6th Grader Shoots Potential Rapist

[Eclectic Dreck]

"I think it's going to change me a whole lot, knowing that I can hold my head up high and nothing can hurt me anymore."

Sounds like she'll grow up to be an excellent american girl, thinking guns will make her safe and solve all her problems.

To be honest, a gun is a tool - nothing more or less than that. Having ready access to that tool and proficiency in it's use provides a measure of protection against various threats one might face.

With proper training and proficiency, an armed individual is generally safer than an unarmed individual. Should that tool be improperly used, this boon could easily become a burden. I myself carry a weapon whenever allowed. There are exactly two people in my city of residence I would draw this weapon to defend. The first is myself. The second is my Fiance. The rest of the world is free to do what they will.

It is not a perfect system by any stretch and my preference would be that I have no reasonable cause to defend myself. Funny how being robbed at gunpoint in front of your own home can undermine your self confidence.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Wow the word "rape" really brings out the worst of the escapist.

Personally I'm glad it turned out OK and that the girl was unharmed.
but there are a few points I'd like to add.

first off the fact that she had access to a .40 glock.
The label "potential rapist" because everyone is a "potential rapist". yeah he broke into the house and was headed for the closet where the girl was hiding but there are no proof that he had the intention to rape her.

This is the best explanation. Even if youre going to respond with "ALWAYS assume an intruder is a rapist" it makes it a worthless descriptor in any news article since it applies to all home invasions ever of all time. Every home invador is a potential rapist. So every news article till the end of time from now on should call the perp "Potential rapist" and thus totally invalidate the term. If it can be used to describe literally everything it isnt useful as a descriptor. Its a silly title.

 

[mooncalf]

I imagine a block of houses like revolver barrels in a game of russian roulette, "Which of these quiet suburban homes contains a little girl in possession of enough fear and firepower to snuff you the f$#! out?"

Anything that'll heal is a-ok against intruders, I *might* have been a bit sorry for him if he'd died or been maimed. But as it turns out, I'm just laughing so hard at him. Vicious, spiteful laughter. (I consider the possibility of him being a rapist as irrelevant, he's already someone who has violated the boundaries of a home, to me that's more than bad enough.)

I hope the girl doesn't develop a warped view of the world because of it all, but you get the impression she's handling it okay.

 

[Roggen Bread]

I thinks we're all jumping the gun by assuming the intruder is a rapist when the only crime they committed so far was home invasion.
Also damn, America needs better locks.

This was a truly good post. Funny AND true.


OT: Well, good for the girl, which should be in therapy by now.

(At least I would be if that would have happened to me.)

 

[Keoul]

I thinks we're all jumping the gun by assuming the intruder is a rapist when the only crime they committed so far was home invasion.
Also damn, America needs better locks.

Spoiler

This was a truly good post. Funny AND true.


OT: Well, good for the girl, which should be in therapy by now.

(At least I would be if that would have happened to me.)

FINALLY SOMEONE GETS IT
Jeez, you'd think making it bold would make it obvious but you're the first one to get it! Congratulations!

[small]I'd use a more happy gif but this is the only one I have, sorry![/small]

 

[ShindoL Shill]

Uh... isn't one of the big firearm safety rules 'keep your guns where 12-year-old kids can't get them'?
The mother was downright irresponsible. For a start, the kid could've been spooked and shot her mother, or herself, accidentally. And what's the point in giving the kid the gun, when presumably you know how to use it? That's just asking for a tragedy.

 

[Woodsey]

So uh... where's the evidence for the rapist part?

 

[Sansha]

I thinks we're all jumping the gun by assuming the intruder is a rapist when the only crime they committed so far was home invasion.
Also damn, America needs better locks.

If a stranger enters your home without your permission and you have a gun, well - basically your front door is for his protection, not yours.
You've got to be able to defend yourself and your family if you have to. Making that decision to actually squeeze that trigger has got to be fucking traumatic, but I've decided I'd rather be prosecuted for using force than have myself or my family harmed because I didn't act.

