Yes but the 13 year-old is the one being mocked in the thread title. It’s the 13 year-old who said he was scared of the guy and that’s why he didn’t call. The other guys did not give comment so we have no idea if they were scared of the guy, were in cahoots with him, hated the victim so they didn’t care or what their motivation was for not doing anything.
The tread title is about the 13 year-old.
If they hated the victim? That would be an acceptable reason to let her be raped?
And no is suggesting the 13 year old should have run up and wrassled the rapist. All he had to do was pick. up. a. phone. and dial 911 or, even easier scream “HELP SOMEONE’S HURTING HER”
oh, and qcomdrj, maybe it’s just me but if I were being dragged off into the darkness for an unknown fate, I’d rather risk getting some pepper spray in the eyes than ‘copper jacketed lead’ in my brain when the rapist moves quickly. I guess YMMV.
I’m not surprised that nobody called for help. But I do believe there is no excuse, even for the 13-year-old. Stories are reported all the time in which kids as young as 3 have called 911 and gotten “Mommy” saved from some disaster. The victim in this case wasn’t the 13-year-old’s mother, but unless the kid was retarded or had no kind of moral upbringing he could have used a telephone to get help.
Gobear’s reference to Kitty Genovese might have been passed over by many here who are too young to remember the event. Here is one of many stories about the Genovese murder, this one reported in the NY Times.
Maastricht has an interesting point about the “bystander effect,” but there are too many and too frequent examples of individuals with a sense of moral responsibility to take it too seriously. Some people simply don’t want to get involved, and if they ever had a sense of responsibility it takes a back seat to their desire to be safe. Whatever its cause, this behavior is shameful.
In my own experience, people have refused to help even when there was no threat to them personally.
One morning, as I was returning from a job interview, I got off the bus and started to walk home. I was carrying my attaché case. I must have been distracted by something. I tripped on a slab of concrete in the sidewalk that was raised either by an earthquake or a tree root. I tripped and lurched forward. I ran, trying to get my feet back underneath me and regain my balance. But the attaché case pulled me farther off-balance. I went down hard on my face in the street.
I tried to get up, but I couldn’t. My arms and legs didn’t work at all, and I felt as if someone had a foot between my shoulder blades pushing me down. I almost lost consciousness. I had put my hands out to break my fall, but the slight scrapes indicated that my hands hadn’t absorbed much of the fall. My face did. When I was able to get to my knees I realized that my glasses were broken and that I was bleeding. The right side of my face stung, and there was blood coming from my nose.
There was a man walking a little ahead of me before this happened. He stopped, turned around, saw me on the pavement and said, “Are you all right?” I said, “No!” about this time a car pulled up and a woman’s voice said, “Are you all right?” Again I said, “No!” I was struggling to rise. The man didn’t offer me a hand up. Instead he turned around and continued walking. The woman, whose car I never saw (all I could see was the pavement – and that not too clearly because I was dizzy and my glasses were on the street) drove on. So much for neighborly concern.
After I got to my feet I was still reeling, trying to keep my balance. I still had a few blocks to walk to get home. The man who had been there was still walking in the same direction I was going, now at least a block ahead of me. He never looked around again. For all he knew I could have passed out or died in the street.
Two individuals, not a crowd, first took the time to ask if I was okay. Then after establishing that I was NOT okay they shrugged it off and left me bleeding in the street. Where was the bystander effect there? They just didn’t give a shit. I can’t imagine why they didn’t just walk and drive on repectively without speaking to me, since neither was disposed to give me aid.
Perhaps a lot of people would have helped, but we live in a world of increasing personal isolation in which too many people don’t really give a shit about each other.
If pepper spray could stop an agressor faster than everything else, then cops wouldn’t be carrying guns.
Um… it was mentioned several times.
Anyway, I don’t cut the kid slack. He should have at least woken up his parents and told them what he saw. I have a Nearly Nine ™ year old son and I can guarantee you that if he saw someone being assaulted out his window he would come wake me up and tell me about it. I’m sorry, but there is NO excuse for the kid not at LEAST telling his parents. NONE.
