stand your ground?

[waggy]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/11/justice/texas-abuser-killed/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

CNN) -- A Texas father caught a man sexually assaulting his 4-year-old daughter and punched him in the head repeatedly, killing him, authorities said.

The father returned to the house, caught the man in the act, and stopped him by striking him in the head several times, Harmon said.

The man was pronounced dead on the scene, while the daughter was taken to a local hospital in Victoria, Texas, for examinations before being released.

/snip


holly fuck. i can't say i blame the guy. who the fuck mollest a 4 yr old? good god.

hope the don't charge the father.

 

[spidey07]

Sounds like perfect defense of 3rd party (which texas and my state allow). No charges should be filed.

 

[QuantumPion]

That probably doesn't fall under the definition of self defense technically but I doubt any prosecutor in the world would dare to bring him up in front of a jury (unless perhaps the child molester was black and the father was white, then Eric Holder would call it a hate crime and push for prosecution...)

 

[BoberFett]

It wasn't his right to pass a death sentence on that victim. He should have called the police and waited for them to handle it.

 

[waggy]

It wasn't his right to pass a death sentence on that victim. He should have called the police and waited for them to handle it.

yeah give the pedo another 15 minutes with his 4 yr old.

 

[Fern]

That probably doesn't fall under the definition of self defense technically but I doubt any prosecutor in the world would dare to bring him up in front of a jury (unless perhaps the child molester was black and the father was white, then Eric Holder would call it a hate crime and push for prosecution...)

Self-defense laws apply to individuals in danger but also apply to 3rd parties in danger. I.e., you don't have to be assaulting me in order for me to be allowed 'self-defense'. I can intercede to stop you from harming another under self-defense law. I.e., I can use self-defense to defend another person.

Therefore this case seems to fall under self-defense.

Fern

 

[Incorruptible]

Knowing the corrupt justice system they will probably try to charge the father even though he is innocent

 

[waggy]

Self-defense laws apply to individuals in danger but also apply to 3rd parties in danger. I.e., you don't have to be assaulting me in order for me to be allowed 'self-defense'. I can intercede to stop you from harming another under self-defense law. I.e., I can use self-defense to defend another person.

Therefore this case seems to fall under self-defense.

Fern

i would be hard pressed to find anyone that would say no it is not self-defense to protect your 4 yr old daughter from a child molester (well besides trolls).

should he have killed him? who is to say. would i? again under that situation who knows.

sad that someone you know could do that though.

 

[QuantumPion]

Self-defense laws apply to individuals in danger but also apply to 3rd parties in danger. I.e., you don't have to be assaulting me in order for me to be allowed 'self-defense'. I can intercede to stop you from harming another under self-defense law. I.e., I can use self-defense to defend another person.

Therefore this case seems to fall under self-defense.

Fern

You really have to beat the crap out of someone to kill them with your bare hands. That is beyond self defense. That being said, I have no problem with what the father did at all.

 

[waggy]

You really have to beat the crap out of someone to kill them with your bare hands. That is beyond self defense. That being said, I have no problem with what the father did at all.

not really. while rare it is very very possible to kill with 1 hit or 1 kick.

 

[Retro Rob]

You really have to beat the crap out of someone to kill them with your bare hands. That is beyond self defense. That being said, I have no problem with what the father did at all.

Agreed. He had time to think, and stop, but he didn't.

He shouldn't go completely clean on this one.

 

[BoberFett]

yeah give the pedo another 15 minutes with his 4 yr old.

He's not the police. He isn't trained to deal with a situation like this. What if the victim had decided to kill the child when the father attacked him? What if the victim had a gun and shot the father.

The father should simply have gone to the neighbor's house, called the police and waited for them to show up. He can't take the law into his own hands.

 

[spidey07]

Agreed. He had time to think, and stop, but he didn't.

He shouldn't go completely clean on this one.

If he saw the felony and harm in progress he could beat the man about the head as long as needed for him to be no longer able to harm the 3rd party. Now granted it would have been better if he just shot him or hit him in the head with a baseball bat as hard as it could or stabbed him, etc (ie, a weapon used).

From the sounds of it, he should be in the clear according self defense law.

 

[crashtestdummy]

It wasn't his right to pass a death sentence on that victim. He should have called the police and waited for them to handle it.

Agreed. He had time to think, and stop, but he didn't.

He shouldn't go completely clean on this one.

Both of these. He clearly went beyond what was necessary to halt the crime and into manslaughter territory. Of course, I don't know what I would have done. I certainly wold have struck him a few times myself. That doesn't make it right, though.

No matter how horrible the crime, we don't have the right to act as vigilantes.

 

[Icepick]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/11/justice/texas-abuser-killed/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

CNN) -- A Texas father caught a man sexually assaulting his 4-year-old daughter and punched him in the head repeatedly, killing him, authorities said.

The father returned to the house, caught the man in the act, and stopped him by striking him in the head several times, Harmon said.

The man was pronounced dead on the scene, while the daughter was taken to a local hospital in Victoria, Texas, for examinations before being released.

/snip


holly fuck. i can't say i blame the guy. who the fuck mollest a 4 yr old? good god.

hope the don't charge the father.

I don't know if Stand your Ground applies here but, the father certainly did the right thing. He shouldn't and most likely won't have any charges levied against since he was defending his 4-year-old daughter. The father certainly did nothing wrong here.

 

[BoberFett]

Agreed. He had time to think, and stop, but he didn't.

He shouldn't go completely clean on this one.

Both of these. He clearly went beyond what was necessary to halt the crime and into manslaughter territory. Of course, I don't know what I would have done. I certainly wold have struck him a few times myself. That doesn't make it right, though.

No matter how horrible the crime, we don't have the right to act as vigilantes.

There we go, I knew we could hook one or two

"Liberals": So Open Minded Their Brains Have Fallen Out Completely

Yes, he had time to stop and think about the man who was molesting a four year old. Maybe he should have reasoned with the guy instead?

You're both poster children for why such a large number of people hate modern "liberals" and why the Republican party even still exists. It's because people with half a brain realize that voting for Democrats would mean people like you get to run things. And that's worse than any kind of economic armageddon the Republicans have in mind.

 

[thraashman]

In the end whether or not they charge him will be based on if they feel he used excessive force. Like, did he punch the man then get on top of him and beat him severely? Did the man's death occur as a result of only a few hits? It's the same as castle doctrine in a way, you're allowed to shoot someone breaking into your home, you're not allowed to execute them if you've incapacitated them. If they do charge him I would think no jury would convict him. This is the type of situation where temporary insanity makes sense, if you catch a man sexually abusing your 4 year old daughter and don't fly into a violent rage at that man I'd question your decisions far more than if you did.

 

[Texashiker]

It wasn't his right to pass a death sentence on that victim.

Texas has the castle law.

Property owners have the right to use lethal force to protect someone on our property.

 

[waggy]

Both of these. He clearly went beyond what was necessary to halt the crime and into manslaughter territory. Of course, I don't know what I would have done. I certainly wold have struck him a few times myself. That doesn't make it right, though.

No matter how horrible the crime, we don't have the right to act as vigilantes.

so you don't have a right to defend yourself or your family? he had no intention of killing the guy. though i would understand why.

he wanted to end the threat.

 

[Icepick]

He's not the police. He isn't trained to deal with a situation like this. What if the victim had decided to kill the child when the father attacked him? What if the victim had a gun and shot the father.

The father should simply have gone to the neighbor's house, called the police and waited for them to show up. He can't take the law into his own hands.

Is that what you would do in this scenario?

"Hello 911? I'd like to report a rape in progress. Yeah it's my 4 year old daughter and a young man is in my house raping her as we speak. No, I'm hanging out over at my next-door-neighbors house. Yeah, I'll probably just sit here until the police arrive rather than attempt to interfere with the attack and protect my child. Yeah, she can handle herself. kthxbye."

Edit, I hope I'm being trolled and it's just a case of my sarcasm meter being broken.

 

[BoberFett]

Is that what you would do in this scenario?
...
Edit, I hope I'm being trolled and it's just a case of my sarcasm meter being broken.

Check my later post.

 

[SilthDraeth]

Agreed. He had time to think, and stop, but he didn't.

He shouldn't go completely clean on this one.

I am not sure how I would react, but you bring up a valid point, he didn't stop, or think, ie he just reacted, most likely enraged at what was happening to his daughter.

If anything, if he gets held at trial, I would have a lawyer say temporary insanity on this one.

I would like to think that I would do the same if I caught anyone doing that to my kids, and or wife, or any of my friend's kids.

In my opinion, the law is wrong when it comes to how child molesters are concerned. No I am not talking about parents that take a picture of their young children splashing in a bath. But actual cases like this, and others where it is verifiable that actual sexual assault has occurred. In my opinion, they should all be killed. I don't give two rats ass if they are mentally retarded or not. Rape a kid, die.

 

[waggy]

There we go, I knew we could hook one or two

"Liberals": So Open Minded Their Brains Have Fallen Out Completely

Yes, he had time to stop and think about the man who was molesting a four year old. Maybe he should have reasoned with the guy instead?

You're both poster children for why such a large number of people hate modern "liberals" and why the Republican party even still exists. It's because people with half a brain realize that voting for Democrats would mean people like you get to run things. And that's worse than any kind of economic armageddon the Republicans have in mind.

lol figured that is what you were doing. suprised you got any it was rather..err otu there.

but you are dead on. Would you be ABLE to stop and think if you walked in and seen a guy molesting your 4 yr old? could you refrain from flying into a rage?

i have my doubts that i would be able to control myself.

 

[Retro Rob]

There we go, I knew we could hook one or two

"Liberals": So Open Minded Their Brains Have Fallen Out Completely

Yes, he had time to stop and think about the man who was molesting a four year old. Maybe he should have reasoned with the guy instead?

You're both posted childs for why a large number of people hate modern "liberals."

Liberal?

Nope, not here.

Just offering opinion.

 

[crashtestdummy]

There we go, I knew we could hook one or two

"Liberals": So Open Minded Their Brains Have Fallen Out Completely

Yes, he had time to stop and think about the man who was molesting a four year old. Maybe he should have reasoned with the guy instead?

You're both posted childs for why a large number of people hate modern "liberals."

I'm really not sure if you're serious, calling Rob M. a liberal...

As for my own views, it's simply a matter of the rule of law. There is a reason that vigilantism is illegal, and it's that individuals, especially ones with a close connection to a crime, are not the best judges of guilt of fair punishment.

If your desire for old-testament style retribution is that strong, you can make a case to proclaim child molestation a capital offense. That's a dialogue that we can have.