The article that I read is called “Who will survive in America” from MSMBC.com. The article discusses the latest Michael Dunn verdict and the stand your grown law in Florida. The article opens up discussing the conviction of the 47 year old Michael Dunn case of shooting teenager Jordan Davis. Dunn’s charges on first degree murder were in a deadlock and judge declared it a miss trial. The article writes about the frustration people have with the verdict because they feel that another black teen was killed by a white man by using the stand your ground law.  The article goes into describing the case by saying that Dunn was armed and he has shown aggression and hateful feeling toward African Americans to his neighbor and it was documents that while in jail he wrote hateful statements as well to his neighbor.

The author of the article becomes interested in whether the Stand Your Ground Law is a law that is neutral to all races. The author makes a point by pointing out how last summer there was a similar case with George Zimmerman, another armed man who got into a tussle with a African American teen and in the end the teen ended up dead and Zimmerman found not guilty to the charge of second degree. The author makes another point that both men had time and the right to retreat away from the situations but decided to “stand their grown”. It seems that the stand your grown laws are supposed to protect everyone, but only seem to protect certain people and the author of the article says that the law is dangerous to everyone but it seems to be used toward black males.

I feel that this is a valid argument which talks about race in our country. From what I see, it seems Stand Your Grown Law lets people get away with murder, which is insane. there are law that are foolish, one women in Flordia shot a gun at the wall to stop her boyfriend from beating her and she got 20 years in jail!! It was a big case right after Zimmerman. Another problem I have with the law is that so far, every person on trial for murder that uses this law gets because majority of the time the jury doesn’t understand the law so the end up either saying the person is not guilty or a lesser charge. This law seems like it has a revolving door that moves in one direction which is saddling. The author said the law needs to add things such as retreating policy that way less aggression can be enforced. This law clearly has it flaws, but no is trying to fix them because I feel it’s not white teens, or females, the elderly or children getting killed. Yes, I believe if females from any race or ethnicity where the ones dying at the hands of this law it would have been repealed or another democratic.  The author makes a point in the article if our country has progressed since lynching days. I feel we have most defiantly! I understand that our country has race problems but so much has changed and gotten better. To compare this to lynching is different, yes young black males are being killed for pointless reasons but eggless these men are on trial and people speak up against them. I feel our racism way to institutionalized which is what I feel the author is coming from.