How'd he do?

Status
Not open for further replies.

VARifleman

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
1,532
Location
Northern VA
A housemate of mine (Ashley) heard a girl scream as he had come in the house from work (he works at a local gun store). He went out side and noticed a guy beating up his girlfriend. He went out and said something along the lines of "what the hell are you doing?". The girl got away from her boyfriend, while her boyfriend started walking toward Ashley. He backs up until the boyfriend closed the distance to about 25 feet and lifts his shirt exposing his Beretta. Boyfriend stops and makes some taunts of "are you going to f*ing shoot me?" then turns and walks away. Ashley calls the cops and they take boyfriend to jail.

The boyfriend is about 5'9" 140 lbs where as Ashley is about 6'4" and 250. If Ashley had not had the gun, it would have escalated into a fight between the two and Ashley could have been hurt and the boyfriend would definantly have been hurt. The known presence of the gun de-escalated the situation, and allowed Ashley to get away to call the authorities.

(Some of the last sentances are unnecessary here, but I've cut and pasted it among several forums)
 
I think all in all it worked out well.

But it seems like at the time it was jsut an arguing match. I don't know the guys body language but all worked out well in the end. Other then perhaps flashing the gun (agian may very well have been justified as I don't knwo the body language going on) very good line of action.
 
From a strictly LEGAL point of view:

I've heard from my CCW instructor that had the sizes been reversed, brandishing the gun would have been okay. Given that Ashley was much bigger he seemed to imply that this isn't an appropriate time to brandish. Is there any truth to this? Actually, this probably varies by state/district.

Granted that this isn't as ridiculous as say Gary Coleman threatening Shaq, but what he said sounds rather believeable.
 
I don't think it means less right but if it came to a trial or something my take on that rational would be that he could have defended himself without the gun.
 
Just because you can't see the knife doesn't mean he ain't got one. A smaller guy like that probably was counting on shanking the larger man, otherwise why take such an aggressive move?
 
Anyone who'd beat up a woman would stab a man in the back.
I agree. I don't fault the guy who pushs his wife off him when she jumps on his and starts scratching (saw a woman jump on her husband and damn near tear his face off once) hell I even know guys that have put their wives over their knee and given them a red backside on occasion. These things are far from beating your wife IMO. But any guy that degrades to beating his wife in the front yard of giving her black eyes and bruises because he is an ***** or anythign else yo ucan think he is a piece of trash that deserves what comes to him.
 
I would have to respectfully disagree, as the morality of using physical force against a woman depends greatly upon the situation. Abusing a woman who has done nothing more than burn the meatloaf is admittedly reprehensible and morally unjustified, but knocking a violent and abusive woman like Tonya Harding on her rear end in self defense is perfectly reasonable.

In this case, it sounds like the former rather than the latter and the presence of the gun certainly served to defuse the situation, since the boyfriend seemed bent on further violence. How it would stand up in court is anyone's guess, as we all know how unscrupulous prosecutors can twist just about anything. Still, were I in the jury box I'd vote for an aquittal.
 
one-
If you are refering to me that is what I was trying to get it. There is defending yourself, there is physicly dealing with your wife if you are in a relationship where both parties allow such, and then there is wife beating dirtbag.

The first two are one thing. The second is quite another and he deserves whats coming to him when he catchs a beating himself.
 
Lupinus said:
The first two are one thing. The second is quite another and he deserves whats coming to him when he catchs a beating himself.

Absolutely, and to return to the gun related content....

My argument for having had to pull the trigger in such a situation (i.e. hostile and abusive boyfriend advancing menancingly) would be the same as if an unarmed burglar were to charge me after I'd drawn down on them in warning - namely that I could not take the risk of my weapon being wrestled from me in a struggle since that would result in my death, the death of a loved one, or a nasty hostage crisis. Any way you slice it there's no good outcome.

Besides, any unarmed individual willing to physically rush an armed homeowner clearly has either lost their proverbial marbles, under the influence of some powerful psychotic drug, or aggressive by nature and hell bent on further violence.
 
In my opinion, I think Ashley did the right thing. Since he did not continue to show the weapon, I don't know if it would be considered brandishing. I'm sure the young woman was very glad that he had the gun and that he took the time to see what was going on. I hope that she will stay away from the violent boy friend.
As far as:
hell, I even know guys that have put their wives over their knee and given them a red backside on occasion.
Unless you are having a little spank and tickle session, that is a huge no-no. Adults do not need to be spanked. Save the spankings for the out of control kids. If the partners cannot have a relationship without physical violence/force then they need to part ways before someone gets hurt or killed.
 
Ashley's size or ability to fight is irrelavent. The "threat of serious physical harm" was there. A bloody nose is serious physical injury as far as the law is concerned. How are you supposed to know the limit of your injuries before it's over. Any physical confrontation can go badly for anybody (ever heard of the "lucky punch?").

Ashley did well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top