 

[iseko]

the funny thing is in my country the girl would be in allot of trouble because she shot him. it is against the law to defend yourself with a gun unless the peep shoots at you first. stupid I know

 

[Keoul]

If a stranger enters your home without your permission and you have a gun, well - basically your front door is for his protection, not yours.
You've got to be able to defend yourself and your family if you have to. Making that decision to actually squeeze that trigger has got to be fucking traumatic, but I've decided I'd rather be prosecuted for using force than have myself or my family harmed because I didn't act.

Allow me to reiterate my paragraph.
Why is he being labelled as a "potential rapist" when he hasn't raped anyone, even if by technicality that title is correct, in truth it applies to everyone.

The lock part was a joke, guns seem to the first and only line of defense for a lot of people and I'm just saying they could try fortifying their house. If they had a stronger door or a security screen the girl wouldn't of had to shoot at all and probably wouldn't be traumatized in the slightest.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to go edit that post a bit before more people ask the same thing.

 

[Meatspinner]

Wait I must have missed a post or something.

OP links sensationalist article.
Someone makes the usual pun.
Bunch of other ask for clarification on the rapist part.
...
people are accused of trying to defend the rapist/homeinvader
someone doesn't get an obvious joke again... I mean profit

OT: That girl has bigger balls then me at that age (or now when i think of it)

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

My thoughts are EXCELLENT F***ING JOB. Good on that little girl and good on the person who taught her to use that gun. Some people are sensible enough to have guns. And some of those people are 12-year-olds.

As stated though, but over the top to be crying rapist already. Maybe he just wanted to make sure everyone was asleep before making off with the TV.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

the funny thing is in my country the girl would be in allot of trouble because she shot him. it is against the law to defend yourself with a gun unless the peep shoots at you first. stupid I know

Even in the US it varies enormously. Generally speaking, a person is only allowed to use lethal force (i.e. employ a firearm in any capacity) when they are in imminent danger. The standard for imminent danger varies considerably but, generally speaking, you must be presented with an obvious and grave threat against your person (i.e. a situation most people would assume could lead to death or serious trauma), and you must not have an obvious and easy avenue of retreat. Meeting these requirements is difficult since the final account relies on a jury to determine if the threat was credible and if there was a viable option of retreat. That said, this generally means firearm use in self defense is used at very close range - usually under 7 meters.

At that range, it seems to me that the option of exchanging fire is not an option at all - even an untrained shooter using an unfamiliar weapons likely to connect. This gives rise to a popular saying in certain circles: better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.

Of course, in the case of a home intrusion rules differ even further. In many states, (Texas for example) there is the presumption that someone should not have to retreat from their own home. This is known as the "Castle Doctrine". While less a hard and fast rule, generally speaking the conditions required to employ a weapon in defense are less stringent when in one's one home. If someone kicked down my front door, employing a weapon to stop said person would likely not even result in a trial in most situations in spite of the fact that the distance from where I sit to my door is about 15 meters. The simple act of breaking in is often sufficient to justify the use of lethal force.

In short, there are a number of things that conspire to all but ensure the shooter in this case will not see a trial. The age, the gender, and the fact the even took place in her home. The standards for threat are far more loose when dealing with a pre-teen girl than an adult male.

 

[Zantos]

Silly goose! She should have done what Europeans keep telling us to do! Just stay still, call the cops, wait, and hope for the best. /sarcasm again

Silly Americans, we're just saying you need to be more creative. Anyone can defend themselves with a gun. You'd know if my house got broken into because the news report the next day would be "Yorkshireman defeats home invaders with a banjo, a pint glass, a small jar of coppers and a purple triceratops".

Possibly going on to say how they wanted to interview me, but the interviewer being a southerner did not comprehend all 18 of the different uses of the word "Ar".

If she'd have set up some ingenious traps to hit the dude over the head with tins of paint, now that would be a story. But I suppose we can't all be Macaulay Culkin, well done little girl!

 

[surg3n]

That's awesome, it sends a message to any fucktard who thinks about doing something similar. I had the misfortune of being attacked in a sort of home invasion... 2 nut cases broke into my house because they got the address wrong, beat me up while I slept. Luckily my brother was in the next room, or I could well be pan bread right now. If I had a weapon, then to be completely honest, I'm not sure if I could get to it and use it - it's quite a shock to be woken up with a punch to the mouth. If it was a member of my family, then I could easily shoot someone, stab someone, whatever is required really - that little girl knew she was protecting her family as well as herself, she deserves a medal.

