Woman Shoots Armed Robber After Beating, Charged With Murder

[Ripple 0]

Quote

And to spare his life is to leave him capable of doing the same thing to another woman. Anyone who pussies out of fighting back against such a piece of shit is culpable for the harm he does to others in the future.

As you've said yourself, you've never been in a similar position, so that statement hasn't got much credibility, has it?

That aside, if someone doesn't exact the kind of retribution you'd like when they have the opportunity, maybe its because they know they wouldn't live happily with the fact, maybe they feel that even if someone does something evil to them, their life is still of equal value. Why is that wrong? The devaluing of people's lives is what causes the shit in the first place.

Surely its better to go through life without resentment. If something bad happens to you and you go after revenge, you're reliving the orginal situation, again and again. I'd rather live it just once. That's not to say I advocate forgiveness, by the way.

PhillyKev:

Quote

That's just about one of the angriest posts I've ever seen.

You can't have read many threads on here then

Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes

[Ripple 0]

Quote

Had HE not beaten her senseless, she would have had the sense to let him flee, and not shoot him.

-

Me thinks Jeffrey should be on this woman's defence panel.

Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

If something bad happens to you and you go after revenge, you're reliving the orginal situation, again and again.

I don't see where 'revenge' is even an aspect of this discussion. This thread was about real time self defense choices and the right to it. Methinks you are off topic.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Ripple 0]

Quote

I don't see where 'revenge' is even an aspect of this discussion. This thread was about real time self defense choices and the right to it. Methinks you are off topic.

Oh, I'm sorry, I had no idea the topic was just about 'real time self defence choices'. I thought it was about a woman who killed her attacker when he was no longer posing a threat to her. Revenge being another name for that, imo.

Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes

[Kennedy 0]

I think he should be on her jury.





(wait, is that what you call a defense panel?)

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I thought it was about a woman who killed her attacker when he was no longer posing a threat to her.

According to whom?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

And to spare his life is to leave him capable of doing the same thing to another woman. Anyone who pussies out of fighting back against such a piece of shit is culpable for the harm he does to others in the future.

As you've said yourself, you've never been in a similar position, so that statement hasn't got much credibility, has it?

That aside, if someone doesn't exact the kind of retribution you'd like when they have the opportunity, maybe its because they know they wouldn't live happily with the fact, maybe they feel that even if someone does something evil to them, their life is still of equal value. Why is that wrong? The devaluing of people's lives is what causes the shit in the first place.

I stand by what I said at the first. I do NOT consider the life of a violent person (rapist, mugger, murderer) to be of equal value of a non-violent, peaceful person. So realize that that is where I am coming from with my views and statements. It may make vast differences between how you would react and how I would react.

I think it is incredibly selfish of a person to put "how they would feel later on if they killed their attacker in self defense" because refusing to stop the person and prevent him from doing more attacks amounts to giving him license to victimize another woman just as he has already done. How many more victims, just because one person who could have stopped him did not do so, for personal compunction reasons?

Someone does something as evil as RAPE to me, and I still think that his life is of equal value to mine, a non-rapist? HARDLY. Just what would someone have to do in order for you to think they are not every bit the moral equal of you??

Quote

Surely its better to go through life without resentment. If something bad happens to you and you go after revenge, you're reliving the orginal situation, again and again. I'd rather live it just once. That's not to say I advocate forgiveness, by the way.

If I were a woman, and were raped by some piece of shit, and I killed him in self defense, I would not have that resentment. The issue would be over, and in fact I'd feel much BETTER because I knew I had protected untold numbers of women from him, as well.

By the way, we're not really talking about revenge, which we have already said is illegal (and somewhat immoral) if you seek it after the threat is over. We're talking about being prepared and willing to act in lethal self defense if attacked. I think doing so is far preferable to just surviving an attack and letting your rapist go off on his merry way, since you KNOW he is extremely likely to do the same thing again.

I wonder what the law would say about a woman who was raped by person X, does not kill him, and on another occasion she sees him storming toward her in an unpopulated area, and she has now armed herself, and she shoots him because she's sure he's come to attack her again. I wonder how far into the attack he'd have to be before her right to defend herself was recognized... She has foreknowledge that he's a rapist, since he's raped her before...

Blue skies,
-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Ripple 0]

Quote

I stand by what I said at the first. I do NOT consider the life of a violent person (rapist, mugger, murderer) to be of equal value of a non-violent, peaceful person. So realize that that is where I am coming from with my views and statements. It may make vast differences between how you would react and how I would react.

