@RBPundit He called for rolling back self-defense laws and called for there to be "Duty to Retreat" when threatened in public.—
SunnyRight (@sunnyright) July 16, 2013
The concept of self-defense is terribly outdated in this day and age. At least that’s what Attorney General Eric Holder seems to believe.
Addressing the NAACP this afternoon, Holder, using the context of the Zimmerman trial, bemoaned the destruction resulting from citizens exercising their right to defend themselves:
For Holder, this was a perfect opportunity to rail against Florida’s Stand Your Ground legislation — despite the fact that SYG was never invoked by Zimmerman:
It also afforded him a platform for his ridiculous contention that when faced in public with a potentially dangerous confrontation, the onus is on the victim:
“There has always been a legal defense for using deadly force if — and the “if” is important — if no safe retreat is available. But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the commonsense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat outside their homes if they can do so safely. By allowing and perhaps encouraging violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety. The list of resulting tragedies is long, and unfortunately has victimized too many who are innocent. It is our collective obligation. We must stand our ground.”
How does that work, exactly?
So now, potential victims are the enemy?
And they have a “duty to retreat”?
Bravely running away may be Holder et al.’s M.O.:
But that sort of twisted logic doesn’t work for those of us in the real world: