Wow.  This turned into a rather heated thread.  I did not mean to turn us against each other.  Rape is a sensitive and infuriating topic.  In fact, it infuriates many “red-blooded” men to the point of evoking primitive rage.  When I first saw that photo, I could not think of anything past hurting the rapist so that they will not see another opportunity to repeat the crime.  Is that kind of though patterning legal and rational?  No, definitely not.  I suspect many of you were caught up in the same type of boiling emotional response I was.  Please, let’s put the confrontational arguments aside on this one.

To put this back on topic:  Ripping a girl’s clothes off without her express consent is rape.  It does not matter is she “pulled a train” earlier in the day or not.  It does not matter if she liked it at first and then changed her mind either.  Once the word “No” is uttered, the act becomes rape.  PERIOD!  In addition, the “reasonable man” clause is really the deciding factor in most cases of this type.  I think it fair to state that a struggling crying girl being assaulted on top of a crowd of guys in public is being raped.  My original question was, “if you had witnessed that event, what would you have done?”.

It seems that most people here would have risked their lives by intervening and attempting to stop the assault.  To all of you who answered this way, I salute you.  You are testaments to the true good nature of the male gender.

So rather than counter my assertion that I know more about this than you, which was the point of my challenge, you call me a name.  Ad hominem attacks are poor debating technique.  It would have been better for you to list your formal and informal training in liability law and police techniques and policy.  But you didn't do that, did you?  Why not, because you have ZERO training in these areas.  I, on the other hand, have extensive training in these areas, and practice law every day.  It's not arrogance, it's confidence.

Also, I HAVE met you, in a manner of speaking.  You have been posting on this topic for several hours.  Your posts reveal that you don't know much about police procedure, tactics, training, or criminal or civil law.

the photgrapher fled to a balcony to escape the crowd and then took this picture. the girl was eventually stripped completely and penetrated. (by what, i was not told)

-2nd hand from a photojournalist familiar with the shot.

In the event I, (as a civilian), am ever involved in a deadly force investigation, I hope some one with your atitude is a responder. What I mean by that is, you seem to want the facts before you jump to a conclusion. Thanks for doing your job.....

Hey, jrzy, I like jokes.

Try this one:

You're from Jersey?

WHAT EXIT?

[b]Quoted:

Wow. This turned into a rather heated thread. I did not mean to turn us against each other. Rape is a sensitive and infuriating topic. In fact, it infuriates many “red-blooded” men to the point of evoking primitive rage. When I first saw that photo, I could not think of anything past hurting the rapist so that they will not see another opportunity to repeat the crime. Is that kind of though patterning legal and rational? No, definitely not. I suspect many of you were caught up in the same type of boiling emotional response I was. Please, let’s put the confrontational arguments aside on this one.

To put this back on topic: Ripping a girl’s clothes off without her express consent is rape. It does not matter is she “pulled a train” earlier in the day or not. It does not matter if she liked it at first and then changed her mind either. Once the word “No” is uttered, the act becomes rape. PERIOD! In addition, the “reasonable man” clause is really the deciding factor in most cases of this type. I think it fair to state that a struggling crying girl being assaulted on top of a crowd of guys in public is being raped. My original question was, “if you had witnessed that event, what would you have done?”.

It seems that most people here would have risked their lives by intervening and attempting to stop the assault. To all of you who answered this way, I salute you. You are testaments to the true good nature of the male gender.[/b]

Well said and point taken
____________________________________________
American Legion - For God & Country

Ya,
but if your packin, and its loaded when you pull, your breakin the law.  
Also, if your in chicago, more laws broken.
c-rock

You are goning to make fun of jersey ,you live in the worst gun grabbing state of this country and you want to make fun of NJ.
Are you a liberal?

So, AR15fan simply states that he wouldn't just pull out a gun and start shooting people if he walked up on this scene WITHOUT ANY FURTHER INFORMATION, and a bunch of you jump his s**t for it? The most generous characterazation of your responses is 'simplistic'. AR, stick by your guns. Most of us know better than these jokers.

I think you may want to go back and read the entire thread before commenting.

The only thing I don't like about his post is that. What exactly does "sexual battery" mean?
Is it something the average person would not want to stop if possible?

Alas, wanting to stop something and using deadly force are two entirely different things. This thus explains the increased interest an research in non-lethal munitions, etc.


Adam

I did.  I even posted on the first page.



Nobody?  Most people advocated firing guns, and a few people jokingly or not advocated killing.



ilikelegs, I think you're great, but I had to use this as an example.




People did advocate that sort of thing.  That is exactly what AR15fan said was innapropriate.  
He specifically said that he would interfere with out laying down fire.
If a small police presence cannot stop this sort of occurance, then the force needs to be beefed up so that a few officers WOULD be able to stop this thing, if they determined that the woman was going to be forcefully assaulted.  Remember, it is not the police duty to protect you.  It is their job to fill out forms and investigate, like it or not.



