A vigilante’s murderous actions almost went unpunished.

Luckily, 45 days after the murder of 17 year-old Trayvon Martin, prosecutors buckled under public pressure and announced they would try Martin’s shooter,  George Zimmerman, for second degree murder.

His case relies on Florida’s kill or be killed “Stand Your Ground” law that allows people who fear death or great bodily harm to use deadly force against someone.

Seeming to be rooted in the rules of the wild west, the law has made it difficult for police and courts to determine the victim from the aggressor, even in cases of domestic abuse.

From the beginning, Zimmerman has painted himself as an unfortunate victim of the situation. Bemoaning his hardship, Zimmerman wrote on his website, “As a result of the incident and subsequent media coverage, I have been forced to leave my home, my school, my employer, my family and ultimately, my entire life.”

Through a Paypal account on his website,  Zimmerman has collected more than $200,000 to support his case.

Prior to his hearing, Zimmerman made no move to publicly apologize for gunning down Martin, and has continued to act as the victim. In fact, Zimmerman apologized to the Martin family only recently, during his bond hearing.

But in reality, Zimmerman is the vigilante aggressor.

It was Zimmerman who followed Martin, provoked him and then pulled out a gun and shot him. Zimmerman had already called police, but ignored instructions by the dispatcher to stop following  Martin.

He made a conscious decision to arm himself, and pursue Martin.  He isn’t the victim, he’s a neighborhood watch vigilante who decided to confront a perceived problem and protect himself and neighborhood at the expensive of another’s life.

With the publicity the media has generated around Martin’s death, and Florida’s “Stand Your Ground Law,” some of the 23 states with a similar law should re-evaluate their statutes.

In no state should a law allow someone to kill another without defending their actions before a judge. Every case should be evaluated individually, allowing evidence to prove the shooter’s innocence.