VIDEO: Self-Defense Attorney Andrew Branca: The Reality and Politics of "Stand Your Ground"

Here’s another video clip from the lengthy interview of yours truly by Glen Evans, of Warrior Men and Self Defense Digest.

Here we discuss the legal realities of “Stand Your Ground”, and distinguish between the tactical application of “Stand Your Ground” on the one hand and self-defense immunity laws on the other–two very different legal constructs that are two often incorrectly conflated.

[UPDATE: Sorry, folks, this video seems to have disappeared off Youtube.]

Published by

Andrew Branca

Andrew F. Branca, Esq. is currently in his third decade of practicing law, and is an internationally-recognized expert on the law of self-defense of the United States. Andrew is a Guest Lecturer at the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Academy, a former Guest Instructor at the Sig Sauer Academy, an NRA Life-Benefactor Member, and an NRA Certified Instructor. He also teaches lawyers how to argue self-defense cases as a certified instructor with the Continuing Legal Education (CLE) system in numerous states around the country. Andrew is also a host on the Outdoor Channel’s TV show “The Best Defense” and contributor to the National Review Online. Andrew has been quoted as a SME (subject-matter expert) on use-of-force law by the Wall Street Journal, the Chicago Tribune, the Washington Post, and many other mainstream media, including nationally syndicated broadcast media. Recently, Andrew won the UC Berkeley Law School debate on “Stand-Your-Ground,” and spoke at the NRA Annual Meeting Law Symposium on self-defense law. He is also a founding member of USCCA’s Legal Advisory Board. In addition to being a lawyer, Andrew is also a competitive handgun shooter, an IDPA Charter/Life member (IDPA #13), and a Master-class competitor in multiple IDPA divisions.

5 thoughts on “VIDEO: Self-Defense Attorney Andrew Branca: The Reality and Politics of "Stand Your Ground"”

  1. This was a great interview. I would like to add just a few of my own personal opinions. I believe that if you have the ability to escape, that you should always take that opportunity. If you are defending a loved one, and you decide to Stand Your Ground, if you are injured, you may not be able to protect your loved one any further. This also is a basic idea taught to bodyguards. The first and best option is always to escape. You cannot protect your principal if you are incapacitated. For a more in depth article I wrote just after the verdict of the Zimmerman trial was over please see Zimmerman VS Stand Your Ground Law

    1. If you have a choice to flee, then undoubtedly you should flee. However, the purpose of Stand Your Ground is to make sure you don’t get convicted by an over-zealous prosecutor who noticed a way you can flee that you overlooked in the heat of the moment.

      Additionally, if I can flee to safety, but doing so means I won’t be able to protect my children or my wife, then you bet I’m going to stay put and fight! Fleeing in this sense would only make sense if I can put myself in a place where I can fight in relative safety; if “fleeing” means getting to safety and calling 911 while my family gets slaughtered, though, then that is not an option I’m going to take, even if I personally get injured. The funny thing is, though, in the eyes of most prosecutors, I wouldn’t be “Standing my ground”, because if I can’t get my family to flee with me in safety, I cannot flee safely, and to the degree that Stand Your Ground cancels out the efforts of evil prosecutors who *would* prosecute me for standing my ground instead of fleeing without my family, Stand Your Ground laws are very important laws indeed.

    1. I’m afraid so. It wasn’t hosted on the LOSD Youtube account, so I guess the owner took it down. Darn, wish I had my own copy.

      –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

Leave a Reply