Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 63

Thread: Self defense scenario: Kicked-in windshield

  1. #1
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Self defense scenario: Kicked-in windshield

    Be interesting to hear thoughts on options during this incident. I'm thinking the attacker is lucky to be alive, as any of a number of defensive actions could have led to otherwise.

    TFred

    Kicked-in windshield leads to arrests

    Snips:

    The driver behind her began honking the horn, then pulled in front of her and stopped. A man got out of the passenger’s seat and jumped up on her hood while yelling at her.

    He kicked her windshield repeatedly until it broke, then got back into the car and was driven away. The victim got the license number and called police.
    Last edited by TFred; 12-24-2013 at 02:47 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    In an extrication exercise, I had a 200# dummy in a vehicle on its side. After seeing to my dummy, I tried to kick the windshield away. We wound up using a Halligan and I learned how tough are windshields.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Only Chuck Norris could destroy a windshield using his feet...

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  4. #4
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    If the windshield has no cracks or chips, however small, it should be very difficult to kick out. However, if it has cracks or chips, it is not that hard to kick out. And we also do not know what kind of footwear the kicker was wearing; that would also make a difference.

    Bottom line: For most of the folks here, a person jumping up on the hood of your car, screaming incoherently, and kicking your windshield would give you reasonable cause to fear for your life. I suspect that it would not end well for the kicker.
    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  5. #5
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    To give you an honest answer TFred...a handgun wouldn't even be a factor, neither would the windshield because as soon as he jumped on my hood, I'd politely get out and beat that SOB into the next century.

    I'd also get a lot more personal gratification (Fun) than I would shooting him and having to deal with the cops.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Dial 911 or Maaco?

    Who would be there first?

    I'd call Maaco.

    she did something to piss off the driver lol

  7. #7
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Interesting question regarding the use of deadly force. Isn't the determining factor "being in fear of death or grievous bodily harm?" Since he just broke the windshield and didn't actually harm her, just her property, would a reasonable-man jury have agreed that she was in justified fear of death or grievous bodily harm when she shot him as he was kicking in her windshield?

    Seems like a good question for all of us -- at what point does it become a "certainty" that if we don't shoot that we will die or be grievously harmed?
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    My fear is conditioned by my previous experiences and training. My CCW instructor taught to kill a carjacker as his hand breaks the plane of the window.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    Interesting question regarding the use of deadly force. Isn't the determining factor "being in fear of death or grievous bodily harm?" Since he just broke the windshield and didn't actually harm her, just her property, would a reasonable-man jury have agreed that she was in justified fear of death or grievous bodily harm when she shot him as he was kicking in her windshield?

    Seems like a good question for all of us -- at what point does it become a "certainty" that if we don't shoot that we will die or be grievously harmed?
    Someone using force to gain entry into the interior of your car should be seen as a highly aggressive act that is a possible precursor to grievous bodily harm ...

    hey, ya act like an ape and try to crush in a window, you can expect to be shot.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Also she's a female so she has even more reason to shoot

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  11. #11
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Someone using force to gain entry into the interior of your car should be seen as a highly aggressive act that is a possible precursor to grievous bodily harm ...

    hey, ya act like an ape and try to crush in a window, you can expect to be shot.
    I thought you said you would have called Maaco... or were you just again being snarky and inane in your comments?

    Used force. Did not try to gain entry into the interior of the car. "Precursor" to grievous bodily harm is not actual grievous bodily harm. When does the line get crossed?
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171

    Simple solution

    Since the idiot and his bimbo had pulled in front, all she had to do is put it in reverse when the moron raised his leg to kick. Boom, splat, the idiot is off the car.

    Problem solved.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    I thought you said you would have called Maaco... or were you just again being snarky and inane in your comments?

    Used force. Did not try to gain entry into the interior of the car. "Precursor" to grievous bodily harm is not actual grievous bodily harm. When does the line get crossed?
    I would think when the guy jumps on your hood and starts a stomping ... wouldn't you?

    Crushing in a windscreen is an attempt to get access to the interior ...

  14. #14
    Regular Member scouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    Since the idiot and his bimbo had pulled in front, all she had to do is put it in reverse when the moron raised his leg to kick. Boom, splat, the idiot is off the car.

    Problem solved.
    That's my thinking too, but we both have the benefit of sitting at home reading about it happening and not sitting in the car watching it take place just in front of us.

    Would be entertaining to jump the car forwards first so they go face first against the windshield then reverse quickly so you can watch their face as they slide down the hood

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Part of the lecture on carjacking was to never allow yourself to be trapped in traffic, with vehicles so close in front/behind that evasive maneuvers were prevented. Best was to drive away regardless of the risk of collisions. Crushing the assailant was mentioned. Better judged by twelve men good and true, than carried by six weeping and blue.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    In a situation like OP, why not just back up abruptly?

