Sex offender vigilante

[NeuroTypical]

He should have pulled the guy off, knocked him out, called 911 then took care of his daughter.

If I read the accounts in the news correctly, he did exactly everything you just said he should have done. (I'm not sure he called 911 himself though.)

Ok maybe restrain instead of knocking out but it would be a fast way to immobilize him. :)

It sounds like you have a few gaps in your knowledge and experience about what sort of things happen when someone tries to "knock someone out" or restrain them. I'm thinking that humans using physical force on each other is a far, far more dangerous and injurious thing than you believe.

Let me guess - you believe that in the space of 5-10 seconds, dads just automatically know exactly how to restrain other grown men? And they somehow how much force to apply with which part of themselves, to what part of someone else, to do exactly enough damage to "knock them out", but not kill them.

Did you learn this in a dojo or gym somewhere? Please - tell me where you got this information. If I could figure out how to access and incorporate this information into myself, which you seem to believe is so common and available, then I could rest easy and let my conceal carry permit expire.

If we have a way of fixing pedophiles so they wont act again then no dont lock them up forever. Other wise yes I would have no problem locking them up forever. The recidivism rate for acting on pedophilia is very very not encouraging.

Yeah, I'm not sure I disagree with you here. But the cost of keeping a segment of society locked up for life is high, and society tends to balk at such things.

It is only common sense, however, to stop a crime being committed then call the cops.

Which is what the father did. Are you under the impression somehow that the father did not stop the crime, or that the cops did not get called?

[KirtlandSaintinZion]

I find the attitude that the murder of the "true pedophile" is less troubling then the murder of the "guy who just slept with his HS girlfriend", disturbing. A life is a life. You have no clue whether the "true pedophile" was repentant or not, or how his life may have been changing or could have changed. Who knows how many lives he could've helped change if he had had the chance to repent and show the forgiving power of Jesus Christ through his new life. You know nothing about the man except one thing he did in his life.

This is a verse I live by in relation to others caught in the snare of sin. No matter what that sin may be...

Mosiah 12:5 (RLDS) "Now they were desirous that salvation should be declared to every creature, for they could not bear that any human soul should perish;"

[Backroads]

I find the attitude that the murder of the "true pedophile" is less troubling then the murder of the "guy who just slept with his HS girlfriend", disturbing. A life is a life. You have no clue whether the "true pedophile" was repentant or not, or how his life may have been changing or could have changed. Who knows how many lives he could've helped change if he had had the chance to repent and show the forgiving power of Jesus Christ through his new life. You know nothing about the man except one thing he did in his life.

This is a verse I live by in relation to others caught in the snare of sin. No matter what that sin may be...

And yet, as Nadia said, it is a very human attitude. We tend to like justice. We might not know much about this man, but we do know he gave into the temptation to harm a child while the other victim did not.

That one thing he did in his life was a pretty big deal. We might be expected to forgive him, but that's not going to erase the consequences of what he did.

Now, you are right. A life is a life and I think celebration would have been better felt had that victim experienced consequences from the law.

[annewandering]

LM are you just feeling pissy at me or what?

[KirtlandSaintinZion]

And yet, as Nadia said, it is a very human attitude. We tend to like justice. We might not know much about this man, but we do know he gave into the temptation to harm a child while the other victim did not.

That one thing he did in his life was a pretty big deal. We might be expected to forgive him, but that's not going to erase the consequences of what he did.

Now, you are right. A life is a life and I think celebration would have been better felt had that victim experienced consequences from the law.

That is a sad commentary on today's society, saying, "I hope they get what they deserve." all the while mired in their own sins.

I do not understand this comment, the dead man was a registered S.O. (having experienced the consequences of the law), that is how the murderer found his address.

[Guest]

LM are you just feeling pissy at me or what?

LM actually has a very important point, Anne. It's easy to say restrain the guy or knock him out. We see it in the movies all the time. It is not an easy thing to do.

