The Nazi’s who murdered in excess of six million Jews during the Holocaust…did so, because they were given permission. The permission, in this case, came in the form or orders from their superior officers.
Slave owners across this nation…..owned slaves….because they had been given permission. It was legal to purchase….and own…another human being; a black human being
Those who committed the atrocities that occurred during the attempt to decimate and wipe out Native Americans….did so, because they had been given permission by the U.S. Government.
In Kansas City, Missouri, 84 year old Andrew Lester-a white man-shot black teenager Ralph Yarl….because as Lester’s defense will argue….Missouri state law…gave him permission to do so.
Missouri law not only allows a person to shoot someone who has unlawfully entered their home, but also allows the use of deadly force when someone is….attempting….to unlawfully enter their home. The state of Missouri grants this permission.
Here’s where things get tricky…and, sickeningly, the reason why I think Andrew Lester will stand a pretty good chance of being acquitted by a Missouri jury:
Lester says the teen had grabbed the door handle of the glass storm door that was between them. Ralph Yarl-the teenager-says he never touched the door handle.
Thus, we have a true “his word against HIS word” scenario.
If a jury believes that Ralph Yarl did grab the door handle, and, that Andrew Lester feared for his safety & life (and Lester claims that he did) then I suspect the permission that the Missouri Castle Doctrine provides….will stand.
This is not a tweet about guns, per se. This is a tweet about the permissions that are often given, either explicitly or implicitly….in our society, and the unwanted consequences these permissions spawn.
Florida starts with the “Don’t Say Gay” laws. Look at the implicit permissions that come with that. Is it easier for someone with hate in their heart to feel they now have permission to verbally abuse and harass those in the LGBTQ community? Oh, I think any reasonable person would say “Yes. It does.”
What comes after that? Does seeing others experience no consequences for verbally attacking members of the LGTBQ community…..allow people to begin feeling as though they have now been give permission to physically threaten or harm those who are LGTBQ? I suspect I know your answer.
When you substitute “permission” for “law” you begin get a clearer idea of how many people, choose to interpret the laws that are in place. They see them, not as “In the event of _______ it is legal to shoot” but as “In the event of _______ go ahead and shoot.”
There is a big difference between the two.
So, not only are some laws problematic by their very existence, but there are also laws that are problematic because of the other things they implicitly permit.
I believe that in the case of Andrew Lester, he will claim that he understood the Missouri Castle Doctrine law to say “….go ahead and shoot”, and that Missouri jurors will return a verdict that reflects “Mr. Lester, that’s also what we heard. Not guilty.”
I hope not. An acquittal of Andrew Lester would say to other Missourians-many that harbor deep hatred of people of color-“In the event of______go ahead and shoot.” The next “Ralph Yarl” won’t likely be lucky enough to survive.