Man arrested for slapping stranger's 2 y/o at Wal-Mart... and a "what if" discussion

[concrete dog]

without using a gun i think this problem could be handled if you know what i mean.man or women to idiot

 

[bigus_D]

My understanding of the law is that you are able to use a gun if neccessary to stop a felony. I don't remember ever seeing anything that said you could only use it to stop a leathal force attack.

I'm not sure if slapping a child, or threatening to slap a child, is a felony... but I'm not going to let my child be subjected to such treatment. I will put myself between the threat and my family.

Also, I'm not about to get into a fist fight with a gun on my hip. NO WAY. I'll put myself in the middle, attempt to make space. If this isn't going to do the trick, I feel it is rediculous to consider starting a fist fight. I'll brandish to stop the advance, any further advance is clearly a leathal threat at that point so I'll shoot.

 

[Joe Williams]

I'd get in between them BFORE he got near my kid, like others have said...

but yeah I;ve said my peace and we're all entitled to our opinions.

Take care.

Your "piece" amounts to denying smaller people the right to defend themselves or their children. Our ability to do so poses a threat to thugs and bullies, but I am now curious as to why YOU seem threatened by that ability. Your "piece" is a willingness to endanger children. Your "shoot inside Walmart" crap smacks of Brady Bunch tactics. Of course anyone who carries a gun must be willing to shoot inside a Walmart, or anywhere else. Otherwise, we shouldn't be carrying a gun at all. I wonder, is THAT your true goal?

If you are so bad a parent that you aren't willing to defend your children, that is their problem. But it gives you no basis for calling those of us willing to use whatever means at our disposal to do so crazy.

 

[No Time to Shoot]

When I first read what Joe posted about drawing on the man, I cringed! But after reading everyone's posts I kind of understand why some of you would. If you are of smaller stature, out of shape or unsure of your self I can understand the feeling you have towards self preservation at that point. I'm not knocking you for going for your gun first...so don't get me wrong.

If I personally felt physically inferior I would start with a softer target on the aggressor rather than trying to punch through his skull right off the bat.

Great post Turtle!

 

[rockydog]

I know what I'd LIKE to do given that situation, but I honestly cannot give you an answer having not experienced it. Chances are good that the suspect here went looking for a confrontation that day, and he found one. I think any parent will tell you that they would act appropriately and similarly if their offspring were threatened. I am also pretty sure that the suspect would NOT have acted the same way toward a FATHER with a child. Most of these people prey on easy targets. I know I am not an easy target, and I don't project myself as such, therefore I doubt the suspect would have acted similarly towards me. That said, if he did, it wouldn't have ended well for him. I would hate for it to come to violence, but a TX to the police would be the first step. How I respond will be determined by how far the suspect wants to take it.

It took 4 pages to get to my first thought. I don't think this is a situation that would even evolve a father. I'm more interested in what our mother members would do.
My youngest of 5 kids is in the Air Force(Air Traffic controller) you slap Her and you'll get Butt stroked across your nose and No one ever laid a hand on my kids, that being said, none of my children were allowed to sit in public and scream... Ever. I have a serious problem with people who think their children or they, have a "right" to inconvenience others. Whether this is braying kids at the theater, themselves talking in the theater, or inconsiderate/vigilante drivers. but I digress ...

THE GUY WAS A NUT BAG who probably wouldn't have attempted this with a man or most likely have pointed his anger at the man if anyone.

I'm done now, medication kicked in...

 

[No Time to Shoot]

Your "piece" amounts to denying smaller people the right to defend themselves or their children. Our ability to do so poses a threat to thugs and bullies, but I am now curious as to why YOU seem threatened by that ability. Your "piece" is a willingness to endanger children. Your "shoot inside Walmart" crap smacks of Brady Bunch tactics. Of course anyone who carries a gun must be willing to shoot inside a Walmart, or anywhere else. Otherwise, we shouldn't be carrying a gun at all. I wonder, is THAT your true goal?

If you are so bad a parent that you aren't willing to defend your children, that is their problem. But it gives you no basis for calling those of us willing to use whatever means at our disposal to do so crazy.

