• 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.

Woman kills serial rapist with 12 guage shotgun.

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Good ending to a bad event.

Hope the lady can get on with her life w/o complications.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Good for her! She should have used a heavier load of 00 buckshot and he would not have even made it alive to the hospital! Bob.

Not the way I would have said it.

Point is to stop the threat, not to see anyone, no matter how despicable, lose their life. We are neither jury nor judge and should not be dancing on anyone's grave - it's not in accord with who and what we are.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Not the way I would have said it.

Point is to stop the threat, not to see anyone, no matter how despicable, lose their life. We are neither jury nor judge and should not be dancing on anyone's grave - it's not in accord with who and what we are.

Ever the voice of reason.
 

hogeaterf6

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
381
Location
, ,
Not the way I would have said it.

Point is to stop the threat, not to see anyone, no matter how despicable, lose their life. We are neither jury nor judge and should not be dancing on anyone's grave - it's not in accord with who and what we are.

I disagree.
I guess it depends on your definition of 'stopping the threat'. If the time comes and you pull the trigger, you will, I assume, aiming for the center of mass, correct? Alot of vital organs there. Why not a arm or leg if you are 'stopping a threat'? Plus, again I assume, you are using a good size caliber of gun? Why not a .22 instead of a .45? If I am using my gun against a threat I am going to make sure my threat is stopped and not decide if I should wound or kill.
I have been shot at before. If I would have been armed, he would have been dead.

What do you mean 'it's not in accord with who and what we are'? Whose 'we'?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Not the way I would have said it.

Point is to stop the threat, not to see anyone, no matter how despicable, lose their life. We are neither jury nor judge and should not be dancing on anyone's grave - it's not in accord with who and what we are.

I disagree.
I guess it depends on your definition of 'stopping the threat'. If the time comes and you pull the trigger, you will, I assume, aiming for the center of mass, correct? Alot of vital organs there. Why not a arm or leg if you are 'stopping a threat'? Plus, again I assume, you are using a good size caliber of gun? Why not a .22 instead of a .45? If I am using my gun against a threat I am going to make sure my threat is stopped and not decide if I should wound or kill.
I have been shot at before. If I would have been armed, he would have been dead.

What do you mean 'it's not in accord with who and what we are'? Whose 'we'?

Pull up a chair if you care to listen and learn, rather than be contentious.

First the "we" rather than the "I." Having the benefit of long association with OCDO and an active part of VCDL (http://www.vcdl.org/), not as the voice of either but rather as a knowledgeable voice of both - "we" is the result of those collective positions.

It is both a moral and ethical posture with legal ramifications (embraced by both organizations) that the purpose of self-defense is to protect and to do so with the least amount of justifiable harm to others. The intent, desire or purpose is not to cause harm but to prevent harm and NO the are not the same. Stopping a threat and intending to end life are two very different starting points - on that we are unwavering.

The fallacy, straw argument, of the center of mass vs leg/arm points and .22 vs .45 contentions are extremely basic by replying that one is more effective/practical in stopping the aggressive/threatening behavior of another, not which one causes more harm.

I find it rather unfortunate that you would attest to being willing to unnecessarily end the life of another, especially after the fact.

We advocate walking, running or driving away whenever and wherever possible - avoidance - deterrence and then only as a last resort stopping the imminent threat.

So disagree if you want, but consider the advice given. It may well be worth much more than you paid for it.
 
Last edited:

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
Its also the potential difference in a justified homicide and murder; the latter of, which there are usually lengthy prison sentences for.
 

hogeaterf6

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
381
Location
, ,
If someone is coming at me with a knife and I pull my gun and aim it at him ,If he doesnt stop, I will pull the trigger. If I kill him so be it. If I wound him, so be it. I would not stand over him and pump another round in him to finish him off. I was protecting my life. I do not care about his because he was not going to care about mine. I would render care to him after his weapon and my surrondings were clear. That is my job as a medic. Remember dead men tell no tales. lol, that is a joke.

Like I said, I have been shot at before. If I would have been armed he would have been dead. Even tho none of his 10 rounds hit me or my friends.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
snip........ Remember dead men tell no tales. lol, that is a joke.

Like I said, I have been shot at before. If I would have been armed he would have been dead. Even tho none of his 10 rounds hit me or my friends.