Somewhat relevant aside, regarding people not wanting to get involved:
When I was in high school there was a sort of crazy old man who hung out at the magic shop where I spent many of my afternoons. [Sounds like a made-for-tv movie so far, doesn’t it?] I was there mainly for the juggling equipment and other jugglers who came in and out, but the magic was cool, too. Anyway, one day I found out the old guy had died. He’d keeled over dead right next to Grant Rd (where the magic shop was)… Grant Rd. at that point is a five lane road with a mighty crapload of traffic and businesses lining both sides of the street. The guy lay there dead for over half an hour before anyone called an ambulance. How do they know that? Because some people who worked across the street said that’s how long they saw him laying there before the ambulance showed up. Guess it didn’t occur to them to CALL the ambulance.
Cops carry guns because pepper spray doesn’t work against someone at a distance who is armed with a gun. It has a very limited range. For close-up fighting it’s still supposed to be the best – according to cops.
Desert Geezer, I felt sad and sorry after reading about your experience. I’ve been thinking about reasons why those people treated you so badly. Your theory is that they didn’t give a shit. Mine is that their incertainty about whetether you needed help, overcame their desire to help (which, unfortunately, as you say indicates that that desire may not have been as big as it should have been).
Couldn’t they have interpreted your “No!” as an agressive “Go away !”? Maybe they thought you were embarrassed and didn’t want any witnesses to your shame. They might have even been a bit afraid you might start acting strangely, or agressively in your pain. And you seemd, after all, conscious. You talked, didn’t you?
It shouldn’t be necessary to think about the feelings of your helpers when you are in agony yourself, but maybe it is. I wonder if those people had treated you differently if you had said: “I seem unable to get up. Would you please stay a while in case I need more help?”
I do feel your pain, though. When I was a girl still in higschool, me and my friend were at a busstation. I went into the cafeteria there to get a soda. Inside the cafeteria were three girls my age I didn’t know. They were the local female bully’s, as I found out later. They saw me, felt like a bit of random violence and came after me, jeering, pushing, kicking and poking at me with burning cigarettestubbs. Their attack lasted maybe five minutes, and nobody at the busstation interfered. My friend didn’t interfere either.
I asked her later why she hadn’t interfered. She said “I thought you knew them”. Her remark baffled me at the time. It was only later that I recognized how violence seems to create intimacy. If a stranger would grab and kick me, I bet almost everybody would think he was my BF and we were in a domestic quarrel. And we all know it is Not Done to interfere in domestic quarrels :rolleyes: That is why it is, sadly, so important to keep “explaining” to the shocked and perplexed bystanders what is going on, long enough to penetrate their initial shock, overcome their fears, and to urge them -individually- to do something.
The Kitty Genovese-incident you wrote about in your post was the trigger for researching the bystander-effect. A few of the conclusions I’ve already quoted. Studies also showed that attractive young women were more likely to be helped then older women or guys. Sad but true.
Research also showed that a small percentage (I’m not sure how high, I vaguely remember about 15 %) of the population has a “helper personality”. Those people will step in no matter what.
What kind of people are these “helpers”, then? Definately not noble angels. They do have what psychologists call “an internal locus of control” meaning they tend to feel they control what happens, rather then events controlling them. They also are a bit more aggressive then average. So, your average busybody.
I’m like that. I have interfered in a number of situations, sometimes physically, (although never in situations where weapons were involved) sometimes by calling the cops. I don’t know what happened the times I called the cops. But about half of the times I interfered, (by butting in and saying something like: “What’s going on here?”) it turned out my interference was neccesary nor welcome, to put it mildly. That won’t deter me, though 
So, do people not “give a shit?”. No, I think they just have to be nudged a little. Or maybe I just need to think this to keep my rosy outlook on life. Probably a bit of both.