Sure, I understand what you're saying. However, I think its totally unfair to make the victim 'wrong' for not killing their attacker (if they can) like you have done when you say:

Quote

I think it is incredibly selfish of a person to put "how they would feel later on if they killed their attacker in self defense" because refusing to stop the person and prevent him from doing more attacks amounts to giving him license to victimize another woman just as he has already done. How many more victims, just because one person who could have stopped him did not do so, for personal compunction reasons?

That's just so wrong. It wasn't the victims fault they were attacked, why does the fact they were attacked make them responsible for what the attacker may do in the future?

Quote

Someone does something as evil as RAPE to me, and I still think that his life is of equal value to mine, a non-rapist? HARDLY. Just what would someone have to do in order for you to think they are not every bit the moral equal of you??

First of all, I'm not talking 'moral equal'. I don't know what someone would have to do to make me think they don't have as much right to life as I do, though.

My beliefs have changed quite radically over the last 10 years or so. I used to feel exactly the same way as you. I really did. But I've increasingly realised that when I believe someone is worth less than someone else (e.g. me), it causes me stress, its not a peaceful way for me to live and it doesn't have any impact on them, at all.

I don't expect, or even want you to change the way you feel. I respect it and I want you to understand that its not wrong for me to feel the way I feel.

Quote

If I were a woman, and were raped by some piece of shit, and I killed him in self defense, I would not have that resentment. The issue would be over, and in fact I'd feel much BETTER because I knew I had protected untold numbers of women from him, as well.

Ok, well, whatever works for you. But I really feel bad that you would blame someone for not killing their attacker if they had the chance.

Quote

By the way, we're not really talking about revenge, which we have already said is illegal (and somewhat immoral) if you seek it after the threat is over. We're talking about being prepared and willing to act in lethal self defense if attacked. I think doing so is far preferable to just surviving an attack and letting your rapist go off on his merry way, since you KNOW he is extremely likely to do the same thing again.

Yes, I believe that self-defence is necessary and I believe in justified self-defence. For me.

I know that I, personally, would not want to kill someone who attacked me unless I knew that they were going to kill me. Its also a very grey area, how does anyone know if their attacker is not going to kill them until the attack is over?

I understand that revenge is an act that is done in retaliation after the threat has gone. Again, a grey area?

All I'm asking is don't make a victim wrong because they didn't kill their attacker when they had the chance.

Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

That's just so wrong. It wasn't the victims fault they were attacked, why does the fact they were attacked make them responsible for what the attacker may do in the future?

How about a different example.
There are women who get raped who tell no one, and do not report the rapist to the police.

Yes, this is the person's prerogative. Women do this for personal reasons ranging from humiliation to fear of reprisals to fear of rejection by a spouse.

But refusal to have the rapist prosecuted when you KNOW he is a rapist because he raped YOU DOES MEAN that you are leaving him out there, and everyone else can sink or swim as far as the potential for him to rape her, as far as you the initial victim are concerned.

I think this is wrong.

I think that no matter WHAT the crime -- particularly the types of crimes that a person is likely to REcommit -- the victim has a responsibility and obligation to society to do what is reasonable to help in the apprehension and conviction of that offender so that others don't fall victim to him.

I don't think that reasoning can really be argued with. It does stop short of saying, "You shoulda offed the sonofabitch," but it does criticize one for letting him go scot-free. In such a case, the blood of others very well would be on your hands. You (the figurative you -- I don't know your specific situation) could have handed the very identity of your rapist over to the police for him to be arrested and tried and put away. Why not do that?

Quote

First of all, I'm not talking 'moral equal'. I don't know what someone would have to do to make me think they don't have as much right to life as I do, though.

Ummm, "killing" would be a start, for me. "Raping" is a close second.

Quote

All I'm asking is don't make a victim wrong because they didn't kill their attacker when they had the chance.

You're right, that is a strong value/judgment call. I'll go, for now, with "obligated to do something -- at the very least, report the rapist to the police, whether you know his identity or just can give a description so they can hopefully find the guy if you don't know him personally." Is that better?

