The article presents few facts, but I doubt if this was a righteous shooting. The guy was hiding in a closet and not threatening the woman in any direct way. Once she determined where he was, she should have called the police while keeping her gun on him until they arrived. If he tried to attack her or escape, she would be perfectly entitled to shoot him. Use of force, whether by police or civilians, should be proportional to the danger faced. With a gun on him, she faced little danger. Race was not an issue, both were Black.
You're kidding us, right? Then what does she do while she's focused on the phone trying to make the call when he comes charging at her?
Ummm, sure. He posed no threat to her?
1. Just a guy who chose to break in AFTER the kids were taken to school when his targeted victim would be all alone.
2. Just a guy who chose to hide within his targeted victim’s master bedroom.
3. Just a guy whose intentions were robbing, raping, torturing, or killing... (take your pick of any combination.)
4. Just a guy whose physical size and physical capabilities would likely easily allow him to over power the smaller unarmed woman.
An intruder in a woman’s home (her bedroom) poses an immediate threat of bodily harm. That IS universally accepted.
She chose a gun, not a phone to protect herself.
Pause and hesitation to locate a phone, place a call, and pray for a speedy response while she held the intruder hostage could have easily resulted in her demise. And what if he had accomplices ready to harm her? How many is she required to hold at bay?
Good Hunting and Great Shooting Lady!
It may or may not have been a legal shooting.
But it sure as hell was righteous.
“The article presents few facts, but I doubt if this was a righteous shooting. “
Under the circumstances it is the woman’s call. The DA will likely take into account the disparity of strength between a man and a woman, the fact that he was in her home and the “feared for my life factor”. Barring any romantic relationship between the man and the woman she will almost certainly not be charged.
Well, I hope you never have the chance to try that yourself. Who cares if both were black. The risk to the woman was tremendous, regardless of the fact she was armed.
The man had every intent on doing her grave harm or killing her, he had the opportunity (he had illegally invaded her home) he had the means ( he is a man compared to the woman-disparity of force) and he had intent (he was again illegally in her home). Non one can rationally draw any conclusion other than that he fully intended to commit horrible felony crimes against her.
She was justified in every way.
Best bet for you is to send your daughters to a self defense instructor, I do not recommend you try to train them yourself.
On the other hand, there is one less rapist in the world now, The courts would have put him back on the streets.
Wow, tell me you’re joking????!!!!!
>> The article presents few facts <<
What did you expect?
After all, it’s a Breitbart article — too many of which are pure click bait.
The facts are lacking here, but no jury in the US is going to find for the victim here.
You know how fast a person can travel 28 feet? We use that for deadly force training. This guy was in her closet, less than three feet from her.
He shouldn’t have been there, period, and since we will never know his intentions, assuming the worst in the victim is easy.
She may personally struggle with this forever, but no court in the country will convict the woman here.