For me to pull the trigger in a walmart or any other venue where there are multiple people that could be hit, it would be a life or death situation. The gun is always your last resort. I'm not worried about missing my target, what if my bullet over penetrates and hit the child sitting in the cart behind him? How are you going to justify killing someones kid because you didn't want to take a few hits? And shot placement means nothing in that situation if the bullet hits a rib and flys out at an angle you didnt' expect it to. Then who is the bad guy?

 

[Bill of Rights]

My understanding of the law is that you are able to use a gun if neccessary to stop a felony. I don't remember ever seeing anything that said you could only use it to stop a leathal force attack.

I'm not sure if slapping a child, or threatening to slap a child, is a felony... but I'm not going to let my child be subjected to such treatment. I will put myself between the threat and my family.

Also, I'm not about to get into a fist fight with a gun on my hip. NO WAY. I'll put myself in the middle, attempt to make space. If this isn't going to do the trick, I feel it is rediculous to consider starting a fist fight. I'll brandish to stop the advance, any further advance is clearly a leathal threat at that point so I'll shoot.

There isn't anything that says in black and white that a gun is only to be used to stop a lethal force attack. The law does say that you must believe that you are unable to stop the attack in any other way, however. Addressing your child's discomfort is another way to do that, and does not necessarily entail retreat, which you have no duty to do.

IC 35-42-2-1
Battery
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is:
[...]
(2) a Class D felony if it results in bodily injury to:
[...]
(B) a person less than fourteen (14) years of age and is committed by a person at least eighteen (18) years of age;[...]

IC 35-45-2-1
Intimidation
Sec. 1. (a) A person who communicates a threat to another person, with the intent:
[...]
(2) that the other person be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act;[...]
commits intimidation, a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) However, the offense is a:
(1) Class D felony if:
(A) the threat is to commit a forcible felony;
[...]
(2) Class C felony if, while committing it, the person draws or uses a deadly weapon.
(c) "Threat" means an expression, by words or action, of an intention to:
(1) unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person, or damage property;
(2) unlawfully subject a person to physical confinement or restraint;
(3) commit a crime;
(4) unlawfully withhold official action, or cause such withholding;
(5) unlawfully withhold testimony or information with respect to another person's legal claim or defense, except for a reasonable claim for witness fees or expenses;
(6) expose the person threatened to hatred, contempt, disgrace, or ridicule;
(7) falsely harm the credit or business reputation of the person threatened; or
(8) cause the evacuation of a dwelling, a building, another structure, or a vehicle.


If a person at least 18 years old states an intention to commit a crime (or to injure another person of less than 14 years of age, (a Class D felony, and by definition, forcible), the intimidation alone is a Class D felony. If the person uses a weapon (which can really be anything other than an empty hand), it becomes a Class C felony.

Usual legal disclaimers apply; IANAL, IDPOOTV, IDSIAHIELN, TINLA, but I would welcome feedback from someone who is a lawyer who could tell me if I've interpreted this correctly.

I also agree with not voluntarily getting into a fistfight with a gun on my hip-too easy for it to fall off and be used by the other guy or someone else. I'm not a cop. I want the guys who are to take this criminal away, but until they get there, I'll protect my kid. If that means going elsewhere, great. If it means I have to swing... or even draw and/or fire... so be it. I didn't decide someone was getting hurt that day... I just made sure it was not me or mine that did.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Cygnus]

Hey folks.
I see that some of my points were taken and some not fair enough.
First nothing was directed at an individualperson here.

I was to bed late and up early for a work run. I could have chosen my words a little differently. So let me clarify.

I'm not denying anyone the right to defend themselves. Less than lethal would be the ideal option. I can get behind drawing to a low ready and warning the idiot. I also needed to read the story a bit closer.


and Joe yeah you're right:
I want to deny people the right to defend themselves, I'm an Obama plant, I won't defend my kid, and you're a yahoo for getting that personal.....and so off the mark about me. The instant trigger pulling is my issue here in general not with you personally. I truly believe a bad shoot here would make us all look bad. Some of the quick shoot comments made me feel that way as well. Did not intend to personally offend anyone........and NOWHERE do I deny anyone's right to defense. I do however question their timing.......

Get grip. I'm done with this. I meant it as food for thought.