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Ripple 0]

Quote

How about a different example.
There are women who get raped who tell no one, and do not report the rapist to the police.
Yes, this is the person's prerogative. Women do this for personal reasons ranging from humiliation to fear of reprisals to fear of rejection by a spouse.
But refusal to have the rapist prosecuted when you KNOW he is a rapist because he raped YOU DOES MEAN that you are leaving him out there, and everyone else can sink or swim as far as the potential for him to rape her, as far as you the initial victim are concerned.
I think this is wrong.
I think that no matter WHAT the crime -- particularly the types of crimes that a person is likely to REcommit -- the victim has a responsibility and obligation to society to do what is reasonable to help in the apprehension and conviction of that offender so that others don't fall victim to him.
I don't think that reasoning can really be argued with. It does stop short of saying, "You shoulda offed the sonofabitch," but it does criticize one for letting him go scot-free. In such a case, the blood of others very well would be on your hands. You (the figurative you -- I don't know your specific situation) could have handed the very identity of your rapist over to the police for him to be arrested and tried and put away. Why not do that?

Ok, firstly, you do know my circumstances . Secondly, you appear to be saying that if I wouldn’t want to kill an attacker, I must want them to go completely free.

Quote

Ummm, "killing" would be a start, for me. "Raping" is a close second.

Yes, killing would be a start for me too. But, for me, its not one rule for one, one rule for another. If I killed, I would be just as bad.

Quote

You're right, that is a strong value/judgment call. I'll go, for now, with "obligated to do something -- at the very least, report the rapist to the police, whether you know his identity or just can give a description so they can hopefully find the guy if you don't know him personally." Is that better?

I’m concerned that you seem to think I was suggesting otherwise.

Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes

[Botellines 0]

Quote

I have to say that you seem to be utterly clueless about what you're talking about, in a manner that suggests you have never read up on the subject of self defense, never been forced to act in self defense, and think of this type of scenario in very static and unrealistic terms.

Wrong again. what you just said is totally pointless and doesn´t add anything to the discussion. Just for the record, i have a black belt in Taekwondo (Federacion Española de Taekwondo. License 18517CN), I have practiced several others martial arts and several courses of self defense. Although probably i am not as knowledgeable as you are, right? . BTW i have had to act in self defense (i said it in another post in this thread)

Quote

It has been demonstrated that an attacker armed with a dummy knife can lie on the ground face down, and on a start signal can leap up and run at a defender, "tag" him with what would be a lethal stab with the knife, before the defender can unholster a handgun and bring it to aim, from 20 feet away.

Maybe i didn´t explain myself correctly, i am talking about the range of the weapon, not the range of the attacker. The attacker was inside the car, so what you just said, does not apply. Actually, the woman put herself in danger by aproaching the car. If he had a knife (the baseball bat would be too cumbersome) he could have tried to strike at her through the window (in that case the efective range would be less than 2 meters)

Quote

This blows your theory of how a gun with a claimed range of 100 meters (yeah, like you can accurately fire your handgun at that distance, especially under stress!) is not justified for use against a weapon with a 3 meter range. Your claim is false. You can be in GRAVE danger from a bat or knife wielder even if he is 7 yards away, or even more, since unlike in the tests he is already standing. Think of how short a time is needed for you to sprint at someone from a standing position and reach him from a scant 20 feet away. 20 feet is nothing.

As i said, i don´t know much about guns (it is not of my interest). Anyway my claim is not false, don´t you think that i would double check this things before posting it here and let everybody jump at me if there is something incorrect?
It would take him much longer to get out of the car, get close to her and strike than for her to get the gun out and shoot.

Edited for clarification

[juanesky 0]

PJ, get this, now to be correct and "enlightenend" you need either a "Taek-it easy" with the assailant belt or read his mind just to make sure he is trying to kill you. You are not entitled to use effective force.

Men some posters here don't even care for what this thread is really about. An asshole who assaulted a woman with blunt force.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Wrong again. what you just said is totally pointless and doesn´t add anything to the discussion. Just for the record, i have a black belt in Taekwondo (Federacion Española de Taekwondo. License 18517CN)

What does this mean, "License 18517CN"?

Do you have to have a LICENSE, where you live, to learn a martial art?

Do you have to register your hands and feet?

Are you held to different legal standards of when you may engage in self-defense, and what you may do to protect yourself, being "licensed" to have martial arts knowledge?

If my impression is correct, and you have to obtain a license to learn martial arts, I think that's just sick. Should I have to obtain a license to learn chemistry or machining, because I could theoretically use that knowledge to create weapons to harm people and property?

