Would Lauren Valle have been justified to shoot Rand Paul's Stompers?

[LostInAnomie]

Just putting it through the typical NRA/second amendment arguments: She was a small woman being attacked by a group of men that each outweighed her by at least 50lbs, the attack was becoming increasingly violent (potentially deadly), and she had no idea what her attackers intended. For all she knew, her attackers could have meant to grievously injure or kill her.

Would she have been justified to pull a gun and shoot her attackers? If not, how would it have been any different than other attacker scenarios we've seen where people have claimed gun use was justified?

[BootinUp]

1. legally or morally? nt

[LostInAnomie]

2. Meh...

Whatever the usual reasoning is.

[BootinUp]

5. I would say no

I would be surprised if she felt her life was truly threatened in that particular incident. But thats the determining factor, and I don't know for sure what she thought.

[damntexdem]

8. Actually, her life WAS truly threatened in that incident.

When a person is lying as she was on the curb and someone stomps on that person's neck, that person's life is in danger. Short of that, she was in danger of trauma that could have led to major disability. Had she been able, protecting herself up to and including deadly force would definitely have been justified.

[DFab420]

3. I think not in that situation no

If however she hadn't been in a large crowd with a police presence there.. (even though they did crap to help that poor woman)..Then she would have been totally justified yes..

Ex. A: Political rally with bunch of people, hopefully some trying to help her = no shooting

Ex. B: Alone in a parking lot, bar, out of ears reach from the general public = squeeze through the trigger..

[NoNothing]

4. Probably not

In most jurisdictions the self-defense justification is not available if you intentionally provoke the threat that caused you to resort to self-defense.

[dalaigh lllama]

14. ???

"In most jurisdictions the self-defense justification is not available if you intentionally provoke the threat that caused you to resort to self-defense."

She did nothing that would justify what they did to her.

[NoNothing]

16. Different issue

Even if the response is not legally justifiable, you are often not entitled to self-defense if you intended to provoke it. That does not absolve the attacker of guilt, though, it just means that you could be ALSO be guilty.

[damntexdem]

6. Deadly force would have been justified, not necessarily shooting.

Not shooting because carrying a gun into the situation would not have been justified: a "street theater" confrontation with a political candidate is not one into which to carry a gun. In fact, had she had a gun, the stompers might have been able to justify not just stomping but killing her. Absent a gun, however, it is unfortunate that she was not adept at martial arts.

[PearliePoo2]

7. The video I watched....

appeared to show him putting his boot on her back at the base of her neck and then putting his full weight down on her. It's possible her neck could snap.
If someone attempts to break your neck, I would say any defense would be justified.....so yeah, shoot the fuckers if you are able.
I normally don't enjoy jury duty, but I'll volunteer to sit on the jury with this asshole in front of me.

[Erose999]

9. Probably not a good idea to shoot in that crowd. These idiots are all just salivating over the

possibility to shoot somebody. These guys are all wannabe Travis Bickles who wake up in the morning anticipating that today will be the day they get to be the hero in a shootout. One gunshot in that crowd would probably be like a domino effect.

[veganlush]

10. damn straight.

[Initech]

11. I'd go with the taser/stun gun/mace option.

[Recursion]

12. Being assaulted by a mob is not really the paradigm for defensive firearm use

You generally want to be at least 10' away from your attacker.

But, on the abstract side, if she was in danger of death or serious harm, then yes, she would be justified in using deadly force if no less-lethal means were obviously available.

[DrDan]

13. no

[bluerum]

15. Had she pulled a gun she probly would have been shot multiple times.

These thugs drool for that kind of 'opportunity'.

[FiveGoodMen]

17. Hell, I'd defend anyone who came back and shot them now.

We HAVE to accept that we're at war.

[guitar man]

18. If they put her in fear for her life

Yes

[spin]

19. Much depends on if she initiated the encounter ...

I believe that if you walked up to a person and provoked a fight and shot them when they had you on the ground, the law would frown on your actions. Much would depend on the individual situation and if they were using excessive force once you had stopped fighting.