You can’t say what the police would or would not do because it appears she did not talk to them. She didn’t attempt anything legally. In a matter of an hour she could have contacted the police, sheriffs office, her city council rep, her state senator and assembly rep, etc, etc… In a short period of time she could have exhausted her options asking for help. Instead she acted on her own and committed a felony.
Where does this form of “self defense” end? Running speeders off the road because the police aren’t pulling them over? Shooting someone at a service station because they have a gang tattoo and they might have a gun and are going to rob the place (or are they just there to pay for their gas?). This idea of preemptive self defense because of what we think someone might do in the future is ludicrous.
She had several legal options she could have pursued and she attempted only 1, a restraining order. She attempted no other means. She has no defense here.
As I understand the story, he was going to be released from jail and one of the release conditions was that he surrender his firearms. So the State (generally) knew he had firearms. If he was released and failed to do so, presumably the police could probably seize them and could certainly arrest him for violating the release conditions.
The problem, of course, is waiting to see if he would comply is that, if he did not, there is a risk that he does something violent with the firearms. It’s why I would want more information to determine if I think it’s “justified.” The ex-wife unilaterally declared that he wasn’t going to comply with the court order. I don’t know if that was reasonable. So I have trouble lauding her. But I also would be disinclined to prosecute her (absent additional information).
To answer the question a few of you asked, the story I read (sorry no cite, on my work PC), focused on the fact that Florida is a state that does not require persons under a restraining order to hand over guns.
Many states automatically require firearms to be handed over to the police, but not Florida. I don’t recall the article mentioning whether he’d be able to purchase new guns while under an order.
Even of she had called the police to tell them, they would have done nothing. In hind-sight, the best option for her would have been to take the guns and bury them or toss them in a lake or something.
The next story we’ll be reading is about how there is now a push in Florida to change the law after her husband murders her. (Of course the NRA will oppose that since it’s the thin end of the wedge to take away all guns.)
Don’t you mean, the NRA will claim it’s the thin end of the wedge to take away all your guns? After all, the man’s right to own a gun trumps any reasonable fear by a woman he’s already assaulted with a deadly weapon.:rolleyes:
I hope she goes to prison for a long time to send the message to other would-be criminals that you can’t attack a persons constitutional rights without due process just because you’re scared. What if home invaders barged in and he was murdered because he had no guns to defend himself with?
What if home invaders wearing striped shirts and Hamburglar masks broke in while she was still there, and she used her ex’s guns to PEW PEW PEWWW!!! shoot them all dead and defend his castle, and we hailed her as a hero and the couple reconciled and had three exceptional kids and an Irish setter, and there was a movie about it on “NRATV Romance,” a new subsidiary channel launched to compete with Lifetime?
In any other state, I’d say not guilty by reason of self-defense. She had reasonable reason to fear imminent harm to herself, and she took action to prevent that imminent harm. And yes, in this case, “imminent” does include within a few hours: If she had not acted when she did, she probably wouldn’t have had any chance to act later.
But Florida eliminated the right to self defense a few years ago, so who knows.
And yes, this woman did try to pursue this matter with the police. The police’s response was to lock him up for one day. She already knew that the police were not willing to do anything meaningful.
No, it’s her own words and actions. Are you denying that she broke in and stole his guns? Are you denying her statement that she was in fear for her life?
Who are you to question what she believes?
I answered this already but I’ll ask you a question in it’s place: why do you keep equating a property crime with murder? :dubious:
In all of this the law has to take a “reasonable” view on this and though I’m not an expert in US law I suspect there is enough latitude to ensure that happens.
Is it reasonable to think that she acted under extreme duress and in fear of her safety? I think so. The legal system surely has enough discretionary power to send a message that stealing is wrong whilst still being on her side.
I think she did exactly the right thing and if it costs her only a few hours in chokey with no serious repercussions and her husband under greater restriction then justice has been served and sense has prevailed.
Thanks. And when people are saying that the police only detained him for a day, was it that the police let him go, or he made bail by court order? There is a difference.
So, people are talking about the legal stuff, but it was a foolish move otherwise. Nothing’s stopping this guy from getting another gun tomorrow even if she takes all his. If you fear for your life, but your life is not under immediate threat, the proper thing to do is to get the hell away. A trip to see family in Oregon would be in order. Or just a motel the next town over, or bunk with a friend the ex doesn’t know, whatever she can afford. Go somewhere the attacker can’t find you.
I mean, did she take all his knives, too? Blunt objects? If the guy is serious about killing her, the lack of guns is no impediment at all. He could even do it with his bare hands. So in addition to committing a felony, she made herself no safer at all. Unless her goal was to be locked up and under guard?
Obviously you’ve never been in this situation. The woman has children, which makes running far away exponentially harder. Also, you’re assuming she has family elsewhere or friends who’d happily take in her and her kids indefinitely. And when is it safe to come back? It’s not a given that he’ll serve time, but if he does, she’d only be safe when he’s in prison, right?
But you’ve hit on the fears of domestic abuse victims everywhere: you’re never truly safe. All you can do is try to diminish the risks somewhat. And an assault rifle is much riskier than a blunt object or a knife.
A lot of people on this thread are assuming this guy ramming her with his car is the first instance of his aggression. Statistically, that’s highly unlikely.
I think she’ll be charged to appease the gun-totin’ masses but given a suspended sentence to placate everyone else.
Sure, but it’s a really scary fucking situation to be in, to know that a person you know, and who knows most everything there is to know about you (where you live, where you work, where your parents live, who your friends are whom you might call for help or take refuge at etc…) is out there looking for opportunities to hurt or kill you.
It must weigh on a person’s mind a smidge, yanno ?
As for the trip to Oregon/going on the lam for a while : most people can’t afford to quit their job.
I’m certainly sympathetic for the woman, and I think she should get a lenient sentence or none at all. Domestic violence is a horrible situation to be in, and there are often no good options. That said, I stand by my original post. When someone wants to kill you, you either leave so that they can’t, or stand your ground and fight back. Stealing his guns might have felt like the right thing to do at the time, and I hate to criticize the decisions people make under duress, but the fact is, it didn’t make her any safer. Unless she was planning to use his guns in her defense? In which case she didn’t have to worry (too much) about being killed with knives or fists anymore. But he could still borrow one of his buddy’s guns, and she could have bought her own. So even in that situation, stealing his guns didn’t help much either.