Joe your negative rep honors me.


Here's the negative rep comment from Joe folks since I believe in full disclosure:

"Your post is out of line, your unwillingness to defend children reprehensible, your willingness to deny others that right disgusting. Your willingness to endanger children makes you unfit to carry a gun."

My right to carry a gun may one day save myself, those I care for or some stranger. Possible even you. I'll just be less trigger happy. My "willingness to endanger children". What a drama queen.......

Rethink what you wrote regarding my having no basis to express an opinion.. You want to deny my 1st and 2nd amendment rights.
Who's " reprehensible" ? maybe both of us?

Joe it takes all kinds. I'd rather we stick together and not divide ourselves so sharply. I'm a moderate ,as such I'm able to change some libs minds on 2A rights, sadly it's one at a time. Once they get to the range....they usually change.

Seriously I'd like to move on from this please accept my positive rep as proof of that.

 

[tyrajam]

Wow, can't believe all the hate on cygnus. I agree with him, if someone tells me to shut my kid up or I will, I will not pull out a gun and shoot him. Pretty sure thats called 2nd degree murder. Deadly force is the last resort. It seems like there are a lot of posts by people looking for an excuse to use their gun. If someone threatens me, or one of my three kids, I try to diffuse the situation. I walk away, but I probably tell him to f off first. Now if he follows me or tries to grab my child, I draw. I am not a pacifist, but I am not a kid looking for my first opportunity to show off my cool new gun either.

 

[Prometheus]

There isn't anything that says in black and white that a gun is only to be used to stop a lethal force attack.

Actually, the law says you can use deadly force to stop more than just a "lethal force attack". As just a singular example:

(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the personreasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

The law does say that you must believe that you are unable to stop the attack in any other way, however.

Wayyyyyy to generic and vague. I'll respond in a similar fashion: No it does not.

IC 35-42-2-1
Battery
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is:
[...]
(2) a Class D felony if it results in bodily injury to:
[...]
(B) a person less than fourteen (14) years of age and is committed by a person at least eighteen (18) years of age;[...]

IC 35-45-2-1
Intimidation
Sec. 1. (a) A person who communicates a threat to another person, with the intent:
[...]
(2) that the other person be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act;[...]
commits intimidation, a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) However, the offense is a:
(1) Class D felony if:
(A) the threat is to commit a forcible felony;
[...]
(2) Class C felony if, while committing it, the person draws or uses a deadly weapon.
(c) "Threat" means an expression, by words or action, of an intention to:
(1) unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person, or damage property;
(2) unlawfully subject a person to physical confinement or restraint;
(3) commit a crime;
(4) unlawfully withhold official action, or cause such withholding;
(5) unlawfully withhold testimony or information with respect to another person's legal claim or defense, except for a reasonable claim for witness fees or expenses;
(6) expose the person threatened to hatred, contempt, disgrace, or ridicule;
(7) falsely harm the credit or business reputation of the person threatened; or
(8) cause the evacuation of a dwelling, a building, another structure, or a vehicle.


If a person at least 18 years old states an intention to commit a crime (or to injure another person of less than 14 years of age, (a Class D felony, and by definition, forcible), the intimidation alone is a Class D felony. If the person uses a weapon (which can really be anything other than an empty hand), it becomes a Class C felony.

Indiana law allows for deadly force (anywhere) to stop a "forcible felony". Assault on a 2 y/o is a clearly a "forcible felony".

Anyone who would have shot that scum bag would have been 100% within the law.

Also Cyngus, the person (people) who 'instructed you" about a "force paradigm" are wrong. You aren't a cop (that I know of). You have no such requirements.

Also with the "Castle Doctrine" YOU don't have to prove anything about why you used deadly force. The burden of proof is back where it belong, squarely on the prosecutor. Innocent until proven guilty.

I don't advocate going around shooting people for kicks, even when the law allows it, but a man hitting my daughter (3 or 5 years old) is a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. The real threat of an assailant trumps any "what ifs" about over penetration of rounds or the possibility of missing, by leaps and bounds. Especially considering, in this case, you wouldn't be more than 3 or 4 feet from the attacker... missing isn't as likely as aiming across the store. If you did miss? thats for the monday morning quarter backs. Not to be debating while some nutjob is laying into your child.