It never even occurred to me that they might have felt threatened by my tone (which was born of pain and disorientation). It’s worth thinking about. I wouldn’t expect an injured person to behave like an injured cat, but maybe some do.
I’m sure if I could have formulated a thought like that, much less formed the actual words, I would have done so. But, having been whacked in the face by a street I was stunned, and not my usual charming, witty (okay loquacious) self. The most I could manage was ,“No!” I assumed that a concerned passerby who heard me answer in the negative to “are you okay?” would conclude that I needed help. It never occurred to me to refer to psychology (I did take Developmental Psych and Psych 1A about 40 years ago, after all).
It seems to me that cigarette burning would be an indication that this wasn’t just friendly sparring. All any adult in the place would have had to do was to speak up, “Hey! Knock that off or I’ll call the cops!” and it would have stopped.
Too bad the percentage isn’t higher. The other 85% seemed to be missing when you and I needed help.
Stay optimistic. In the long run you’ll be happier (if a bit bruised). I’ll think about what you said. I’ve been mad at those two people for years, and I wouldn’t know them if I bumped into them. That’s a shame, now that I think about it. I forgive them.
But if they EVER do it again . . . ! 
I am stunned by this. Truly.
He was “simply dragging the woman off”? Let’s set aside the fact that he already committed a crime at this point.
What do you think he was dragging her off for??? To take her to a surprise party? His intent is clear. He meant to do her grievous, physical harm. And lethal force is NOT an overreaction. Lethal force is appropriate, legally and morally.
I concur and I am also quite shocked by how so many dopers apparently consider rape something so minor. I am not advocating shooting people randomly, nor am a “gun freak”. My stipulation is that Rape is an extremely serious crime that, BY LAW, equates to substantial physical harm, which, by every use of force continuom I have seen, justifies deadly force if other means are not available. The scenario would have to be spelled out in detail, but there are many times I believe that deadly force would be more than acceptable. Are we forgetting that the rapist is the aggressor, and the one who is choosing to do permanent mental and possibly permanent physical damage to the victim (including death at times)?
I sincerely hope the many dopers here realize the difference between a gun control rant and a discussion about the right of a woman, or man, to be protected from sexual assault. In the end, if there is an alternative to deadly force, then by all means we must, as civilized people, use it, but if it comes down to a rape or deadly force, then I choose the latter each time.
Finally, in regards to a warning shot, any experienced peace officer knows that warning shots are the most dangerous thing you can do. Instead of shooting at the offending party, you are shooting away from them; henceforth, shooting at every other possible bystander who may be in the lane of that bullet or the ricochet. The one thing my husband learned was shoot for effectiveness while prtotecting the public and yourself. If you must fire your weapon, be sure that a) it is a justfied reason (to the best of your knowledge at the time and what any reasonable person woud think), b) follow the use of force continuom, and c) STOP THEM.
I usually love your Pit rants but I think you’re off on this one. If someone sees me or mine being dragged away I hope they shoot the bastard dead. This goes no regardless of whether I’m in Riyadh or the US.
I’d rather gamble on the marksmanship of a good Samaritan than the intentions of someone that would drag a person off a public street.
Regards
Testy
Earlier, Mr. Moto wrote
Here is a link to a section of the Code of Virginia pertaining to shooting at someone.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-279
If you shoot another person in Virginia, you’ve committed a crime, whether that person is robbing your house, threatening to kill you, raping your daughter, or if you just don’t like his/her looks. It’s up to a judge or jury to decide whether to convict you and the severity of the offense.
Click “next” in the link to read more statutes, including the one about brandishing.
I don’t think they let you disregard the adjectives, adverbs and such. Malicious injury means “An injury committed against a person at the prompting of malice or hatred towards him, or done spitefully or wantonly.”
Well, just remember this next time someone starts the “I’m the air marshall” routine.
“Hey, they’re hijacking the plane! We have to do something!”
“Stay where you are and nobody gets hurt.”
