i ran across this. it is just so wrong on so many levels i don't know where to start.
was the woman crazy, and used her car as a deadly weapon?
No, and yes, she most certainly did.
did she stop a dangerous person posing with a gun?
Your use of the word "posing" changes the dynamics of both the scenario and of the assessment anyone would use in responding to your question. I will hope that by "posing" you meant displaying, pointing, brandishing, making a threatening gesture, or the like. If thast is the case, the answer to the obvious is an unquestionable "Yes." And I'll bet she intended to.
what would have done if someone pointed a shotgun at you?
Try to get out of the line of fire, and if they continued to point that thing in my general direction I would make every effort to make them stop threatening my life. While formal negotiations, facilitated by the use of a mediator, might be an option, I do not think that would be on my right there/right then short list of options to select from. Unless you consider the use of Mssrs. Smith's and Wesson's finer products to be a facilitator or mediator of some sort.
did he point the air soft at her? curious minds want to know
From line #12 of the article you cite: "“He turned and pointed this at her ...." Captain Obvious says the obvious answer is "Oh, yes he did."
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video...n-over-by-woman-who-feared-gun/#comment-39157[/QUOTE]
The "wrong" I see was all committed by the guy with the airsoft.
Searching Pa laws
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/htm/18/18.htm I do not see anything specifically addressing facsimilie weapons (except facsimilie weapons of mass destruction). That being the case it seems both the woman and the law must proceed based on what a reasonable and prudent person would perceive the situation to be - and with the orange/red tip removed it all comes down to "if it looks like a shotgun you get to treat it as if it is in fact a shotgun" - because, as everyone else has mentioned, she had no duty to inspect it to determine it's true properties, nor did she have a duty to retreat from a place where she had a lawful right to be.
The comments about "protecting/defending the kids" is a false trail if not an actual red herring. That argument went out the window when airsoft guy pointed the thing in his hands that looked like a shotgun at the driver of the car. Defense of possibly innocent others changes to defense of self against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
437.5 grains of lead were reasonably presumed to exist and were pointed at her. If the shell were fired she could expect the lead (slug or shot) to travel towards her at 750 mph. (1100 feet per second)
http://www.calculateme.com/Speed/FeetperSecond/ToMilesperHour.htm
I response she propelled 17,500,000 grains of automobile (2,500 lbs)
http://www.asknumbers.com/PoundsToGrains.aspx at roughly 51.333333333333336 feet per second (35 mph)
http://www.calculateme.com/Speed/MilesperHour/ToFeetperSecond.htm
That does not seem to be a significant disparity of force, which by the way has no place in considering the scenario and her response to having what she reasonably thought was a shotgun pointed at her.
Some gun guru, when asked what they would do if someone pointed a gun at them, is reported to have said something along the lines of "I would shoot them as dead as I could make tem, as quickly as I could." We know that's not appropriate because all we are supposed to be trying to do is stop the threat. While being shot dead will most likely stop the tyhreat, there may be other ways of achieving that goal. Deciding on what alternatives might be viable might need to be done quickly enough to beat 750 mph!
stay safe.
