Is rape = great bodily harm

[GVMan]

Thanks for taking the High Road. I noticed in the sticky that opens this section of the forum that rape is not mentioned. Later in Ryan M's post he mentions rape not necessarily involving great bodily harm.

Without getting into legal terminology, MI law allows deadly force to prevent death, great bodily harm or rape. MI has reciprocity with many other states. This leads to two concerns about carrying in other states. First, do most states mention preventing or stopping rape as a justification for deadly force? Two, if they do not, then is it generally accepted that rape is great bodily harm?

This might be a better way of putting it: Are there any states where Joe Blow could walk into his hotel room and find a man raping Mrs. Blow and NOT be justified legally in using deadly force?

How about finding a man about to rape Mrs. Blow?

It may be that this varies so widely from state to state that one would need to read the laws of each state traveled to in order to know. Which is always a good idea. But I am curious what the majority of states do (if there is a majority). Please feel free to sound in with your states view.

Thanks

 

[The Drew]

While not necessarily legally "great bodily harm" many states deadly force statutes explicitly include prevention of rape as a reason to use deadly force.

PA is one of those states.

 

[geekWithA.45]

The general concensus of society and the law is that rape is indeed great bodily harm.

In these days of incurable deadly diseases, many consider it to be deadly force.

 

[pax]

From conversations with various law-enforcement people, what I understand is that deadly force is justified when confronted with rape because rape intrinsically involves the threatened use of deadly force. Even when the rapist does not explicitly threaten to kill the victim if she does not comply, the implied threat of bodily harm or death for non-compliance is part of what constitutes the crime of rape.

This also includes scenarios where no weapon is produced (that would be most rapes, btw), based upon the disparity in physical strength between men & women.

pax

 

[Steve in PA]

PA also includes kidnapping;

§505. Use of force in self-protection.

(a) Use of force justifiable for protection of the person.—The use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion.
(b) Limitations on justifying necessity for use of force.—
(1) The use of force is not justifiable under this section:
(i) to resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, although the arrest is unlawful; or
(ii) to resist force used by the occupier or possessor of property or by another person on his behalf, where the actor knows that the person using the force is doing so under a claim of right to protect the property, except that this limitation shall not apply if:
(A) the actor is a public officer acting in the performance of his duties or a person lawfully assisting him therein or a person making or assisting in a lawful arrest;
(B) the actor has been unlawfully dispossessed of the property and is making a reentry or recaption justified by section 507 of this title (relating to use of force for the protection of property); or
(C) the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily injury.
(2) The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat; nor is it justifiable if:
(i) the actor, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or
(ii) the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:
(A) the actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by another person whose place of work the actor knows it to be; and
(B) a public officer justified in using force in the performance of his duties or a person justified in using force in his assistance or a person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape is not obliged to desist from efforts to perform such duty, effect such arrest or prevent such escape because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom such action is directed.
(3) Except as required by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity thereof under the circumstances as he believes them to be when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do or abstaining from any lawful action.
(c) Use of confinement as protective force.—
The justification afforded by this section extends to the use of confinement as protective force only if the actor takes all reasonable measures to terminate the confinement as soon as he knows that he safely can, unless the person confined has been arrested on a charge of crime.

 

[Working Man]

First, do most states mention preventing or stopping rape as a justification for deadly force?

Texas does as well as aggravated kidnapping and arson of habitat IIRC.

Rape is one of those crimes with far reaching and haunting consequences and should
be prevented by any means necessary regardless of what the specifics of the law state, IMHO.

But that is a matter for a man/woman and their conscious.

 

[El Tejon]

Yes, it is.

 

[Lupinus]

well yeah it is

if you rape one of mine you will recieve great bodily harm

so yep rape=great bodily harm

 

[Smoke]

Is rape = great bodily harm

No. It's worse.

Smoke

 

[mete]

Here in NY IIRC rape and arson are included. .....Women should never assume that the BG is ONLY going to rape her .Some times after the rape the woman is beaten and murdered !!!

 

[B Easy]

The law is written strangely. Unless it explicitly states it, it would probably be up to your lawyer to argue effectively.

People have said that "grave bodily harm" can include being attacked by someone significantly larger than yourself.

How much larger are we talking here? How many more people does their party need to have before you can turn a fist fight into a gun fight?

Size doesn't really matter in reality. One skinny guy can get a lucky punch in and kill you. Yes, it happens.

The law is essentially ridiculous, as it leaves too much to interpretation. If you break it (a person), you buy it, so caveat encanem.

 

[pax]

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/five_stages.html

According to Marc MacYoung, nearly 80 percent of women who are seriously harmed by rapists are hurt after the actual sexual assault.

pax

 

[tepin]

YES!
When has any male or female submitted to RAPE WITHOUT the threat of death or great bodily harm?

