- NEWSDAY.CO.TT - A la Une - 04/Aug 05:07

Misunderstand your ground

AUSTIN FIDO THE TT government’s proposed Home Invasion (Self-Defence and Defence of Property) Bill, 2025 is not a "stand-your-ground" law. The clue is in the name. Certainly, it’s not a stand-your-ground law in the way people living in Florida and a host of other copycat American states understand stand-your-ground (SYG) laws. As neatly summarised in the policy document accompanying the proposed TT legislation, Florida-style SYG laws permit an individual to use deadly force in self-defence “in a place where he has a right to be.” That set the stage for landmark Floridian tragedies such as the killings of Trayvon Martin (on a residential street) and Markeis McGlockton (in a convenience store parking lot). The TT government’s policy document notes that SYG laws following the Florida model have been associated with “vigilantism, escalated violence, and ‘low-cost licence to kill’” – all too sadly illustrated by the cases of Martin and McGlockton, both gunned down by armed antagonists who provoked confrontation, seemingly emboldened by Stand your Ground. Equally sadly, it would seem some government ministers believe vigilantism and escalated violence to be part of the desired outcome for the proposed legislation. Defence Minister Wayne Sturge was regrettably quoted concocting vivid hypotheticals at a Sangre Grande stand-your-ground consultation in service of the advice that the law permitted citizens to “strike first and kill first.” “Shoot him in the back and explain yourself later” is not the encouragement I expect to hear from a law-and-order government minister, but perhaps Mr Sturge was irretrievably captured by the emotional currents of his own storytelling. We are in the early stages of the national discussion of this legislation, so there is plenty of time for the conversation to change. But at the moment, it seems to largely be an argument between what the government’s ministers and proxies would like the law to be, and the actual intention of the proposed legislation itself. Over in Sange Grande, wild-eyed Wayne describes multiple scenarios in which the new law would justify a killing. Meanwhile, his government’s policy document soberly lists “shoot first, ask later” as a criticism of SYG laws, not a selling point. In St Ann’s, Senator Phillip Edward Alexander tells a gathered crowd that the lawless “might be tempted to choose another profession” when confronted with the knowledge that homeowners can legitimately use deadly force to defend themselves and their property. “The intended deterrence effect was not proved,” notes the government policy document, while also citing a study that concluded “individuals were found to be undeterred from committing crimes even though their victims had lethal means to defend themselves.” And Anand Ramlogan instructs any critics of the legislation to “give back your US visa,” on the grounds that it is the same sort of law that makes them feel its safe to go shopping in Miami. Except, if he’d read the government’s policy document, he’d know that Florida’s SYG law replaced a law that effectively codified Castle Doctrine – which is essentially all the TT government’s legislation is proposing. If you felt safe in Florida 20 years ago, before SYG came into place, that’s what TT is being offered by its current government. Perhaps Mr Ramlogan wants you to give up your US visa because it’s out of date. A Florida-style stand-your-ground law is simply not what is being proposed for TT. There is nothing in the proposed law that invites anyone to believe they can confront and murder someone in a supermarket car park. The pending legislation has a lot more in common with existing laws codifying Castle Doctrine in other Commonwealth territories, such as the UK, Australia, and Canada. Hearteningly, it takes note of some of the criticisms levelled at legislation in those countries – such as the lack of clarity over a legal standard for “reasonable force” in the law in Ireland, for example – and takes steps to ensure TT is not burdened by the same issues. (So the proposed TT legislation includes some guidance to the court for assessing whether defensive force used was reasonable.) While ministers tell gruesome stories about shooting intruders in the back or tout discredited ideas about deterrent effects that have never been proven, the government’s proposed legislation is actually backed by a clear-eyed policy document that methodically summarises a variety of germane approaches to codifying self-defence legislation. It’s freely available via the website of the Office of Attorney General and Ministry of Legal Affairs. Read it, and you might be a step ahead of a few cabinet ministers. The post Misunderstand your ground appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.