Are you the head of the though police?  It seemed callous?  Well I've got news for you.  We live in a callous world.  If men and women are willing to go to public places, get drunk, and act like hooligans, then you have to expect some bad stuff.  
I had a friend whose parents were going out of town.  She had a huge party, and people started breaking stuff, getting in fights, and stealing.  Uninvited guests showed up, and stole about $20,000 worth in guns and electronics, and a girl was raped.  
I hate those people with a passion, and sincerely hope that they spend the rest of their lives in agonizing pain, but everyone who went to the party was a complete idiot.  Even the girl who was raped.  She knew what kind of party it was.  She didn't deserve it, but shit happens if you are an idiot.  And she [b]WAS[/b] an idiot.  I knew her.

I feel sorry that woman had to go through some terrible crap.  I hope all the people who are caught on film are prosecuted.  
Bottom line is: She went to Mardi Gras.  [i][b]MARDI GRAS!!![/b][/i]  That is where people go to get hammered and revel in drunken orgies and nudity.  She was probably lifting her shirt for beads a few minutes before.  Again, [b]She didn't deserve to get gang raped![/b]  But as I said before, she played in the snakepit, and got bitten.

This situation is different from one where an innocent victim was minding their own business, so don't tag me with the "It's the victims fault" label.  I never said that.  Rape is rape, and it is always wrong, but only stupid women go to Mardi Gras thinking they are safe from animals like the ones in the photo.

For what it's worth, I agree.

Anybody that carries a gun on a regular basis needs to be thinking clearly and unemotionally about using deadly force. This description is NOT very far from a question my CHL instructor asked as part of the training.

"You hear screams from a small local park, and find a woman tied to a tree, and a male with his pants down, groping her. Do you shoot?"

Turns out the woman had a rape fantasy, and hubby was helping her act it out.  Crime? Disturbing the peace. Not exactly a felony, (though that is not necessarily a limit here in Texas). The instructor went on to point out that there are plenty of strange people out there, and not all forms of goofiness are punishable by death.

If you DON'T know what's going on, find out before you shoot. Dead is awfully permanent, and the jury will have HOURS to decide on what you did.

By the way, does ANYONE think that the FIRST thing to be done is GET HELP?  Unless you pull a wagon around with loads of ammo, you don't have sufficient fire power to stop them if they are determined to carry out the crime that may be in progress. Escalating force all by your lonesome may well result in death of the victim, and other inncocent bystanders.

I don't think anyone can reasonably object to a fast draw on your cellphone as FIRST RESPONSE.

Why am I not surprised to see only two white people, including the victim, in this picture?

Since the title of this thread is "Deadly force against a crowd"  I'll approach it from that perspective.

1.  The picture at this point does not warrant deadly force.  Misdemeanor assault at best.  There is no rape at this point.

2.  Pulling a gun in a drunken crowd will get the gun implanted in your rectum. That same crowd will then stomp you to death.
Some of you think that just showing a gun will get you a positive response.  You are about to be unpleasantly surprised.  It's not a magic wand.

3.  Those of you that shoot based on the picture will get charged with murder, and the headlines will read: MANIAC CHL HOLDER SHOOTS INTO MARDI GRAS CROWD.
For the warning shot guys,  the crowd will probably not even notice.  Then what do you do?

Those of you with rational thought processes please disregard this rant, but I've had about as much of some people as I can take.

 I've noticed here lately a major outgrowth of dumbass on this board.  The same names keep popping up reference to police threads and deadly force issues.

 You all know who you are.

 Grow up,  get some education and training (hint:  video games are not training) on the issue,  stop flaming people and name calling, and act with maturity and responsibility.  That's a deadly weapon you've got in one hand,  maybe it's time you took your other hand off your "gun".

Don't misunderstand me lostwildcat.

I never said I wouldn't try to help out.  If there were enough people to help, and a reasonable person would agree that you are doing the right thing, I wouldn't hesitate to thump heads.

If you tried this alone, you would probably end up dead.


Ilikelegs,

I specifically said that the police should step up their force so that they would be comfortable dealing with a riot situation.

The courts have ruled that the police don't have any legal obligation to protect you.  I understand the concept, but I also think that the police should have the legal obligation to try to protect you.  Those pricks who stand around and do nothing ought to rot in hell!

If would have helped out in that situation.  I would have probably shot some people, beat up others, and gotten my ass kicked and sued for millions.  Blame the lawyers (not the good ones).  Most people aren't willing to risk their lives, families, and livlihoods for some stranger regardless of the situation.

Times have changed.  I would love to be able to dispense justice to criminals on the spot, but that is not how our nation works anymore.

Heck.  I would even be worried about my own ass if I ever shoot a home invader.  I have too much to lose.  I would probably take the risk though.  What a choice!

Yup, you got me, I'm a liberal.

Because of where I live.

Moron.  

So, let me get this straight.  A crowd stripping a woman's clothes off and molesting her is only a [i]misdemeanor[/i]?  I would presume everyone in the crowd could be charged with something like aggravated sexual assault and punished by many, many years in jail.  Why isn't any attack by a crowd against a single person considered a felony?  Somebody want to give me the 5sec dissertation on the law here.


I wonder what would happen if you unloaded a decent-sized can of OC over the crowd.  My guess is that it would separate the opportunists from those who need to be shot.  But I cannot figure out a "safe" way to deploy it.


I can't believe nobody has said "Fire 50+ warning shot into the air." yet.