MachIVshooter
Member
This one very good reason for the well-meaning citizen who may be tempted to intervene in a situation to "defend" an "innocent third party" to do a little risk analysis first.
I would say analysis in general. Just as trying to defend someone else in a deadly force situation, it can be tricky to know who is who if you're not privy to the entire thing.
That said, if some dude is beating the hell out of a female, there's not much question as to which one of them is the aggressor.
I've read through the replies, lots of sage advise. For some of us, though, the protective instinct is rather strong, very difficult to suppress, regardless of what our rational mind tells us we should do. I might be able to stay out of a conflict between domestic partners if I didn't think there was a likelihood of serious injury or death. If it were a child being assaulted by an adult? Accuse me of internet bravado if you please, but as sure as the sun rises in the East, I'm gonna treat the abuser to a no-expenses-paid ride in a bus to the ER. I have absolutely zero tolerance for child abuse (and I don't mean spanking, but actual, injury-causing abuse), and have no problem facing the music for my actions if it means protecting a kid. IMO, some instant, painful justice that comes out of nowhere is liable to have a much more profound effect than our impotent legal system's handling of such matters, make the abuser think twice in the future. Unfortunately, the extreme majority of child abuse happens in private homes, where we have no opportunity to actively stop it, are forced to use said ineffective measures and count on an inept system to save these kids.
I do apologize for the rant, get pretty fired up when the subject of spousal and especially child abuse is brought up. My comments on the legal system are also just that; I do not blame LEO's for the failures once it leaves their hands.