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

[finity]

I'm conflicted.

Rape and murder share #1 on my sht list

Unless I saw a weapon, I wouldn't shoot. Without verbal warning - Pistol whip. Attempt to detain him. If he gets away... He does.. Wait with the victim until leo arrives. If they drew a weapon or fought back I'd fire.

You're confused.

Killing someone who is committing rape is not murder whether they have a weapon on them or not.

But given we're all in the CYA world today, you would have to at least tell him to stop before firing.

No, you don't.

There is no requirement to warn someone before using deadly force to protect yourself or another person.

If you want to, that's fine. It's your choice but you don't have to.

 

[czar996]

I couldn't go to sleep at night if I didn't react right away.

Legal troubles or not doesn't matter.

 

[BloodEclipse]

At this posting, 215 responders have drawn with a command to stop.
He does, gets his trousers up and starts walking away.

Now what?

No intent to stray away from the original question, I voted the first day and continued to follow the results.

Just because he has stopped this action, he doesn't get to go free.
I make him stay or I shoot him. I will not let a rapist go as I deem him a threat to others and if he tries to walk away I will end that threat.
I think a jury would agree with me.

 

[versuchstier147]

FINITY-

Ok, Murder by definition is the UNLAWFUL killing of another person. The way the law is written anyone would be in the right in that given situation. But, I'm not looking for reasons to justify killing someone. I'm not going to kill someone just because I can get away with it. R.O.E.

 

[infidel]

FINITY-
But, I'm not looking for reasons to justify killing someone.
Knowing the reasons that you can is very important.

I'm not going to kill someone just because I can get away with it. R.O.E.
Good, that would be bad. You almost make it sound like we just want to kill someone. However; "getting away with it" or not should not stop a moral person from doing the right thing.

The most important thing to know when carrying a gun, next to how to use it, is to know when you can/should use it.

 

[clydesdale]

this reminds me of the movie slingblade, yes for sure kill the rapist but make damn sure its a rape not just rough sex in public,the way some of you answer i wonder if you have ever been with a "screamer" really enjoying the outdoors you should still think first before you shoot the "lucky"guy in the back most of these replies just focus on justified triggerhappiess not is this the correct action if your too scared to confront the suspected perp you should carry for personal protection only. and stay out of civil duty arenas so possible innocent but not very discreet people wont die

 

[LPMan59]

this reminds me of the movie slingblade, yes for sure kill the rapist but make damn sure its a rape not just rough sex in public,the way some of you answer i wonder if you have ever been with a "screamer" really enjoying the outdoors

i've never been with a woman who cried and begged me to stop.


though i had one ask if i was done yet.....

 

[clydesdale]

i've never been with a woman who cried and begged me to stop.


though i had one ask if i was done yet.....

lol what if these guys got there and heard......stop! but not the dont.......... that came before it bang your dead

 

[LPMan59]

lol what if these guys got there and heard......stop! but not the dont.......... that came before it bang your dead

i guess thats what i get for being so awful....maybe i deserved it.

 

[infidel]

this reminds me of the movie slingblade, yes for sure kill the rapist but make damn sure its a rape not just rough sex in public,Read the OP, it is a rape.the way some of you answer i wonder if you have ever been with a "screamer" really enjoying the outdoors you should still think first before you shoot the "lucky"guy in the back Well this part of your reply makes sense. most of these replies just focus on justified triggerhappiess(civil duty?) not is this the correct action if your too scared to confront the suspected perp you should carry for personal protection only.I couldn't really make sense of this because it doesn't read like a sentence. Maybe you are saying that you shouldn't protect people or help them? Hope not... and stay out of civil duty arenas so possible innocent but not very discreet people wont die Clarify?

lol what if these guys got there and heard......stop! but not the dont.......... that came before it bang your dead

Read the OP please.

 

[infidel]

Oh yeah, 2

 

[Paxton383]

i would do whatever i had to to get it to stop and if that means putting some new holes in him then thats what i would do

 

[finity]

FINITY-

Ok, Murder by definition is the UNLAWFUL killing of another person. The way the law is written anyone would be in the right in that given situation. But, I'm not looking for reasons to justify killing someone. I'm not going to kill someone just because I can get away with it. R.O.E.

Ok, now I'm confused.

The law is written that way to allow a person the ability to protect themselves or others from the worst crimes (i.e. those capable of resulting in severe injury or death) without the fear of facing criminal prosecution. A civilized society needs those protections. How long would a society last if the BG's knew that the innocent victims couldn't (therefore wouldn't) fight back? Look at England now. Violence in that once 'safe' country has increased significantly since their gun bans & putting people in jail for defending themselves.

