• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Self defense scenario: Kicked-in windshield

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
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:

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
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.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
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.:rolleyes:
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
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?
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
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.
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
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?
 

va_tazdad

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
1,162
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
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.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
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 ...
 

scouser

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,341
Location
804, VA
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 :)
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
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.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
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.:lol::lol::banana:

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

Virginian683

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
187
Location
Southwest Virginia
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.
 

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
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.
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
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.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
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!
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
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.:lol::lol::banana:

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
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
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...
 
Top