    Or, just in a general sense, if an escape route exists, why not just drive that route? This has the advantage of avoiding all the legal hassles of having to justify shooting someone, waiting for the grand-jury to no-true-bill you, and so forth. Or, maybe being tried for murder/manslaughter.

    Think about it. You shoot the guy, all the prosecutor has to do is introduce a false, or even sincere-but-mistaken witness that you were involved in a road-rage incident that you contributed to just moments earlier, and suddenly you've lost your mantle of innocence. Instantly you go from legitimate defender to manslaughter-er.

    Relying on the good faith of the prosecutor sounds kinda iffy to me. I'll be leaving the gun for the very last resort.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    Interesting question regarding the use of deadly force. Isn't the determining factor "being in fear of death or grievous bodily harm?" Since he just broke the windshield and didn't actually harm her, just her property, would a reasonable-man jury have agreed that she was in justified fear of death or grievous bodily harm when she shot him as he was kicking in her windshield?

    Seems like a good question for all of us -- at what point does it become a "certainty" that if we don't shoot that we will die or be grievously harmed?
    It's a very individual question James.

    One thing would be how long he was on the hood.

    The other is how much danger the individual would have been in if he's gotten in the car.
    Tazdad for instance would be in much less danger than say David. David would be in extreme danger because everyone hates him.

    I think the majority of us would not have shot and I think it would be a very questionable shooting if we did.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Virginia
    Posts
    188
    I think a woman or elderly man would probably get away with shooting. "Disparity of force" and all that.

    In general for a man, I think you would be rolling the dice on which prosecutor, and possibly jury, you get.

    I would not have shot unless and until he broke through the windshield. If somebody is beating on your home window at night do you have the right to kill them? I think not. Not until they break through. "Breaching the castle walls" so to speak.

    Frankly a gun need not even come into play in this situation; she was already behind the wheel of a car. Why didn't she just start driving as soon as the SOB got on the hood? I'd like to see somebody stand on a hood at 55 mph.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Virginian683 View Post
    I think a woman or elderly man would probably get away with shooting. "Disparity of force" and all that.

    In general for a man, I think you would be rolling the dice on which prosecutor, and possibly jury, you get.

    I would not have shot unless and until he broke through the windshield. If somebody is beating on your home window at night do you have the right to kill them? I think not. Not until they break through. "Breaching the castle walls" so to speak.

    Frankly a gun need not even come into play in this situation; she was already behind the wheel of a car. Why didn't she just start driving as soon as the SOB got on the hood? I'd like to see somebody stand on a hood at 55 mph.
    In Florida one is statutorily provided with the presumption of reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm when someone unlawfully enters or attempts to enter their occupied vehicle or home. Which as we all know is the standard when one may use deadly force in self-defense.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Also she's a female so she has even more reason to shoot
    Is this your legal opinion? I don't see how a female has more reason to shoot; and what does 'reason' even mean? Justification under the ler?

    What if a bystander videoed her as not being pure of motive, contributing? So, no it doesn't give her any enhanced legal standing to shoot.

  21. #21
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    In Florida one is statutorily provided with the presumption of reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm when someone unlawfully enters or attempts to enter their occupied vehicle or home. Which as we all know is the standard when one may use deadly force in self-defense.
    This is Virginia Thank You!

  22. #22
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    It's a very individual question James.

    One thing would be how long he was on the hood.

    The other is how much danger the individual would have been in if he's gotten in the car.
    Tazdad for instance would be in much less danger than say David. David would be in extreme danger because everyone hates him.
    I don't think David engenders any hatred here. It's only a bulletin board, man. You need to take some anti-'drama-mine'. har-har

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Le sigh! Elderly depends on the Sorites Paradox of the Heap. A Centenarian is elderly, certainly having a heap of years. Remove one year-grain from his age and is it still a heap of years? Remove a second grain and is it still a heap? How few years and grains are still a heap of years?

    David is not on my extensive list of lusers to whom I will not respond even if I do read them occasionally.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 12-24-2013 at 03:35 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Virginian683 View Post
    I think a woman or elderly man would probably get away with shooting. "Disparity of force" and all that.

    In general for a man, I think you would be rolling the dice on which prosecutor, and possibly jury, you get.

    I would not have shot unless and until he broke through the windshield. If somebody is beating on your home window at night do you have the right to kill them? I think not. Not until they break through. "Breaching the castle walls" so to speak.

    Frankly a gun need not even come into play in this situation; she was already behind the wheel of a car. Why didn't she just start driving as soon as the SOB got on the hood? I'd like to see somebody stand on a hood at 55 mph.
    Well, a jury would be more sympathetic to a woman ... but the act is so weird and bazaar any jury would say "what's up with dat?"

    Reversing sounds like a good idea .. but what if there is a kid behind you car you cannot see? Not the best time to reverse...

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    . David would be in extreme danger because everyone hates him.
    To know me is to love me ... lol

    I'm sure you would love me on a jury in this type of case....

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •