Woman Pulls Gun On Flasher

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is quite unlikely that this woman has the training or experience to understand the "most" flashers do not approach or make physical contact with their victims. It would not be reasonable to expect that she would. On the other hand I think a reasonable person would not fail to understand her being in fear for herself and her child. Especially the child.

As for the sex offender, I can give you examples I am aware of of flashers absolutely breaking the mold and attacking their victims. Unusual to be sure, unheard of, not much.
 
jhenry said:
It is quite unlikely that this woman has the training or experience to understand the "most" flashers do not approach or make physical contact with their victims. It would not be reasonable to expect that she would....
Click to expand...
Now you're just speculating with absolutely no data. All you have is wishful thinking.

jhenry said:
...As for the sex offender, I can give you examples I am aware of of flashers absolutely breaking the mold and attacking their victims....
Click to expand...
Then do so, with solid documentation.
 
Do you really think scientific data is required to understand that most folks do not have the knowledge and understanding to make accurate decisions on the fly, let alone in a crisis, regarding the potential for harm to their child or themselves when faced with a situation like this. Please.

As to the other, PM sent.
 
Frank Ettin said:
The vast majority of flashers do not present a physical risk. And it is a "reasonable person" test.
Click to expand...

Who knows how many people have been raped and murdered by flashers.
The witnesses would be dead, so I believe your argument cannot be substantiated.
 
Changed to reflect pax's explanation of the law in Washington

Posted by jhenry: On the other hand I think a reasonable person would not fail to understand her being in fear for herself and her child. Especially the child.
Click to expand...
Fear of what? Was she threatened with the unlawful use of force?
 
Last edited:
jhenry said:
Do you really think scientific data is required to understand that most folks do not have the knowledge and understanding to make accurate decisions on the fly,...
Click to expand...
No, but an opinion to merit attention should have some meaningful support -- more than a satisfying guess.

jhenry said:
As to the other, PM sent.
Click to expand...
Nothing received as of now.

Microgunner said:
Who knows how many people have been raped and murdered by flashers.
The witnesses would be dead, so I believe your argument cannot be substantiated.
Click to expand...
There has been a fair amount of study of sexual predation. Standard recommendation is to leave. And while it's been found that some exhibitionists graduate to assault or rape, in this case the perpetrator was sitting down and, according to the report, did not appear to make any overt gesture consistent with an attack.
 
Frank Ettin said:
There has been a fair amount of study of sexual predation. Standard recommendation is to leave. And while it's been found that some exhibitionists graduate to assault or rape, in this case the perpetrator was sitting down and, according to the report, did not appear to make any overt gesture consistent with an attack
Click to expand...

My emphasis

With a pistol in his pocket? Who knows? Too big a risk to give the benefit of doubt IMO.

The deviate is a felon after all.
 
I just practiced standing up. I can stand up rather quickly, of course my hands were free at the time.

Let us not forget disparity of force as well, to include the child.
 
Based on the fact that the article did not mention whether the police were charging the woman with an unlawful act, seems like any argument whether she is culpable or not is moot.
 
The situation called for an immediate, strong dose of pepper spray to the guy's wanker.

Displaying the firearm or using OC on the offender is an appropriate level of force in this situation, IMO. Shooting him would have been inappropriate, unless the offender escalated to a physical attack. It is not reasonable to expect her to retreat, since the speed of her retreat would have been hampered by her young child.

You can find the relevant WA state statute at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.270

RCW 9.41.270 said:
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

...

(3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:

....

(c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;
Click to expand...

Displaying the weapon was an appropriate level of force because she was protecting herself against the present threat of unlawful force. He told her to watch him yank off. Why? Because he believed he could force her to comply, and apparently so did she, which is why she drew the gun. She may have been able to retreat; however, the speed of her retreat would certainly have been hampered by the presence of her young child.

Note that she did not shoot him. She displayed the weapon to make him stop, and she stopped using any level of force against him as soon as it was obvious that he was no longer interested in using force against her.

All's well that ends well -- although on a gut level, I wish she had put his fire out with a little OC instead.

pax
 
From http://www.kgw.com/news/local/Flasher-flees-after-woman-pulls-gun-on-him-179658621.html

Around 8 p.m. on Wednesday the woman was at Lake Sacajawea with her 6-year-old son and a dog when a man approached her aggressively while masturbating and suggested she should watch him.
Click to expand...

Video interview with the victim here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkg-4uUTEBg

Her 6 year old son is terminally ill, and the dog is his service dog.

Original local news story here: http://tdn.com/news/local/woman-pul...cle_66bab166-2f9a-11e2-9af1-0019bb2963f4.html

pax
 
She would not have been justified in displaying the firearm in that manner under Missouri law, or that of many other states.

The law in the state of washington clearly does permit the display of a firearm in some circumstances in which the threat of death or serious bodily harm is not imminent. However,mI do not know enough about the legal definitions and case law of the State of Washington to judge whether saying that someone should watch something would amount to the "presently threatened use of force". Pax lives there, but lacking more background, I'm dubious.
 
I believe she would have been legally justified in brandishing the firearm in Missouri as I read RsMO 571.030 and 563.031
 
I agree w/Pax 100%.

I disagree w/oldsmarksman(people have already noted/posted valid arguments).

Frank, I edit my original post. Yes, it would be wise for me to proofread upon posting...thank you. I also have to side w/some arguments explaining their side with you, but you made some good points.

First we are talking about a woman(it does matter), then we are talking about a young child of the mother, then we are talking about the location. It is common knowledge that most pervs do escalate when they get away with stuff: one of example of many - peeping tom's many times can graduate to rapists andor breaking and entering. Take that into account when one can easily feel threatened(we all realize this depends on the person not state law) and have reason to believe that this individual had very bad intent, is on drugs or highly drunk, andor might easily have some mental issues. One can not take the chance. She didn't brandish her firearm...she pulled it out for protection and got it at the ready. She didn't fire but would've been justified if this individual posed any further danger to her and her child(example: charged them). Who knows what would've happened, but as I mentioned in my original post: "Things can escalate quick...."
 
She was wrong for not having the gun ready and had to do all after pulling it and this would have been a great time for a can of pepper spray instead of a gun as a first choice. I shot in the face and one more in the privates would have been righteous
 
She was wrong for not having the gun ready....
Click to expand...

you may be right, but that is an opinion. Everybody has to make their own choice of how to carry their firearm: one in the chamber, mag installed, etc, etc. I give her credit for having a firearm for a CCW(some people choose to leave it at home) and for having a plan: inserting her mag and making her CCW "hot" without hesitation. She didn't seem clueless.
 
Due to an unfortunate prank escalation several years ago - when I was still in college - I can say definitively that yes, it would hurt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top