Please clarify.

Blue skies,
-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Michele 1]

So many questions...

Quote

What does this mean, "License 18517CN"?

It's not a license, per se. It is more of a registration number, showing that you belong to a particular governing organization (for me, it's Kukkiwan, I am Dan Registered, No: 05127928, photo id)(Dan meaning first level/degree blackbelt).

Quote

Do you have to have a LICENSE, where you live, to learn a martial art?

Nope. Maybe in Spain, but not in the US. Once you achieve Dan status, however, you will become a cardcarrying member of whatever organization your studio affiliates itself with (ala the above).

Quote

Do you have to register your hands and feet?

There are some municipalities where you do need to do so. Most places, however, would prefer you just register your name w/ the local authorities. Kinda like getting your cat or dog registered. Keep in mind I may not have registered my pets....draw your own conclusion...

Quote

Are you held to different legal standards of when you may engage in self-defense, and what you may do to protect yourself, being "licensed" to have martial arts knowledge?

Actually, yes. Because we supposedly know how to fight, there is a burden placed on us that "justified use of force" was necessary, because we can cause more damage with one strike or kick than the average person. Which, imho, is phooey. There is a higher degree of "care" if I get involved physically in a situation, to make sure I go only as far as needed to address the degree of physical violence necessary to counter the threat. And I would be judged more harshly should I exceed that degree of care.

There is a case where a Dan registered guy ended up in a streetfight, whupped two other guys, and was charged with ADW/attempt murder, despite there being video tape that clearly showed he was attacked and was defending himself. He was eventually acquitted, but still had to go through a trial (IIRC, he was acquitted because there were two opponents, and the jury thought the accused may not have been able to assess accurately the degree of threat under such circumstances.)

I handle that by not getting into physical altercations in the first place, and if one shows up in my house at 2 am, I have alternative methods of handling it other than getting up and kicking someone over the head...

Quote

Please clarify.

I hope I have.

Again, Spain may be different, and I *do* live in Southern CA, so that may need to be considered, as well.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Kennedy 0]

But Michele, I like you and know you think logically. Botellines I'm not so sure about.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Do you have to have a LICENSE, where you live, to learn a martial art?
Do you have to register your hands and feet?
Are you held to different legal standards of when you may engage in self-defense, and what you may do to protect yourself, being "licensed" to have martial arts knowledge?
If my impression is correct, and you have to obtain a license to learn martial arts, I think that's just sick. Should I have to obtain a license to learn chemistry or machining, because I could theoretically use that knowledge to create weapons to harm people and property?"

Do you have a USPA license number?

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[Botellines 0]

I couldn´t have explained it better. It is the same in Spain than in California.

[Botellines 0]

Quote

But Michele, I like you and know you think logically. Botellines I'm not so sure about.

I will take that as a cumplimet. At least, you say you are not sure.

[juanesky 0]

If you take that as a "cumpliment" good luck in trying t explain that one out. How hard could it be from a "future" spanish psychologist to press the "check spelling" button?

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

If you take that as a "cumpliment" good luck in trying t explain that one out. How hard could it be from a "future" spanish psychologist to press the "check spelling" button?

You got her misspelling wrong. It was "cumplimet."


-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Michele 1]

Quote

But Michele, I like you and know you think logically

LOL....er, thanks!

And frankly, I'm not too sure about many people, not just Botellines.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[Kennedy 0]

True, true

postin a thread, drinking a bud

True, true

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

True, true

postin a thread, drinking a bud

True, true

See, here's the problem:
You're supposed to smoke a bud!
And drink a Corona.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Kennedy 0]

I'd be happy if I could smoke it down low on a hop n pop in Rantoul.

Besides, some of us have to show clean in "official samples." I'm still up for the Corona though.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Botellines 0]

Quote

If you take that as a "cumpliment" good luck in trying t explain that one out. How hard could it be from a "future" spanish psychologist to press the "check spelling" button?

If the only thing you can do is make fun of my not perfect knowledge of a SECOND language, i am very sorry for you. You need to get laid.

By the way, it is really NOT necesary that you answer every post i write, especially if it is not about you. If you really can not forget about me, please DO add something intelligent to the thread (or at least copy-paste someone else´s post)

By the way, unless "t" is a contraction of "to", you didn´t spell check either. As i said: dude, get a life.