“Oh, well I guess since they put it that way…”
I don’t think it’s that people don’t care, or that they’re afraid. I think it’s simply that most people are basically… let’s call it functionally limited. They are adapted to a very narrow set of commonplace events, with which they can deal more or less ably. When something happens outside these events, they just shut down. They sit there waiting for normalcy to kick back in so they can pretend nothing happened. And all the pepper spray, cell phones, concealed guns, and ninjitsu classes in the world aren’t going to change that.
Just general thoughts, not specifically addressing anyone…
I agree with a modifier that informing the police should happen first, before taking action, if possible and if the time frame warrants it. In this situation, if I had my gun near or on me, or in my vehicle, I would have tossed the cell phone to someone to call the police, while I took out my weapon and ordered the male to release the woman. If he didn’t release her, I would follow him to where he took the woman, making quite a fuss doing so. You know, like Honey Bunny when she first jumps on the table in “Pulp Fiction”. Make noise, draw attention, force people to get off their arses and get involved.
I find it highly unlikely he’s going to proceed with a rape while being followed at a safe distance by a crazy woman with a gun. If things escalated I would likely fire into the air - at least that would get more people interested and involved, and then someone would likely call the police (especially as some people think even mere possesion of a firearm is a crime and should be reported, as opposed to, oh, a man dragging a woman off against her will…gotta stop those Evil Guns, after all…).
I suppose then if he escalated matters by trying to harm the woman, rape her, or get in a car and remove her or take her into a confined space, I would have to shoot something or someone to stop it. But when you shoot someone do you aim to “murder” or “kill” them? No, to fight some ignorance here, you rarely aim to kill a person, you more often aim to stop them. That is, your goal is to prevent the crime from happening, not to kill. The reality is that shooting someone does have a high possibility of killing them.
If you can you shoot legs, but IRL that’s a very hard target, and the femoral artery is fatal. Arms/shoulders are rarely fatal and extremely painfull, but also very hard to hit, especially if he is holding someone. Head shots are also very difficult, and nearly always fatal. So you aim for the torso. But if he’s using the woman as a shield, that makes that hard to do. So what do you do? I guess so long as he is using her as a shield he’s not or else too busy to rape her, so you don’t shoot. If he starts hurting the woman…well, you know, hypotheticals like this are kind of silly, because every situation is different. People opposed to firearms use for protection will present numerous scenarios where the Magic Rapist is somehow able to always shield himself with the woman and where the woman is always at serious risk; people in favour of firearms use for protection can likewise present scenarios where they can play Deadeye Dick and pick off the rapist cleanly and easily, with little risk to the victim.
Would I get into trouble for taking action? Possibly, although actual charges are not likely in (thank God I live in) Kansas. However, having been raped I consider it my responsibilty as a human being to prevent that from occuring to anyone else, and I feel morally justified in doing what is needed, up to and including shooting and possibly killing an attacker, to prevent that. If, having suffered through that, I did not act to save another person from a lifetime of trauma, I would be a coward and couldn’t live with myself.
If you were the victim of a violent assault, would you feel safer if, while you were twisting and struggling to get away, someone decided to shoot at your assailant?
If they actually shot? No, but then I’m not in a position to judge risk since I’m not at their viewpoint. This would be the same, exact answer had you asked instead:
Alternately as well, if the person had started to rape me or kill me, then my answer would be “yes”. I have little to lose at that point.
Would I feel safer having a person with a gun following along screaming “let her go, motherfucker!” and attracting attention by firing into the air? Without question, absolutely. And that’s more what I’m posting about in my long post.
Whereas if you are using pepper spray and the perp isn’t brandishing a gun you move in close and spray his face. You don’t have to worry about accidentally killing anyone, and if the perp is using his victim as a shield, he’s gonna have hide his face behind her, not a very effective move for perping it up as you are then free to get in really close and spray him anyway.
Whassamatta with a solution that doesn’t have a prospect of leaving brains spattered on the sidewalk?
Its unAmerican!!