Another Poor Decision by Sprowls and DeSantis

A while back, Florida Republicans were promoting the idea that laws against homicide should be reduced, so that business owners can shoot shoplifters, and drivers can run people over, to mitigate rioting (which there was none of in Florida). They then passed a law, with the idea that this would conserve the quality of life for law-abiding citizens in Florida.

Yesterday in Indiana, a cashier shot and killed a shoplifter, who refused to give back a few dollars of drinks and instead tried to drive away.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/national/article252655263.html

The paper presented it as a narrative of whether four cans of Red Bull are worth someone’s life. Many Florida Republicans would say they are. But looking at the article, the cost is actually much greater than that. The first comment they got was from a lawyer. And there will be many more, prosecutors and public defenders and judges and their support staff, all at taxpayer expense.

Florida allows people to ride motorcycles without helmets, but only if they buy their own insurance. One might suggest you should only be allowed to shoot people and run them over, if you already have a lawyer on retainer. I imagine Florida Republicans would respond no, this is an appropriate expenditure for government, we want to spend money to help protect the lifestyle of the middle class from criminals.

The Florida legislature is made up of lawyers and prosecutors. So they might see paying more lawyers and prosecutors as a benefit, not a cost.

The article also mentions police responded to the shooting. And the shooter then lied to police, and denied what he did. And there were other witnesses. Not only does this pull police away from other crimes over some drinks, but it increases the burden on police to execute investigations, and execute discretion correctly.

Suppose the shooter was one race, and the victim was another race, and the witness was the same race as the victim. Even if the victim was a legitimate threat to the shooter under applicable Indiana law, the witness might lie and say he wasn’t. And the police might get it wrong. This would then result in a significant reduction in the quality of life for a law-abiding member of the middle class, when police and jurors found him guilty of murder. Which is a likely outcome, even if he is acting exactly as Sprowls and DeSantis encouraged him to act.

Or maybe the shooter was not within his rights in Indiana or Florida, but he lied and said he was. And police believed him, and didn’t charge him at all. This might result in a riot. If what the shooter did and successfully got away with by lying, was a result of the new law, then the new law would increase rioting where there was none.

Police are likely to use their discretion to enforce the new law in an uneven way, that is biased in favor of the members of the party that aligns with police. So if the guy who gets shot is a Democrat, screw him. This will of course energize Democrats to turn out against Republicans, in self defense against the arbitrary powers of police and the new law. Then at the very least, Republicans will have to burn down the state with spam fundraising emails, and empty the pockets of their donors to fight back on the airwaves.

Justice is imperfect. Human knowledge is imperfect. The ability of the government to administrate the law to achieve legal or just outcomes is imperfect and costly. And the citizens who bear those costs are likely not only to riot, but to vote for the opposing party. If marginal additional voters turn out passionately against Florida Republicans as a result of the outcome of the law – if they perceive a member of their faction was killed unjustly – it will result in a reduced quality of life for Republican constituents.

So Sprowls and DeSantis have created a potential scenario where they throw red meat to their base between elections, with something that sounds good or signals their virtues. And then the Republican Party pays the price sometime down the road, if people get killed as a result of a law to mitigate nonexistent riots, and the outcome is costly and unjust. As it was from the first second in the case in Indiana.