 

[LT1coupe]

Regardless of a particular states law, you shoot if necessary & no jury would convict you if that was a reasonable way to stop the attack.
It's not like I'm going to be too concerned about what the law says if I see a BG attacking someone. As always it's the last resort, but there's no way I'm letting the assault continue.

 

[Otherguy Overby]

Is rape = great bodily harm?

It might depend on who's asked, and the context.

An anti would probably say defending oneself with force would only make the situation worse... :banghead:

Cooperating with criminals to get along must be a moonbat mantra.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Does rape = great bodily harm?

HIV AIDS is a death sentence, how much greater bodily harm
can there be?

The emotional and psychological scars of rape never heal
and are more damaging than any physical damage.

There is physical damage from rape, too, which makes the
aftermath of rape distinctly different from voluntary sex.
Rape is about power and hurt and inflicting harm.

Back in the old days, when there were only seven felonies,
rape was one of them, right up there with murder, treason,
piracy, highway robbery. And they were capital offenses.

There are enough rape-murders where the witness--
the victim--is killed after offering no resistence, to say that
rape should always be considered an imminent threat of death
or bodily harm.

Rape = threat of death or greivous bodily harm. period.

 

[c_yeager]

The key phrase is "threat of great bodily harm". Wether or not the actual act of rape constitutes "great bodily harm" is not entirely relevent (i happen to think it does anyways) because it is still a violent crime that a reasonable person would construe as having the likelyhood of resulting in such harm.

For example, an armed robbery doesnt necessarily result in great bodily harm, but the nature of the crime would lead a resonable person to believe that it is a likely result. In the case of rape it is even more clear. There isnt a jury in this nation that would convict a person of murder for shooting a rapist actually engaged in the act of raping someone.

 

[coltrane679]

If you cannot exercise the right of self-defense (or defense of others, for that matter) to prevent a rape, then the right does not exist in any meaningful sense.

This is absolutely a no brainer. It is possible to overthink an issue.

 

[Car Knocker]

There isnt a jury in this nation that would convict a person of murder for shooting a rapist actually engaged in the act of raping someone.

I hate to say it but I really wouldn't be so sure of that.

 

[Cosmoline]

It's a dicey area when defense of strangers is concerned, mostly because it's so difficult to tell what's rape and what isn't when you happen by. Plus there's the notorious problem of the woman switching sides when she sees her brute boyfriend's head get blown off inches from her face. I don't mess with domestic fights unless I actually see someone killing another person. I've been around the block too many times. People in those relationships aren't sane. They have to be treated like crazy children.

 

[exar]

People in those relationships aren't sane. They have to be treated like crazy children.

That speaks volumes.

 

[coltrane679]

You guys are now mixing concepts.

Rape is most assuredly a crime that can be stopped with deadly force--in self defense or defense of others. Period.

That concept does not relieve you of your resposnsibility to act REASONABLY however--which is the case in all deadly force situations. If you unreasonably believe that you are about to be hacked with an ax, the fact that ax-hacking is unquestionably "great bodily harm" is beside the point--it is the reasonableness of your belief that is problematic.

And, concurrent with that, are the basic evidentiary issues you have--which could be more complicated in a rape (it might be possible, for example, for an instance of public "rough sex" to be mistaken as a rape by someone who just happened along).

None of that changes the fact that rape can prevented/terminated through deadly force, however.

 

[TMM]

If someone is raped, (s)he could also be killed after, which is what some cases turn out to be.

You could also contract a deadly or uncurable STD...

possibly the worst impact[provided you're not killed] is mental.

Far as i'm concerned, it justifies deadly force, especially of the rapist presents a weapon.

~tmm

 

[NukemJim]

(it might be possible, for example, for an instance of public "rough sex" to be mistaken as a rape by someone who just happened along).

The above is one possibility. Another is you could be being manipulated.

A case I was involved with had a beaten, bloody victim who had an 4 letter obscenity carved into her Abdoman in letters about 3" high and a 10" butcher knife ( Ooh boy... Art's Grandma... uhmm) "inserted" about 7" deep into a "personal" space.

She descibed who did it. Told the LEOs where she had seen him before.

She lied.

She did it all to herself. :banghead:

If you are defending yourself/family member/significant other is one thing. Strangers not matter what the situation appears may have hidden agendas putting it mildly.

Jim Morrison voice ON/ People are strange /Voice OFF

NukemJim

 

[atlctyslkr]

It takes 12 to lock you up. Some of those 12 are going to be women. Do the math. You see a woman in trouble take out the threat. Think of all the fears you have as a man. Women have all them too plus rape.