In the local news out here, a guy in Texas that defended his daughter is in the news. I shall analyze and comment.
At a large private gathering of people, a grown man started acting inappropriately toward a young female child and it escalated. The Dad, by sheer dumb luck happened to walk in. And commenced to laying the smack down. In the process, the perpetrator died. Papa Bear was using bare hands.
The question at large is, was Daddy wrong?
I feel, based on my federal deadly force training, that the Dad was right. Some in California say that he robbed the perpetrator of due process when he killed the man. I have heard this discussion during training. I disagree strongly. The perpetrator was robbing the little girl of her due process.
This event happened in TX. The Sheriff declared it to be within the proper guidelines and turned his evidence over to the DA. Thus far, the DA is still figuring out what to do in order to make all his voters happy.
Defense of self and others is allowed in the Deadly Force chain. As is prevention of serious offenses against persons. Serious offenses against others includes rape as a primary example.
I wish to point out that the father was using bare hands. That implies no premeditation. His daughter was in danger and he reacted. I feel it was a “righteous kill”.
Some people in CA think he overreacted. I disagree. If my son or daughter was in that position, you may bet your last pair of shoes that I would probably do the same thing, if not retrieve my pistol from the stash box. I feel that the little girl’s dad was right. Feel free to add your .02 in the comments.