My boys go to MMA classes 3 times a week. They take jiu-jitsu classes that has its main purpose to restrain and incapacitate an opponent. It is NOT easy. At all. Especially when in tournament situations when the adrenaline is pumping, you don't know what the other guy is going to do, and you have to think very quickly or get hurt. A lot of times, the training that you have been doing flies out the window in that kind of presure. It takes YEARS of study to actually get all that training to be instinctive, keeping you calm and thinking even when you get in a trouble spot.

My younger son has been taking classes for 2 years. He walked into the gym two days ago and got paired with a newbie white belt. The newbie was so wild and undisciplined that my younger son got hurt. Even after all that training and having had a few tournaments under his belt.

In a situation where a man is molesting a 4-year-old daughter, a father is REQUIRED to MAKE SURE he gets control of the situation in the best way he knows how. If that way is to pull his Glock and shoot the guy, that's what he needs to do. You don't want to be in the situation like my son who got bested by a white belt with your daughter's life on the line.

Edited June 15, 2012 by anatess

[annewandering]

I guess I wasnt raised delicately enough for the general audience. I did have 5 brothers and no sisters. Sorry I just cant relate to delicacy all that much.

LM is nitpicking most of what I say and it is getting annoying. Ok you disagree. I disagree with you, LM. Happy now?

[NeuroTypical]

It wasn't about nitpicking or feeling pissy. It was about disagreeing. After I posted, I saw this:

It matters little to me if every single person in this world disagrees with me about an opinion.

I almost deleted my post, because I was on notice that it really didn't matter what I had to say. I decided to leave my post up, because there's more folks in this thread than just you and me.

From where I'm standing:

1- The dad stopped the attack, and 911 got called, and everyone is trying to help the girl.

2- As Estradling mentioned, the people in posession of the facts will be deciding if the dad used an appropriate amount of force or not. If they decide to charge him, well, if Texas law is like CO law, he's got an affirmative defense.

3- It's tempting (and common) to 2nd guess what should have happened based on our incomplete grasp of the facts and preexisting worldviews about how things work. When deadly force has been used, and someone pipes in about how they should have done it differently, I try to find out if they know what the heck they're talking about or not. When they do, the responses tend to sound a lot like Anatess' post. When the only response is to get called pissy and nitpicking...

[Guest]

In a way, I'm glad that little girl will always know that her dad did everything he could to protect her. Not knowing the situation, I can't say whether he went too far.

It would be tragic if she had to live knowing he went to jail because of it.

[Backroads]

That is a sad commentary on today's society, saying, "I hope they get what they deserve." all the while mired in their own sins.

I do not understand this comment, the dead man was a registered S.O. (having experienced the consequences of the law), that is how the murderer found his address.

Doesn't mean all of society's going to agree with him being back on the streets, I'm afraid. Not everyone believes a little jailtime is just. Hence the entire issue.

Which leads to the question if it's just to list the addresses of sex offenders. Yes, it might help a family or individual make decisions, but apparently it also puts former convicts in danger, or at least severely affects their lives.

[annewandering]

It wasn't about nitpicking or feeling pissy. It was about disagreeing. After I posted, I saw this:I almost deleted my post, because I was on notice that it really didn't matter what I had to say. I decided to leave my post up, because there's more folks in this thread than just you and me.

From where I'm standing:

1- The dad stopped the attack, and 911 got called, and everyone is trying to help the girl.

2- As Estradling mentioned, the people in posession of the facts will be deciding if the dad used an appropriate amount of force or not. If they decide to charge him, well, if Texas law is like CO law, he's got an affirmative defense.

3- It's tempting (and common) to 2nd guess what should have happened based on our incomplete grasp of the facts and preexisting worldviews about how things work. When deadly force has been used, and someone pipes in about how they should have done it differently, I try to find out if they know what the heck they're talking about or not. When they do, the responses tend to sound a lot like Anatess' post. When the only response is to get called pissy and nitpicking...