In any event, it's an individuals choice and their child on the line. I can't think of any greater reason to use deadly force than to defend my child... but thats just me.

 

[No Time to Shoot]

Hey folks.
I see that some of my points were taken and some not fair enough.
First nothing was directed at an individualperson here.

I was to bed late and up early for a work run. I could have chosen my words a little differently. So let me clarify.

I'm not denying anyone the right to defend themselves. Less than lethal would be the ideal option. I can get behind drawing to a low ready and warning the idiot. I also needed to read the story a bit closer.


and Joe yeah you're right:
I want to deny people the right to defend themselves, I'm an Obama plant, I won't defend my kid, and you're a yahoo for getting that personal.....and so off the mark about me. The instant trigger pulling is my issue here in general not with you personally. I truly believe a bad shoot here would make us all look bad. Some of the quick shoot comments made me feel that way as well. Did not intend to personally offend anyone........and NOWHERE do I deny anyone's right to defense. I do however question their timing.......

Get grip. I'm done with this. I meant it as food for thought.

Joe your negative rep honors me.


Here's the negative rep comment from Joe folks since I believe in full disclosure:

"Your post is out of line, your unwillingness to defend children reprehensible, your willingness to deny others that right disgusting. Your willingness to endanger children makes you unfit to carry a gun."

My right to carry a gun may one day save myself, those I care for or some stranger. Possible even you. I'll just be less trigger happy. My "willingness to endanger children". What a drama queen.......

Rethink what you wrote regarding my having no basis to express an opinion.. You want to deny my 1st and 2nd amendment rights.
Who's " reprehensible" ? maybe both of us?

Joe it takes all kinds. I'd rather we stick together and not divide ourselves so sharply. I'm a moderate ,as such I'm able to change some libs minds on 2A rights, sadly it's one at a time. Once they get to the range....they usually change.

Seriously I'd like to move on from this please accept my positive rep as proof of that.

I sent you a rep Cygnus but but didn't type anything .....oops Basically agree with what you said. And that negative rep was way out of line. Someone needs to take a chill pill and sleep it off. I am a moderate my self and can tell you that people that react like Joe are the ones that hurt our cause more than they will ever know. The gun doesn't make you a tough guy it's a tool to increase your ability to survive. If your not able to handle the responsibility of carrying a gun in public then leave it at home.

Carrying a gun has calmed me down and caused me to handle minor and major confrontations in a more mature manner. I'm only 28 and I've seen my share of extremely high stress and sometimes bloody situations without having a gun on me, and I survived just fine. Someone with the training you have had Joe should be more sure of themselves and not require the use of a weapon for a minor altercation, reguardless of your age.

 

[AndersonIN]

Here is one for you guys..................what if it was YOUR WIFE (without you) with the baby and she is carrying!

Being female, in fear of her childs life, in fear of her life......................take it away!!!

 

[BloodEclipse]

I sent you a rep Cygnus but but didn't type anything .....oops Basically agree with what you said. And that negative rep was way out of line. Someone needs to take a chill pill and sleep it off. I am a moderate my self and can tell you that people that react like Joe are the ones that hurt our cause more than they will ever know. The gun doesn't make you a tough guy it's a tool to increase your ability to survive. If your not able to handle the responsibility of carrying a gun in public then leave it at home.

Carrying a gun has calmed me down and caused me to handle minor and major confrontations in a more mature manner. I'm only 28 and I've seen my share of extremely high stress and sometimes bloody situations without having a gun on me, and I survived just fine. Someone with the training you have had Joe should be more sure of themselves and not require the use of a weapon for a minor altercation, reguardless of your age.

See the problem is you say it's a minor altercation. Do you have kids?
As I pointed out before the mother had no idea the level of assault, this piece of human garbage was about to inflict. If the mother would have stepped in she may have been punched out and no one left to defend her child. I surely hope when someone threatens you or yours, you make the correct decision. Saying that Joe and ones like him hurt our cause is bunk. It only adds to those who already want our guns. Those of us who own guns and carry them with purpose, do not have your attitude.

