But noted gun expert Joe Biden told her it was OK!
12 Responses to “But noted gun expert Joe Biden told her it was OK!”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 24th, 2013 at 7:38 pm
“In an apartment complex, the odds of that bullet coming down and striking something are very high.”
More than just “high”. I would put the chances of hitting something at 100%. The chances of that something being a person- that is pretty small. It will most likely be the ground.
October 24th, 2013 at 8:13 pm
I agree with the police that what she did was dumb and illegal, they should have kept their mouths shut beyond that though.
October 25th, 2013 at 9:35 am
This will never make it past a DA to a judge. If it does it will be laughed out of court by any jury in the US, even in a city.
The charges will be dropped the moment she has a lawyer present to laugh out loud when the police claim that there wasn’t an imminent threat to the daughter, who had already been grabbed and hit at least once.
Police really should keep their mouths shut about the law; they apparently don’t know anything about it.
October 25th, 2013 at 10:20 am
I think the police are correct on this one. Read the story carefully. I think the facts are there that this was just a fight amongst the locals. The mom left the group and got a gun, fired it into the air. That tells me they could have probably disengaged but chose not to (mutual combat). At any rate shooting into the air was dumb. I live in NOVA and such an event in Woodbridge is not a big surprise.
October 25th, 2013 at 11:04 am
She should have shot the first one to place a hand on her daughter. There were ten of them. Seems to me to be a case of assault by mob, and lethal force would surely be justified.
I live in Woodbridge and don’t think I would have any reservations about shooting under such circumstances, given what I know about the populace.
October 25th, 2013 at 11:11 am
Heh. After checking a map to find out exactly where this happened, I know I would have ventilated somebody.
October 25th, 2013 at 12:39 pm
@ Robin: It was a group assault on her daughter. From the articles I have read, deadly force appears to have been justified.
@ Roland: This is one of the very few situations where I feel a warning shot may be justified – i.e., defending another person who is in a close physical altercation with one or more attackers – because there can be a substantial risk of accidentally hitting the person you are trying to protect. A warning shot may be enough to break the attack, or at least cause the attacker to hesitate and allow the victim to gain distance for a clear follow-up shot if needed.
The problem in this case, at least from a non-anti-gun perspective, is that she took that warning shot in a manner that placed everyone within a mile or two in danger. The most appropriate way to fire a warning shot (in the unusual circumstance where one is appropriate) is to fire into an area of soft ground, as close to perpendicular to the surface as possible. If you’re careful, in most cases that should be enough to provide a safe backstop.
October 25th, 2013 at 2:07 pm
Jake,
Totally agree.
That -she- could leave to get a means of defense against a group attacking another person is (should be anyway) immaterial to her responding to that continuing threat (actual ongoing assault) to her daughter. Here in AK you aren’t required to attempt to retreat prior to using deadly force if another person is being attacked in a manner to justify using deadly force in their defense.
Assuming the threat to her daughter met that legal standard, for the officer to suggest she should have run to find someone to call 911 and just waited for the cops to get around to showing up (in PG county?) or waded back in herself is asinine.
October 25th, 2013 at 3:50 pm
The problem is that this IS ILLEGAL IN VIRGINIA. Period. Using a gun is lethal force, AUTOMATICALLY — and firing a warning shot shows the shooter DID NOT BELIEVE LETHAL FORCE WAS JUSTIFIED. Hell, her own statement shows that. Don’t do warning shots, and for DAMNED SURE, don’t do them in urbanized areas.
Roland’s right — pick one of the barbarians at the edge, well clear of your daughter, and use HIM for a safe backstop. The warning is, “I got plenty more bullets!”
October 27th, 2013 at 11:08 pm
Assholiness excuses itself, but not others. Tough luck, lady!
October 28th, 2013 at 11:39 am
I hope she cites Biden in court as part of her defense. Why shouldn’t she take the advice of the Vice President of the United States?
I understand she had probably better choices; however, I don’t blame her for doing what she did to protect her daughter. Otherwise should she have started to shoot them?
October 28th, 2013 at 3:48 pm
Of course, ol’ Joe is surrounded by hired guns at all times who carry weapons which are banned to the common people. The “equal protection of the laws” is not applicable to him and others ruling elite class—even though they claim to be the champions of the little guy.