Father now wishes he'd shot daughter's attacker

Thats why you close the distance and put a round through his skull with a contact shot.
No need to mess around with this guy.

"Dodge This..."

[This message has been edited by George Hill (edited April 19, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tim Burke:
The Mag-lite stays right next to the ready access safe. If I can't shoot him, I can clobber him. If one did shoot him, no question about it being justified.[/quote]

I was thinking along the same lines. Time to go invest in some really stiff pepper spray.
 
Tim,

Amen to the maglite! A 6 D cell flashlight applied to the head will do the trick. Either that or I have a 10" bladed tanto (that hangs from the bed post next to the maglite) that I would be happy to sink to the hilt in his kidneys, chest or whatever else I can get hold of! (Why does that sound so much more violent than saying you'd just shoot him?) If he's fighting with a family member, better to use something that you apply with a little more precision as a contact weapon.

Chris Canis (hurray for another chestpounding topic!)

I wait in breathless anticipation for Glenn's response to this one...
 
I figure the father was lucky in three ways. First, his daughter survived. Second, his warning shot didn't hit someone unintentionally. And third, he didn't shoot the BG (much as the BG deserved it), since the use of deadly force, while evidently justified, turns out to have been avoidable and might have jeopardized his freedom.

IMHO the warning shot was excessively dangerous and a poor choice, even allowing for the stress of the moment.

OTOH I agree completely that a parent's duty is to protect his or her children, regardless of what hairs the law may split about the use of deadly force. Protection of one's family is a higher obligation than what we owe to the statutes, if only because the family--not the city, state, or federal government--is the basic and most important unit of society.

Just my $0.02.
 
The link posted by bestdefense357 says that the guy is facing only 4 1/2 yrs for this even though he has prior burglary and assault convictions.
 
In Washington State, the father could have shot the bg and he would be justified under the law. Washington is fairly tolerant regarding the use of deadly force. As long as the bg was in the house, he was fair game, even if shot in the back while running.

Two years ago, a local homeowner awoke to find a burgler in his house. He responded with a shotgun. As the burgler ran away, the homeowner shot him in the back and the bg fell back through the window he came in.

It turns out the burgler was a 14 year old neighborhood kid out for a teenage lark. Didn't matter, the homeowner was not charged with any crime. A private citizen actually has greater latitude in the use of deadly force in Washington than a police officer does.
 
In this scenario, I think a baseball bat or an ASP baton, etc... to the attacker's head or body would probably draw his attention away from your loved one. If not, wind up, smack, repeat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top