You're not killing someone because you can get away with it. You're stopping someone from hurting you or another person (by possibly having to kill them) under extreme circumstances which the law, at least in this state, is reasonable enough to realize you shouldn't be prosecuted for.

If you are married, would you want your wife to use a gun to stop someone from raping her? Even if the guy didn't have a weapon? If so, what's the difference between her using the gun or you using it? The law allows you to protect another person as you would yourself.

If not...well....

 

[Delmar]

FINITY-

Ok, Murder by definition is the UNLAWFUL killing of another person. The way the law is written anyone would be in the right in that given situation. But, I'm not looking for reasons to justify killing someone. I'm not going to kill someone just because I can get away with it. R.O.E.

Killing a man because he is raping a woman is different than killing a man just because you can get away with it, don't you think?

 

[mskendall]

I couldn't go to sleep at night if I didn't react right away.

Legal troubles or not doesn't matter.

Much agreed!

 

[versuchstier147]

I think it's a lot easier to think back on a situation - than for it. I don't want to add variables to the OP, but there's a lot more to it than just that.

I've never had any first hand, or even second hand experience with rape. I can't imagine how horrible it must be for someone to go through.

FINITY - There is a difference between her and me using the weapon. She's being overpowered by someone and has no option. Being a third party to the event, and the only one armed, I have the rapist overpowered and the choice to shoot first or make my presence known.

* In case anyone missed this, this isn't about "if I'd do anything or walk away" - this is about shooting first, or trying to stop them by other means.

I've asked a couple girls, and even myself what they would rather have done in that situation, and every answer (including my own) has been shoot first. But, for the same reason I didn't ask my girlfriend, emotion plays into it. I figured that aspect should be left out of play. In that same plane of thought, if it isn't my friend, girlfriend, daughter, what ever - it's someone else's. One could successfully argue there should be no difference. I still think using a firearm is an absolute last resort.

DELMAR - Yes. That was what I was intending to clarify in that reference to an earlier post.

 

[groovatron]

Too me this is a no brainer. If I see an alley rape happening right in front of my eyes, gun is out and trained on the perp. The guy gets about 2 seconds to repond to a very authoritative verbal announcement that I am armed and prepared to fire. I can't imagine a rapist being able to continue the rape with an intervention like this. If and when he ceased the attack, I would order him face down on the pavement with his hands on his head. If he decided to run, then I would not chase. I would immediately call LEO and try to keep a visual on him for as long as possible without pursuit. If the BG decided to attack me, he'd better have a bullet proof vest on. There are no legal ramifications that could scare me away from this decision. Rape is a crime that has personally affected a couple people close to me. I have no tolerance for it at all.

 

[ntrngr]

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.)

Technically, in Indiana, if you read the law, you find that a knife is only a knife if it is longer than 2 inches and is used as a weapon to commit a crime. I can't easily cite the code section but I read it and my jaw dropped. In Indiana, you can carry a common language defined "knife" of any size since it is not a knife until you use it illegitimately as a weapon. Frankly, I think this is bizaare but the law says what it says.

 

[ntrngr]

In the context of this thread, we should keep in mind that the rape in question happened in Kalifornia (AND on a school campus), and thus I'm fairly confident NONE of those witnessing the assault had a firearm at their disposal (or legally should have). Police say as many as 10 may have been involved in the assault. Details are still emerging.

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?

Sounds like a terrible thing, but I'm not ready to judge the witnesses until all the facts are out.

The dangers of intervention should also be factored in:
http://www.stoppingpower.net/commentary/comm_dangers_in_intervention.asp


Which is why my response had to be, "not necessarily."

There are some things in this world, regardless of your level of physique, courage or ability that you cannot back away from. Never. This is one. 1 to 1, 10 to 1, doesn't matter. I'll live (or die) with my honor before I'll live another 50 years with the guilt of not doing what I could. I might decide to run and call 911. I might decide to go back to the car and get my gun, Indiana law be damned. I might decide to de-socket some shoulders or break a few necks. The probability of someone getting hurt is high and its probably going to end up with someone dead if the perp(s) don't stop or they attack me. The action would depend on some many things. Are they a bunch of kids? Adults? What do they look like? How do they act? How big are they? Is this on school grounds? Do I have a cell phone? Are there any other witnesses?

You don't make those decisions consciously. But, you have to do what you have to do. If you "chicken out" or cow to it, you'll hate yourself the rest of your life.

Basically, a can of whoopass gets opened and somebody gets to eat it. I just hope its not me.

-NR

 

[JUMBO]

I think that most would not know how they would react in said given situation. thats my .02 cents