00Total 373 (100%) 393 (100%) 63 (100%) 96 (100%)Table 3: Justifiable Homicides Based on Weapon Type Used California MichiganWeapon: 1999-2001 2009-2011 1999-2001 2009-2011Firearms 371 (99.5%) 356 (90.6%) 58 (92%) 86 (90%)Other Weapons 2 (0.5%) 37 (9.4%) 5 (8%) 10 (10%)Total 373 (100%) 393 (100%) 63 (100%) 96 (100%)Table 4: Type of Firearms Employed in Justifiable Homicides California MichiganShootings by: 1999-2001 2009-2011 1999-2001 2009-2011Firearm Type Not Stated 6 (1.6%) 53 (14.9%) 5 (8%) 4 (4%)Handguns 340 (91.6%) 279 (78.4%) 42 (72%) 72 (84%)Rifles 13 (3.5%) 18 (5%) 5 (9%) 5 (6%)Shotguns 12 (3.2%) 6 (1.7%) 5 (9%) 5 (6%)Other Guns 0 0 1 (2%) 0Total 371 (100%) 356 (100%) 58 (100%) 86 (100%) REFERENCESBoots, D. P., Bihari, J., and Elliot, E. (2009). “The state of the castle: An overview of recent trends in state Castle Doctrine legislation and public policy.” Criminal Justice Review, 34(4), 515- 535.Chamlin, M. B. (2013). “An assessment of the intended and unintended consequences of Arizona’s self-defense, Home Protection Act.” Journal of Crime and Justice, 37(3), 327- 338.Cheng, C and Hoekstra, M. (2013). “Does strengthening self-defense law deter crime or escalate violence? Evidence from expansions to Castle Doctrine.” Journal of Human Resources, 48(3), 821-853.Hagedorn, J and Chesney-Lind, M. (2014). “America’s war on gangs: Real threat or moral panic? In S. L. Mallicoat and C L. Gardiner (Eds.), Criminal Justice Policy., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 175 – 190.Hall, A. R., and Coyne, C.J.. (2013). “The militarization of US domestic policing.” The Independent Review, 17(4), 485-504.Hepburn, L.M. and Hemenway, D. (2004). “Firearm availability and homicide: a review of the literature.” Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9(4), 417– 440. &..&
Hiatt, Richard. “The militarization of police.” New Politics, 11(2), 153.Kraska, P. B. (2007). “Militarization and policing – Its relevance to 21st century police.” Policing, 1(4), 501-513.Lave, T. R. (20130. “Shoot to kill: A critical look at Stand Your Ground laws.” University of Miami Law Review, 67(4), 827-860.Loftin, C, Wiersema, B, McDowall, D, & Dobrin, A. (2003). “Underreporting of Justifiable homicides committed by police officers in the United States.” American Journal of Public Health, 93(7), 1117-21.MacDonald, J, and Parker, K. (2001). “The structural determinants of justifiable homicide: Assessing the theoretical and political considerations.” Homicide Studies, 5(3), 187-205.Stewart, M. (2015, January 1). St. Louis Police Turn Stun Guns On Non-Violent Protesters Near Busch Stadium. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ 2015/06/01/st-louis-police-stun-guns_n_7488302.html.McDowall, D. 1991.“Firearm availability, and homicide rates in Detroit, 1951– 1986.”Social Forces, 69(4), 1085– 1101.Parenti, C. (2008). Lockdown America: Police and prisons in the age of crisis. Brooklyn, NY: VersoRobin, G. D. (1963). “Justifiable homicide by police officers.” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology & Political Science, 54(2), 225-231.Sibley, R. (2012). “10 States Copied Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” Law.” Sunlight Foundation. Retrieved from http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/03/28/10-states-copied- floridas-stand-your-ground-law/.The Penal Code of California § 187-199.United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2011). Crime in the United States, 2010. Retrieved on December 29, 2014, from https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.- 2012/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expandhomicidemain. &./&
Search
