Argumentative Brain Storm

    For my final paper on the argumentative essay I have been tossing around a few ideas. My blog entries have been, for the most part, about the martial arts themselves. In this paper I was thinking of taking on something with a legal aspect in regard to self defense. I think I am going to argue against Wisconsin's stand your ground law.
    The Wisconsin stand your ground law states that if you feel that your life is in danger you can use deadly force without having to make an attempt to retreat. For example, if someone approaches you and says, "I'm going to kill you." you don't have the obligation to try and get away from the attacker. You could simply pull out a gun and kill the other person. I realize that this is a very simplistic example but that's the gist of it.
    This idea of kill first goes against many of the principals of the traditional Martial Arts as well as some of my own fundamental beliefs. I do feel that retreat should always be the first option and should always be considered. Taking retreat out of the equation leaves a very important and deadly decision  up to everyday people not equipped to make such a important choice.
    Part of my decision to take on this topic was the huge amount of debate surrounding this topic and the wide availability of case studies regarding it - most recently the George Zimmerman case that divided a large number of people across the country. At the heart of that case was the stand your ground law.
    There is no doubt that the Martial Arts is about self defense but at its base is the preservation of self and others. The very idea of killing before exhausting all other opportunities is something counter productive to the core belief of Martial Arts as self defense. I believe I can make a strong argument against the stand your ground law not only from a Martial Arts stand point but also from a moral and ethical standpoint as well.