Would you use your weapon to stop a stranger from being raped?

[GuyRelford]

I remember reading a report of a passe by coming on the scene of a rape The shot first and asked questions later Turns out the lady was a prostitute. She only yelled rape to get a passer by to help free her. Police officer just trying to MaKe an arrest. I'm not saying don't stop the rape, but definitely think this one thru!

That is an important point. Indiana law would require the jury to look through the eyes of the shooter to determine whether deadly force was justified under the circumstances. Here's a slide that I use in my Comprehensive Indiana Gun Law course:

“A defendant’s belief of apparent danger does not require the danger to be actual danger, but the belief must be in good faith. . . . The question of the existence of such danger, the necessity or apparent necessity, and the amount of force necessary to be employed to resist the attack can only be determined from the standpoint of the defendant at the time and under all the then existing circumstances. . . . Focusing on the ‘standpoint of the defendant’ means at least two things: (1) the trier of fact must consider the circumstances only as they appeared to the defendant, and (2) the defendant’s own account of the event, although not required to be believed, is critically relevant testimony.”​

Brand v. State, 766 N.E.2d 772 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002)

 

[INGunGuy]

Without hesitation...

INGunGuy

 

[Archbishop]

That is an important point. Indiana law would require the jury to look through the eyes of the shooter to determine whether deadly force was justified under the circumstances. Here's a slide that I use in my Comprehensive Indiana Gun Law course:

“A defendant’s belief of apparent danger does not require the danger to be actual danger, but the belief must be in good faith. . . . The question of the existence of such danger, the necessity or apparent necessity, and the amount of force necessary to be employed to resist the attack can only be determined from the standpoint of the defendant at the time and under all the then existing circumstances. . . . Focusing on the ‘standpoint of the defendant’ means at least two things: (1) the trier of fact must consider the circumstances only as they appeared to the defendant, and (2) the defendant’s own account of the event, although not required to be believed, is critically relevant testimony.”​

Brand v. State, 766 N.E.2d 772 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002)

so in the case of shooting a cop. who's in trouble? Me, or the hooker? I remember a case where women told her husband that her boyfriend was a rapist. Her husband shot killed the man. She was put on trial for his murder as she created the situation. Would this be the same deal?

 

[40calPUNISHER]

Shoot first, then he should stop.

 

[GuyRelford]

so in the case of shooting a cop. who's in trouble? Me, or the hooker? I remember a case where women told her husband that her boyfriend was a rapist. Her husband shot killed the man. She was put on trial for his murder as she created the situation. Would this be the same deal?

That's dicey. You have to have a "reasonable belief" that deadly force is justified under the circumstances. That has two elements: your subjective view of the event under all of the circumstances as they appear to you, and whether your belief is reasonable under those circumstances. Here's another quote from an Indiana case:

“More recently, our Supreme Court has clarified that the phrase ‘reasonably believes,’ as used in the Indiana self-defense statute, requires both subjective belief that force was necessary to prevent serious bodily injury, and that such actual belief was one that a reasonable person would have under the circumstances. Littler v. State, 871 N.E.2d 276, 279 (Ind. 2007). Thus, both objective and subjective standards are implicated; a defendant claiming self-defense is not necessarily restricted to producing evidence of his own state of mind or belief. It is ultimately the defendant's belief that is at issue; however, the beliefs of others may shed light upon the reasonableness of the defendant's belief.”

Hood v. State, 877 N.E.2d 492 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007)​

 

[roscott]

So, in this context, maybe a more accurate question might be, if you happened upon a gang of ten young men (possibly armed) engaged in a rape (assuming you know it's a rape), in a reduced light situation, in the jurisdiction of California, what would your unarmed response be?

If that were to be the case, I would still have my knife on me. Due to their numbers, I would not give any verbal warning. I would get as close as possible, and attack as violently as possible. Hopefully I could make a scene bloody and violent enough to cause the remaining guys to run.

If they don't run, I might be a dead man.

However, I would rather be dead than live with the memory of seeing something like that and knowing I did nothing.

 

[cosermann]

If that were to be the case, I would still have my knife on me.

School campus in the accounts I've read, hence knife = illegal.

(Actually, a bystander would be ok with a knife under 2.5" under CA law. Not sure about the students. They're probably banned by school policy.)

 

[spartan933]

I'll try to aim for the rapist's leg or something. But, I can't promise anything. I'll take my chances with a jury of my peers. At least I will be able to sleep at night, no matter what verdict comes down.

 

[calcot7]

I voted to shoot the rapist with no verbal warning. But this would only be the case if I was the one being raped.

 

[Wabatuckian]

I do not know how that could happen in CA.

I would draw, order to stop, and then shoot if need be.

As an aside, I have it on good authority that, until recently, the police of some lesser-known crime ridden countries in central Europe preferred the .32acp for police work. The reason was that it would go into the back of a rapist's head and not overpenetrate into the woman.

Josh <><

 

[Professor Thump]

You have to make a difference. There is nothing greater than saving a woman or child from danger.

I never intended my post to mean that I'd try to fistfight the rapist or anything silly like that. I'm talking about yelling first, probably just a heartbeat ahead of beginning the draw stroke. Assuming no force disparity or terrain factors that put me at a huge disadvantage, the scenario I envision goes like:

Of course the OODA loop would continue during and after the attack in case the BG brought friends or surrendered at first but then got uppity before the cops arrived. I just don't see the need to wait to draw before engaging if it's one or two guys who may choose to run away when discovered.

I like your chart Bubba but didn't you forget a sequence in the middle?

Please add an action box for the following: "Fire two warning shots to the back or front of the rapist's head". That should take care of it. No trial for the scum bag to get off. Unfortunately you might be on trial yourself but you have saved a life worth saving.

 

[Cain71]

Why shoot?,take out to remote place find stump attach parts via spike and large washer. Start fire on said parts and hand butter knife, let rapist cut or watch burn,........ if you can't get away with this than shoot,most definatley...

 

[gage]

would consider it a good day if i got to shoot a rapist dead and if by chance I was out of ammo because i already shot a rapist that night i would not hesitate to use my hands or a ball point pen to inflict permanent damage. absolutely i'd try every means to end his worthless life.

 

[warangelcometh]

Good Day Indeed!! It makes me sick and again I lose more faith mankind that a dozen people would sit by and watch this happen to this girl. WTF! is wrong with people?? No need for a 3 strikes and your out rule here! Kill the S.O.B.

 

[Clearwat]

As a father or two daughters. . . I would absolutlely shoot to kill. This story out of Kalifornia is scary. I pray for this girl.

 

[tv1217]

Pardon the language, but anybody who answers no is a *******.



Edit: Never mind, the magical board elves took care of that.


Hint:

 

[redneckpastor]

cant even think about walking away or calling the cops, that crime is happening right there, what would that women want me to do!!!!? what would you want someone to do if that was your wife or little girl!!!!!!

that guy would not stand a chance!!!!!

 

[SC_Shooter]

Not even a question in my book...of course I would do everything in my power to stop such a thing. Might there be legal consequences, doubtful but certainly possible. Whatever they may be, they would pale in comparison to the consequences internally of not taking action.

This answer remains the same with or without my carry gun, though the tactics might change just a bit.

 

[Integraholic]

Only reason I'd say anything before shooting him would be to get his attention and give me as much target as possible to hit. I hate sex offenders. I don't care what people say, someone with the desire to go that far to get with a girl will definitely do it again.

 

[emsdial911]

Yes, Wouldn't think twice.