[slog]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/flasher-runs-wash-woman-pulls-gun-17735807#.UKYaRoeunt0

[rocshaman]

He's lucky he didn't get his ______ shot off.

[kfox75]

I think he probably ran 'cause her's was bigger.

[rocshaman]

Originally Posted by kfox75

I think he probably ran 'cause her's was bigger.

A derringer???

[Chainfire]

If this woman was in Florida, she would probably have been charged with the crime of Aggravated Assault with a firearm, which carries a mandatory minimum jail sentence. A more suitable response would have been to point and laugh.

I ain't a lawyer, but I used to watch Perry Mason, so here is my take:

Here, you can only pull a gun to stop a "forcible felony" Exposing one's self, while a bit uncouth, is not a forcible felony. While her modesty may have been in danger, her life was probably not.

Forcible Felonies (in Fl) are:

Treason, murder, manslaughter, sexual battery, robbery, burglary, arson, kidnapping, aggravated assault, aggravated battery, aircraft piracy, placing a bomb, aggravated stalking, or any other felony that involves physical force against a person.

Showing off your weenie, isn't one of these, unless he touched her in the process, which may rise to sexual battery.

If you ain't stopping or preventing one of the above, you best keep your gun in your pants, or purse, as the case may be.

Although, I believe her response was correct and reasonable, a jury with a couple of gun haters might not and she may have ended up doing ten years with no possibity of parole, and with no flexibility available to the judge to lessen the sentence, even if she was a model mother, Sunday school teacher, and had never even received a parking ticket.........

[Rick1967]

I dont see it as much of a stretch for her to say she was in fear of being raped. I believe she was justified. I woman should not have to wait until a man has started raping her to defend herself.

[rocshaman]

Little more info on the story, the guy had balls, so to speak, cause she had a dog with her too.

A flasher allegedly got more than he bargained for when he approached a woman at a lake in Washington state this week: a Ruger .380 pointing back at him.
“I put the magazine in my gun. I cocked it,” the woman told The Daily News online. “I said, ‘You need to leave or I’ll shoot you. I’m going to blow your brains out.’”
The gun reportedly had the intended effect.
“Oh, [expletive]!” the man declared, according to the paper, before running away.

The 35-year-old woman was at Lake Sacajawea in Longview, Wash., with her 6-year-old son and a dog Wednesday evening when the man approached, police confirmed to NBC News.
He allegedly sat down and began performing a sex act and said she should watch.
It was at that point that she pulled out her gun.
After the man ran away, she sent her dog, a Norwegian Buhund Hound, after him, police said. The dog cornered him, and when she called the dog back, the man disappeared into the darkness.

The alleged flasher is described as a “white male in his early 20s with short dark-blond hair and wearing a gray hoody and dark blue jeans,” the paper reported.
Detective Kyle Sahim said police are actively investigating the incident, including whether it is connected to another reported flashing in the area.
"Not a common event in Longview," Sahim said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doesn't sound like she's in any trouble, probably considered a heroine around those parts.

[Chainfire]

Originally Posted by Rick1967

I dont see it as much of a stretch for her to say she was in fear of being raped. I believe she was justified. I woman should not have to wait until a man has started raping her to defend herself.

And therein, lies the rub.....

If an anti-gun prosecutor charged the woman with aggravated battery with a firearm, (and it does happen....often!) it really does not matter what you and I think, unless we are on her jury.

The woman would be forced to prove that her fear of rape was "reasonable" in order for her to justify pulling the gun. "reasonable" is an argument that a jury would have to decide. You can bet that the DA would be arguing that her action was "unreasonable". Even if you or I were on the jury and would not convict her of the crime, she would have gone through a year or two of pure hell, and economic disaster to prove that she was justified in using the gun.

Look at Zimmerman. You can bet your ass he wishes he had never seen the kid he shot. He probably wishes he had taken an ass-whoopin from the kid. I would be willing to bet, that if he had a do-over, he would have never pulled the trigger and would have accepted a beating, even a severe beating, rather than to have to defend himself in court. Even if he avoids prison, which is iffy, his life has been changed forever, and not for the better.

The whole point of my response to this thread is to try to get gun owners to learn and think about what their laws are. Don't assume, don't guess, and for heavens sake, don't take the advice of folks on gun forums. The laws are different in every state. What you and I, would consider to be completly reasonable, and justifiable, might end up with you spending many long years wasted in a jail cell.

[Rick1967]

Mr Zimmierman's life has changed. But Mr. Zimmerman still has a life. That is the difference. That is why I carry.

I think the woman was a little over the top in sending her dog after the guy. But, she had her son to think about too. I would rather pay for my wife's criminal defense than her hospital bill from a rape. My wife carries too. I seriously hope she never waits until a rape starts to pull her gun.

Once the "Man parts" come out, it is justified in my opinion. I believe many a jury would agree with me.

[rocshaman]

It's all moot anyway, the law obviously isn't going after the woman, they're actively seeking the perv who's suspected of doing this on at least on other occasion. And I seriously doubt if he will be coming forward to press charges. She did the right thing.