Whats wrong with people?

[jon_in_wv]

I would have shot him without hesitation for the following reasons:

1. His attack was obviously lethal. If I tried a lesser level of force and it did not stop him his next attack could be a lethal one. You could not afford to give him another chance to attack. The most effective method must be used to stop him.

2. If I physically subdue him how am I able to render aid to the child? Whatever force I used must incapacitate him so efforts can be made to help the child.

The thing about that story that sickens me the worst is that several cars of people stopped and no one was able to help this child?? No one had the fortitude to do what it took to stop this guy?? No one could grab a stick, a rock, a tire iron, ANYTHING to help this child?? What kind of society are we in where this can happen? I would have done everything in my power to help this child. I could live with no less than either saving him, or lying on the ground next to him. Its a sad state of affairs that anyone would even consider less.

TO answer the OPs question, while WV does not have very good laws in the books, they are pretty understanding when it comes to "gettin' things done". If they agree the guy had it coming, you would be fine legally. If not, your screwed. They really need to rewrite their laws.

 

[Nozoki]

Personally, I think the question is moot. I would have found some way to stop the guy regardless of the legality. I can only hope someone would do the same if it was my kid. I really hope those witnesses were too old or handicapped to be able to help, because that is the only excuse for not stomping this guys guts out with a tire iron or something. This reminds me of some video I saw where some lunatic was stabbing some lady in the middle of town while lots of people were walking by. A few tried to pull the guy off her, but it was half-assed at best. The guy just pushed them away and kept on stabbing. It's clear in the video that a really hard boot to the head would have been easy to do, and would have stopped the guy. I could not believe how many people did absolutely nothing. I think it was in Europe somewhere, but even with no guns, someone should have punched that dude's ticket.

This is my first post. I've been lurking for a bit but this story made me have to finally register.

 

[kentucky_Dave]

That story sickens me.

He deserved a much more inhumane way of being dispatched.

Yes I do think that shooting him is 100% justified, and had there been an armed citizen present...

 

[ZombieHunter]

Titan06:
Beating a child to death is more common than you might think but it is a rare public spectacle. It is difficult to tell based on the article but the shooting seems justified, but not everywhere is this the case. I could think of several countries where shooting the actor would have resulted in lenghty prison time for the shooter.


I am so sad to say this is true. I have a very good friend working in a hospital...and to hear the number of child abuse stories I hear from here turns my stomach. And I don't mean beaten child, I mean fractured skull, broken femurs, near drownings, babies shaken so hard their brains detach from the skull...

It all makes me question the very premise of humanitity...are we basically good or are we basically evil...or are we just gussied up animals?

 

[doc2rn]

Even if I didn't have a gun the police would have had one tough time pulling me off of him. Some people just don't deserve to be parents, especially with all the people begging to adopt.

 

[Nolo]

Aren't more kids beaten to death by their parents than accidentally shot by unsecured firearms?

 

[Bazooka Joe71]

He deserved a much more inhumane way of being dispatched.

It's probably not High Road talking about inhumane ways to kill a criminal, but I'll be damned if I couldn't agree more.

Aren't more kids beaten to death by their parents than accidentally shot by unsecured firearms?

I could wrong, but I think you're correct.

 

[rainbowbob]

The law In Washington State would allow for defense of a third party in imminent danger of death or severe bodily injury.

I prefer to think the story was some what poorly written and people did what they could.

I understand your preference, but unfortunately I am less confident than you that people did all they could to help. I realize I wasn't there, but I've seen too many news videos of bystanders waving ineffectually at a violent perpetrator, or else simply standing by helplessly and watching. And I'm talking about groups of able-bodied men.

Or how about the fellow who was hit by two cars chasing each other in the wrong lane a week or two ago? People just stood there on the sidewalk. Nobody bothered to stop traffic. No cars stopped. A motorcyclist turned around, took a look, and drove away! Unbelievable!

 

[catfish101]

When I heard about this it mad me sick. "I'm not as good as I once was" but I really think I would have done him the same way. I don't think I would have the taken the time to shoot him.

 

[Cuda]

Legal or not the sob was killing a baby who could not defend it's self.. I would not have hesitated to remove him from the gene pool..

There is never any reason EVER to hurt a child, never...

C

 

[bhp9mm]

i dont care if it is legal i would have shot him full of holes what kind of person can do that to a little baby i would not be thinking about the law if i seen sombody killing a kid

 

[hooterjoe]

Justified hell....should be required!!!

 

[Dark_Harvest]

there is a special place in hell for the 7 (so far) people who voted they would not be legally justified in shooting this "man."

a *special* place.

if you stop, in this situation, to consider the law... well... you fail.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

Just a few weeks ago we had people saying we could get hurt ourselves and to not intervene. I will repeat along the line of what I said.

Screw that! I would have gone in there and dropped that guy.

 

[Bazooka Joe71]

there is a special place in hell for the 7 (so far) people who voted they would not be legally justified in shooting this "man."

a *special* place.

if you stop, in this situation, to consider the law... well... you fail.

That's fine and dandy, but that wasn't the question.

Would you be legal in your area to have shot this guy? and if you dont mind let everyone know what state you speak for.

No one said they wouldn't shoot, they said it wouldn't be legal, so don't get your panties in a bunch...



I said "yes" BTW.