Not only do dead men tell tales - think autopsy reports, DNA and other crime scene evidence; but so do one's postings on a public forum - and that, sir, is no joke.
 

hogeaterf6

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
381
Location
, ,
Not only do dead men tell tales - think autopsy reports, DNA and other crime scene evidence; but so do one's postings on a public forum - and that, sir, is no joke.

I was throwing a little humor into it. Its a biker saying. Jeez.
 

HvyMtl

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Messages
271
Location
Tennessee
I hate this had to occur. I am glad she was armed. I am sorry she has the emotional scars which will occur from taking a life, even if the life was from scum such as this.

I am truly glad the right for her to protect herself still exists. Sad she had been attacked the first time, and that was not prevented...

Truly sadly - I bet his relatives sue or have sued her...
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
Here we go again, the old argument of how much force is enough to "stop" a threat. Of course in a perfect world it would be "oh I just shot him in the leg". A alleged serial rapist in the act of attempting to commit yet another, would of course a major consternation to the victim. As someone else stated, a good dose of doublenaught Buck would be just enough to "stop" the threat.
As General George S. Patton said " There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
Survival is a deadly business, to use any lesser force than required to neutralize the target is senseless. My ole Gramps said it best when he first taught me to shoot. "Never point a weapon at anything you don't intend to kill" If I point a weapon at a would be BG he's goin' down for the count.
 

COMMANDER1911

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
129
Location
Flintstone, GA
Here we go again, the old argument of how much force is enough to "stop" a threat. Of course in a perfect world it would be "oh I just shot him in the leg". A alleged serial rapist in the act of attempting to commit yet another, would of course a major consternation to the victim. As someone else stated, a good dose of doublenaught Buck would be just enough to "stop" the threat.
As General George S. Patton said " There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
Survival is a deadly business, to use any lesser force than required to neutralize the target is senseless. My ole Gramps said it best when he first taught me to shoot. "Never point a weapon at anything you don't intend to kill" If I point a weapon at a would be BG he's goin' down for the count.

+1
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Oh, you always shoot center mass. That is the shot most likely to stop an attacker. Unfortunately, it is also the shot most likely to kill him. But, killing is not the goal. Stopping is.

We need need to keep chanting this mantra. It must be ingrained in our psyche. It must rule our actions in a self-defense setting. It must be our undoubted motivation when our actions are examined after a self-defense shooting.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Oh, you always shoot center mass. That is the shot most likely to stop an attacker. Unfortunately, it is also the shot most likely to kill him. But, killing is not the goal. Stopping is.

We need need to keep chanting this mantra. It must be ingrained in our psyche. It must rule our actions in a self-defense setting. It must be our undoubted motivation when our actions are examined after a self-defense shooting.

A distinction that IMHO is not well enough understood nor fully enough embraced by a few. The fine line between over-reacting, revenge and self-defense may be breached by a few careless utterances.

We buy reliable equipment, read and study, train and practice, - then open our maws and offer up the family farm to pay for poorly chosen words. :uhoh:
 
Last edited:

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
The goal is to stop the threat. I was trained to use three shots to do so, a double-tap to the center body mass, and a third to the head, if possible. After that, reevaluate the threat and repeat as necessary until the threat has been stopped. I use the same caliber and type of firearm on which I was trained in the military.

Let's not mince words, here. Some might call that excessive. I call it an effective means of stopping the threat.

Let us never forget that an armed criminal who retains both a weapon and and even slight consciousness remains a deadly threat. The only thing shooting him in the leg will accomplish is to royally tick him off.

I'm sorry the woman had to go through this, but I'm very glad she borrowed a friend's shotgun, knew how to use it, and used it properly when the need arose.
 

Brimstone Baritone

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Leeds, Alabama, USA
The goal is to stop the threat. I was trained to use three shots to do so, a double-tap to the center body mass, and a third to the head, if possible. After that, reevaluate the threat and repeat as necessary until the threat has been stopped. I use the same caliber and type of firearm on which I was trained in the military.

Let's not mince words, here. Some might call that excessive. I call it an effective means of stopping the threat.

I assume you would not shoot an attacker after he surrendered, or after he turned to run, or after he was already disarmed/down/dead. Once the threat is no longer an active threat you stop shooting. THAT is the key.
 
Top