Frankly, you break into someones home, it's fair game IMO, if you do that and end up shot then you deserve everything you get, and probably more. I'm not sure how things work in the US, but in the UK - the prison guards will tell everyone exactly what this guy did, and let whatever happens, happen. It's just the way it is, and nobody wants it any other way. Justice is served in jail, not in court.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

It concerns me that the girl was able to so easily access a loaded firearm.

 

[Sansha]

If a stranger enters your home without your permission and you have a gun, well - basically your front door is for his protection, not yours.
You've got to be able to defend yourself and your family if you have to. Making that decision to actually squeeze that trigger has got to be fucking traumatic, but I've decided I'd rather be prosecuted for using force than have myself or my family harmed because I didn't act.

Allow me to reiterate my paragraph.
Why is he being labelled as a "potential rapist" when he hasn't raped anyone, even if by technicality that title is correct, in truth it applies to everyone.

The lock part was a joke, guns seem to the first and only line of defense for a lot of people and I'm just saying they could try fortifying their house. If they had a stronger door or a security screen the girl wouldn't of had to shoot at all and probably wouldn't be traumatized in the slightest.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to go edit that post a bit before more people ask the same thing.

Both valid points.

I agree that the intruder shouldn't be labelled as a rapist without information, but the point stands that he was in her bedroom under very illegal and potentially dangerous circumstances, and the girl obviously responded in the way she'd been raised and trained to, to protect herself from scum criminals and potential predators by any means. She should be standing by her decision.

And yes, fortifying one's house should indeed be the first line of defense, but there's only so far a deadbolt and solid oak, which is also classy as hell, front door can get you from someone determined enough to enter your home to loot it and hurt you.

A few years ago somebody broke into my house while I was home, and I chased him half a mile down the road with a machete, screaming that I was going to 'beat him like a runaway slave'. So maybe I'm biased by my own personal feelings of rage and hatred towards people like this.

Thieves and rapists aren't just criminals, they're grossly disrespectful. Someone who steals your camera is not only stealing its face value, but photos you might have in it, and the time it took you to earn the several hundred dollars it cost, and a rapist will take a few minutes of, to him, a forgettable experience to get his rocks off, while causing permanent and horrendous emotional damage to his victim.

I've gone terribly off-topic, but I apologize for nothing. I needed to let this out anyway.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

Is there any proof on the whole rapist thing? Because all we seem to know is this guy broke into her house. To me that makes him a burglar, not a rapist. I'm also concerned about how a 12 year old girl had such easy access to a firearm.

 

[ImperialSunlight]

I thinks we're all jumping the gun by assuming the intruder is a rapist when the only crime they committed so far was home invasion.
Also damn, America needs better locks.

EDIT: Due to a severe case of misunderstandings allow me to reiterate.
1. The bold means it's a joke -nudge nudge wink wink-
2. I'm pointing out that he shouldn't be labelled as a rapist at all, just a burglar.
3. The Lock part is also a joke, that most Americans see their guns as the first and only line of defence, perhaps investment into a stronger door and security screens would have saved this girls from a traumatic experience.

I completely agree with you, what with the massive stigma against rapists and pedophiles (not unwarranted, mind you), people shouldn't be labelled in that way, even "potentially" unless that was very clearly their intent. It extends beyond prison, there's no chance a sex offender or someone publicly labelled as one would ever be able to hold a decent job after released.

 

[Sansha]

It concerns me that the girl was able to so easily access a loaded firearm.

Is there any proof on the whole rapist thing? Because all we seem to know is this guy broke into her house. To me that makes him a burglar, not a rapist. I'm also concerned about how a 12 year old girl had such easy access to a firearm.

Clearly her parents saw fit to trust her with access to the pistol, and that she was able to retrieve it from wherever it was, hide, cock it, know when to aim and fire under extreme pressue, and hit her target to injure, not kill, tells me that she's obviously been well trained in its mechanical and sensible use.