 

[No Time to Shoot]

The man should have been dealt with at the the time he made the threat not when he came to make good on it! I'm blown away that some of you would shoot and potentially ill them and or the people around them because of the way you interpret the law.

Deal with the problem maturely and correctly. If a man comes up to you and threatens to do harm to your child beat his *** or call the police. If he shows a weapon or threatens that he has one show him what it feels like to be swiss cheese. We are referencing the article and the situation it describes. No where in there does it talk about a weapon. You have far better tools available to you than using a gun. Police store security bigger people around you that would help you out.

I have stepped in to help people out before when they were in need others would do the same. Especially when it involves children.

 

[No Time to Shoot]

See the problem is you say it's a minor altercation. Do you have kids?
As I pointed out before the mother had no idea the level of assault, this piece of human garbage was about to inflict. If the mother would have stepped in she may have been punched out and no one left to defend her child. I surely hope when someone threatens you or yours, you make the correct decision. Saying that Joe and ones like him hurt our cause is bunk. It only adds to those who already want our guns. Those of us who own guns and carry them with purpose, do not have your attitude.

Yes I have kids. I have a 3 year old daughter. Maybe I grew up rougher than the rest of you but my fists will always come out before my gun if there isn't the chance of another weapon being involved. We are talking about how we would react not that mother. Big difference! She should have immediately alerted store personnel to the problem and called the police. Not continued shopping like the threat never happened.

Let me get this straight your telling me that the vast majority of gun owners when verbally threatened will stick a gun in that persons face. What happened to situational awareness? Your in a place and could have 100s of people around and the only thing you can think of is to pull your gun out? That's smart!

I wish some LEOs would chime in because I'm sure they would recommend against putting your gun in someones face based on the threat level we are discussing.

 

[BloodEclipse]

You draw the gun after the threat has been made and the idiot advances. I have been taking this from a mothers perspective for several posts now. The story sounds like the guy no more than made the threat before he acted on it. I think a draw would back him up but she needs to be ready to fire if he continues to advance.

 

[No Time to Shoot]

You draw the gun after the threat has been made and the idiot advances. I have been taking this from a mothers perspective for several posts now. The story sounds like the guy no more than made the threat before he acted on it. I think a draw would back him up but she needs to be ready to fire if he continues to advance.

Coming at it from a mothers perspective I would agree with you. I was looking at it as a what would you do scenario.

 

[Unoid]

I'm 6'4 and 180 pounds touch my kid your going to have a real bad day. Forget using a gun I'd beat them till my wife says enough. < That takes a long time by the way!

by using your non existent muscles? :P

 

[No Time to Shoot]

by using your non existent muscles? :P

As one of my best friends used to tell people when they would come to my house "don't **** off the skinny man!"

 

[dburkhead]

Remember Ability, Opportunity, and Intent (of lethal force)?
That is what you'd have to prove he had before using lethal force.

What you are missing is that Ability, Opportunity, and Intent are directed at the person or persons being attacked, not necessarily the person performing the "defense."

The person is not attacking the adult, they are attacking the child.

Ability: Disparity of Force. An adult absolutely has the ability to kill a small child.

Opportunity: If the adult is in a position to slap the child, Opportunity is pretty clearly established.

The only real question is Intent. You have the attacker verbally saying that he will "shut [her] up for you." The question is: if the person is unstable enough to actually physically attack someone else's child--while that someone else is standing right there--are they unstable enough to threaten the child with serious bodily harm?

If I were on the jury trying such a case (something as described in the OP, but with parent using lethal force once the other person attack's parent's child), the worst the parent would see is a mistrial because there is simply no way that, given the facts as described--adult makes verbal threat then physically assaults (with battery) a two-year-old child--there's just no way I would vote to convict on someone treating that as a potential "serious bodily injury" assault on the child.

Now, were I in the situation of the OP, my response would likely be more along the lines of stepping between my daughter and the person making the threat and saying something along the lines of "try it and first you'll have to go through me, then second you'll be facing charges for assault and they really, really don't like people who abuse children in prison."

I can get away with that because I'm a big ugly guy who works out regularly, have several years training in Judo, and learned "mean" from some of the best teachers in the world (drill instructors).

Don't Tread on Me.