LM, again out of context. sighs. I am always interested in other opinions and facts. What does that have to do with not caring if I am the only member of the board holding a certain opinion? It is wrong to not bow to peer pressure, which is what you implied I should do? I will certainly bow to better ideas and to facts but not majority opinion.

How can you say on the one hand that restraining someone isnt really very probable because we probably dont have that capacity when you go ahead and see the guy certainly had the capacity to beat up the rapist. Sounds like he was perfectly capable of restraining him to me.

[Backroads]

Yes, but in a fit of anger, are you really going to focus much attention on the fine line between just right and too much?

[NeuroTypical]

It doesn't even have to be about a fit of anger. It can also be about not knowing the capabilities of your opponent. He just got caught molesting a child - will he try to kill the child and father? Will he take a hostage? Is he a better fighter than the dad? Will he pull a knife or gun?

Indeed - you spend just enough attention on that fine line, to make sure you're far enough past it that it's not an issue.

[annewandering]

Yes, I have to agree, LM, better to kill the guy than take ANY chances on lesser alternatives. Oh dang. Someones at the door, unexpectedly. Got to get my shotgun quick because I am here with just my husband. He is 71 years old and someone might be stronger and faster than we are. We are disabled after all. Cant take any chances.

[Guest]

Yes, I have to agree, LM, better to kill the guy than take ANY chances on lesser alternatives. Oh dang. Someones at the door, unexpectedly. Got to get my shotgun quick because I am here with just my husband. He is 71 years old and someone might be stronger and faster than we are. We are disabled after all. Cant take any chances.

That is just silly, Anne.

Of course you're not going for the shotgun everytime somebody rings the doorbell. But, what are you gonna do when you open the door and the guy comes at your 71-year-old husband beating him to a pulp? Oh, sorry husband, you're just gonna have to fend for yourself while I decide how much pressure to apply to the guy's neck so I don't end up killing him.

Nach.

[Backroads]

It's one thing to mean no harm to anyone, but it's quite another when a choice must be made. I'm not advocating killing anyone, but I am saying the average person will probably be more concerned over the well-being of his loved one than the well-being of the person harming his loved one.

[annewandering]

hmm once again my post is gone.

once again. Of course it is silly. It was intended to be silly to make the point. No where have I ever said that hurting anyone should not be stopped. The man in question was obviously capable of stopping the rapist. Does he have to kill him to stop him? I doubt it from what the story says. Do I believe everyone can be stopped without death? No.

Just read what I say not expand that to who knows what by putting words in my mouth..

[NeuroTypical]

According to this article, it looks like the Grand Jury won't convene until July 10. I'm guessing we probably won't hear much more about it in the news until 2nd or 3rd week of July.

[Guest]

hmm once again my post is gone.

once again. Of course it is silly. It was intended to be silly to make the point. No where have I ever said that hurting anyone should not be stopped. The man in question was obviously capable of stopping the rapist. Does he have to kill him to stop him? I doubt it from what the story says. Do I believe everyone can be stopped without death? No.

Just read what I say not expand that to who knows what by putting words in my mouth..

What does the story say? For some reason, I can't find the story linked on this thread.

[estradling75]

Update: Grand jury: No indictment against father who killed daughter's alleged abuser - CNN.com

I think this means it is over legally speaking

[NeuroTypical]

There's still the next of kin filing civil rights abuse charges, if a hungry enough lawyer can talk them into suing. But yeah, no charges from the state.

[Echo2002]

I just saw a link that said the act was going to be considered a homicide, which I guess technically it was. I think it was justified though, he was protecting his daughter. I'm guessing he was overcome with a lot of rage after witnessing someone molesting his daughter.

[Echo2002]

Never mind, it does say the Grand Jury did not indict. The case is over.

[Jamie123]

The way the article was written makes it sound like the yawning was in disrepect....

This is the Daily Mail we're talking about; they'll make the facts "sound like" whatever best suits them.

But either way, if this guy's just committed double murder a little disrespect in court is the least of his sins.