See thats my thought process Digs, I dont really know if a lot of rape victims are killed its actually probably low since there are so many rapes BUT if a person is mentally unstable enough to assault and rape how could the victim EVER assume she wasnt in danger of being killed by a nut case like that?
Many rapes and assualts end in the death of the victim. I can't begin to know the end intention of my attacker, but if I have a reason to fear for my life, I'm justified in using deadly force to end the threat.
Correct me if I am wrong?? But in order to justify deadly force, you must only feel that your life is in danger or fear for your life.. Since the rape victim or assult victim have no clue as to whether or not they will also be killed.. If they fear for their lives, they are justified to use deadly force to protect themselves..
IIrc, it's already such that if you have a reasonable fear that your life is in danger then you can commit homicide to save yourself.
See thats my thought process Digs, I dont really know if a lot of rape victims are killed its actually probably low since there are so many rapes BUT if a person is mentally unstable enough to assault and rape how could the victim EVER assume she wasnt in danger of being killed by a nut case like that?
There was a discussion about assault and rape and the use of deadly force and a poster stated something along the lines of:
"Thats ridiculous. You wouldnt get away with that in a court of law and if you did, it be wrong and you shouldn't be able to. Rape alone does not cause grave bodily harm its just minor bruising and tearing. Injuries like those will heal completely within a few days. Only if you are being attacked with a deadly weapon or in the middle of be strangled to death can you use deadly force otherwise it is completely illegal and completely immoral"
also then compared it to a bar fight and how he would be able to just "full the guy full of lead"
Now I know this is just opinion and not matter what happens the law has to do its job, I could shoot a guy standing over me with an axe and I still have to face the law so im not asking that question. Nobody is above the law but what I want to know is if you are on a jury and a women was being beat and raped and managed to pull a gun or knive or hell even nail file and killed the scum would you sentence her to any type of murder and feel her response was unjust because its "only some minor bruising and tearing?"
My stance is, if the assault and rape can be proved she walks and deadly force is definitely justified.
There was a discussion about assault and rape and the use of deadly force and a poster stated something along the lines of:
"Thats ridiculous. You wouldnt get away with that in a court of law and if you did, it be wrong and you shouldn't be able to. Rape alone does not cause grave bodily harm its just minor bruising and tearing. Injuries like those will heal completely within a few days. Only if you are being attacked with a deadly weapon or in the middle of be strangled to death can you use deadly force otherwise it is completely illegal and completely immoral"
also then compared it to a bar fight and how he would be able to just "full the guy full of lead"
Now I know this is just opinion and not matter what happens the law has to do its job, I could shoot a guy standing over me with an axe and I still have to face the law so im not asking that question. Nobody is above the law but what I want to know is if you are on a jury and a women was being beat and raped and managed to pull a gun or knive or hell even nail file and killed the scum would you sentence her to any type of murder and feel her response was unjust because its "only some minor bruising and tearing?"
My stance is, if the assault and rape can be proved she walks and deadly force is definitely justified.
Jesus. Are you kidding me? It only causes "minor bruising and tearing. Injuries like those will heal completely within a few days." What a clueless moron. Seriously. Rape causes life long damage, beyond what is physical. Not only that, some rape victims are severely beaten. I know I would be if some prick tried to rape me. He'd be in for the fight of his worthless life. I'd rather die than be raped. So yes, if anyone ever rapes me. I will kill them. I will spend every moment of my life until I find them. Then, they will die. And what's more, they'll be damn lucky if they don't suffer before I take end their miserable existence.
At one time in this country, rape was punishable by death. And it should be.
Its not like an assailant negotiates a contract with you and you know to what level you are about to be assaulted. If someone sets out to cause me bodily harm of any nature, in the words of Marian Cobretti...Im going to "use everything I have" to bring about a quick fast and in a hurry resolution in my favor. If my family or a woman or children is at risk? Forget about it. Lethal force would be the least of the assailants concern. And no...thats not meant to sound all 'internet tough guy' like. Im just sayin...
The "Victimization" of criminals in this country by the far leftist PC sympathizers is disgusting. There are tons of examples of this, and here is one:
Accused Burglar Sues Homeowner Who Shot Him
The Milwaukee Journal ^ | 10/01/06
Posted on Mon Oct 02 2006 17:28:04 GMT+1300 (New Zealand Daylight Time) by baldeagle390
MILWAUKEE -- A Janesville man who admitted breaking into a home is suing the homeowner who shot him.
Kurt Prochaska, 39, was on probation last fall when he admitted he broke in to a home and was shot by the homeowner, but that's not stopping him from going after cash through the courts.
Late last year, the Rainiero family awoke to find Prochaska in their home. Michael Rainiero, a doctor, ordered Prochaska to leave. He didn't and was shot in the back.
Nearly a year later, Rainiero's attorney said it's far from over because Prochaska is suing him from beind bars, saying the doctor didn't need to shoot him.
"What the doctor wants is this whole ordeal to be ended and done with," Rainiero's attorney said
Rape alone does not cause grave bodily harm its just minor bruising and tearing. Injuries like those will heal completely within a few days. Only if you are being attacked with a deadly weapon or in the middle of be strangled to death can you use deadly force otherwise it is completely illegal and completely immoral"
I believe people should be allowed to use lethal force to defend themselves from harsh language.
I do not believe in proportional force. If someone is attacking you, you should be allowed to do whatever it takes to make them stop.
two 18 year old "utes" tried to assault me (strong arm robbery) years ago and I shot one through the gut with a 9mm. I wasn't even handcuffed and they were indicted by the grand jury. Of course the fact that I called the police, waited for them to arrive, handed them the pistol license, gave a statement without lawyering up (I was a lawyer) and given my testimony was consistent with the three witnesses who the police questioned might have had something to do with it
Interesting side note: at the trial, after her testimony, my best friend was actually being harassed and threatened by the family of Garrison outside the courtroom. They were actually angry that was shot while he was attempting to rob us. As if he was just walking down the street and got blasted on for no reason. Unbelievable.
No family member ever wants to think of thier [sic] child as being a robber...much less shot at for it.
Thank god for the notion of Castle law! I, too, have been in that situtation. Home invasion, three guys with pistol grip pumps robbed us. My roomate blasted one of them, a Mr. Cruz Garrison, with his twenty gauge, caught him once the ribs and once in the arm with bird shot. Not deadly, but damn painful. All three were convicted, the guy who held a barrel to my best friends head got forty years.
Interesting side note: at the trial, after her testimony, my best friend was actually being harassed and threatened by the family of Garrison outside the courtroom. They were actually angry that was shot while he was attempting to rob us. As if he was just walking down the street and got blasted on for no reason. Unbelievable.
True and true...but how does that translate to harassing the victims of their son's malevolent actions?
I'm sorry, I have absolutely no comprehension how a slightly reasonable person can connect the two.
Being stupid is the only answer I can think of. Stupid people blame others for mistakes. Non-stupid people lay the blame squarely where it belongs.