 

[Speer]

Ugh, what a chilling, sad story. I would have shot him. Dead.

 

[Dark_Harvest]

Bazooka_Joe,

It's not my panties that are in a bunch, it's my humanity... i am deeply offended that people could consider "law" being above dealing with someone who is blatantly beating a child to death.

I consider no law to trump the life of a 2 year old child.


I also don't take criticism personally, so i thank you for debating.

 

[Cosmoline]

If you condemn bystanders from a few lines in some journalist's earlier stage report, you need to go back and re-read all the many many threads about how wrong such reports usually are. Use your craniums people and SETTLE DOWN.

I realize I wasn't there

No, and you really don't know anything about what happened. You have a double hearsay version from a REPORTER. Think about it.

 

[Defensory]

Don't know if anybody posted this update yet. My apologies if it already has been.

Turlock boy, 2, beaten to death by dad
Deputy killed father in roadway with a single shot to the forehead.

By Michael R. Shea / The Modesto Bee
06/16/08 22:56:48

"TURLOCK -- The toddler who was beaten to death on a dark country road Saturday night was killed by his father, authorities said Monday.

Sergio Aguiar, 27, of Turlock was killed with a single shot to the forehead fired by Modesto police officer Jerry Ramar, who was dropped on the scene in rural Stanislaus County via helicopter as Aguiar kicked and stomped the small boy's head.

Aguiar had parked his gold 2002 Toyota pickup in the eastbound lane, into traffic, and viciously attacked the motionless child as passers-by frantically dialed 911 and tried to stop him.

Aguiar seemed calm and spoke of "demons" in the boy. He had no criminal history, authorities said.

The 2-year-old boy later was pronounced dead at Emanuel Medical Center in Turlock."

http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/672603.html

 

[HIcarry]

Hawaii

Here in Hawaii it would have technically been permissable under HRS703-305 which allows the use of lethal force to prevent death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping, rape or forcible sodomy. However, that being said, anyone who might have shot the actor would likely be taking a great risk.
First, CCW is not allowed in Hawaii...I know we are listed as a "may issue" state, but in practical terms, mere mortals do not EVER get CCW permits. So chances are that anyone who whipped out a gun, if they were a mere civillian, was breaking one of many laws (besides the CCW issue) pertaining to transportation of a firearm. Besides, the police are instructed to arrest someone, regardless of the circumstances, in any shooting.
Second, language incorporated into the statues pertaining to the use of deadly force specifically state that despite "justification" for lethal force civil remedies are preserved for the actor...yep, even if the shooting was good as gold, you still run the risk of a civil suit for your troubles.
This, unfortunately is not just an esoteric exercise for us in Hawaii. Back in January a young lady was beaten to death by an ex-BF with the butt of a shotgun, in broad daylight, literally blocks from a police station, as a horrified crowd stood by and watched. The only person to try to help (granted the ex-BF was a HUGE guy...) was an elderly man, reported to be an ex-soldier, who was then struck several times and sustained injuries requiring treatment in an ER. Supposedly an off-duty LEO heard the commotion and after putting on his body armor responded, but by that time the assailant had left, the woman was dead, and the old guy was lying on the ground. The police found the ex-BF at his house the next town over.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Jan/23/ln/hawaii801230407.html

And, for the best part, our illusterious PA was asked if under the circumstances, the use of deadly force would have been justified by a civillian onlooker. He replied that it may have been justified, but that he was still against regular folks carrying guns as it would result in some innocent bystander getting shot.
I'll save the stories of the good sam trying to prevent a purse snatching in Waikiki getting beat to death, and the guy who died after being stabbed in the chest trying to prevent a wife-beater from smacking around his little lady at a bar, for another time....
Aloha

 

[71Commander]

Michigan has legislated Castle Doctrine. So, the answer I voted, "Yes".

That wouldn't cover this.

 

[Olrocker]

NC=defense of another=OK

The mental picture I got when I first saw this story made my jaw tight.
Sickening.

 

[J Star]

Couple of things I'd like to interject:

1 - Don't bag on the people that were there unless you were. It doesn't say who stopped, only that it included an elderly couple. Do you really expect a single mom or a 120lb 70 year old guy to stop some raging idiot that may have been twice their size?

2 - I'm in NY. I'm no lawyer, but our law seems pretty clear on this: Shooting this guy would have been justified, LEO or not.

Now, if I had come upon this idiot, you bet I would have stopped him. I won't bag on the people that didn't though, because I am 6'4" 240lbs, I have a martial arts background, and I used to work as a bouncer in a biker bar. I don't even have a pistol yet, but I'm sure he would have "accidentally" received a lethal blow.

Having said that, however, I would never expect my wife to have stopped him, or even many of my friends. They're just not built to stop somebody like that, and unless you are trained or prepared for that kind of violence, people tend to freak out and freeze up. I'm just glad somebody still had the presence of mind to call 911. ( I used to have to yell at some bartenders to snap them out of it and get them to the phone...)

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

I'm not sure there's a jury in the world who would convict you, legally justified or not...

This IS Californial.


A jury there would probably convict the officer of pre-meditated murder and award the victim's (child killer) family $90 million dollars in a wrongful death lawsuit.


:banghead:

 

[Sylvan-Forge]

Atrocity!

No law is going to keep me from doing what is right.