Mother charged for firing warning shot when daughter is being attacked.

According to the news report the woman in question was walking through a parking lot when her and her daughter were set upon by a group, who apparently had an earlier argument with the girl, now the mother is being charged for firing a warning shot into the air to scare the group of 10 lads off.

www.washingtontimes.com...

First of, why would a group of 10 lads feel they have to argue with a girl? A group of 10, what are they cowards? oh yeah that's right they are nothing but cowards, anyone who goes out in a group looking for a fight or altercation verbal or otherwise is nothing less than scum. Scared in case they lose on their own? pathetic.

Second, yes the woman should be charged for firing into the air even though the report says she checked the area to make sure no one was there, what goes up MUST come down and a bullet will fly and hit something, she was lucky it didn't hit anyone out of her line of sight, but I understand and applaud her for trying to protect her daughter, regardless of whether her daughter is innocent or not of starting the previous argument.

Third and most important, maybe there should be an unwritten law in the US of having ANY weapons first round of ammo a BLANK, that way you can fire the first round to frighten off any potential toe-rag and then automatically let them know the next round is live without getting charged by the police.

NO! Blanks should never be put in a weapon, they are for protection. Period.

What would you have wanted the woman to do? It is situations just like this that evolve into something very ugly, very quick. This is a situation that was brought to an end quickly without anyone getting hurt.

She did nothing wrong in my eyes, legal weapon, legal carry.

reply to post by DataWraith


S & F, I applaude you for your ingenuity, opinion and suggestions.

If I were a staff admin I would give you 500 points or something for an OP such as yours.

I totally agree with you on all your points, especially that first blank shot.

reply to post by knowledgehunter


I understand your point of view and can accept that carried weapons are for protection and defence but in todays crazy politically correct world where the good guys get criminal records for protecting their own and the criminals get to commit their crimes and get away with barely more than a slap on the wrist, isn't best to pre-empt the law?
Use a blank first to warn off the scum then after the blank is used anything else that comes out the barrel will be the real deal.
The law is an ass and you know it, so why not protect yourself from it at the same time as protecting your kin from the low-lives?

honestly .. i didn't even read this ...

but if a mother shot a "Warning shot" first .... fair call,

personally i would have just shot them dead ...



Muzz

Would she still be arrested if she fired a shot into the ground? Being from the UK i am not clued up with US laws with regard to discharging a weapon in public. Mythbusters proved that a vertically fired weapon is not dangerous apparently, only a shot fired in a ballistic trajectory has a potential for it to become deadly. Is it the discharge regardless of angle the crime or the manner it is done?

DataWraith
Third and most important, maybe there should be an unwritten law in the US of having ANY weapons first round of ammo a BLANK, that way you can fire the first round to frighten off any potential toe-rag and then automatically let them know the next round is live without getting charged by the police.

Sort of defeats the purpose of having a gun for self defence against an armed criminal though, doesn't it?

I dont see what the problem is here, this lady quite rightly diffused the situation in the correct way which resulted in nobody being hurt. Unlike those officers in the case of the 13 year old boy.

Also a bullet fired in the air once it descends can only travel at the speed of its terminal velocity. Which isnt enough to seriously hurt somebody on its way down.

America is a crazy country these days.....

Wonder if the 10 guys were a typical "Flash Mob" of African Americans out having some fun ? cops have to protect them over a harmless mother and her daughter don't they ?

A law that the first bullet is blank?.....if that WAS a law, then EVERYONE would know it, including the person attacking you. That would just give them more time to attack you, and the chances becomes greater for YOU to die. Personally , if someone's breaking into My house or attacking me, I'm not going to be concerned if my blank bullet is loaded. ...because that person isn't breaking into my house or attacking me to deliver me candy or be my friend....they are going to do me harm. And in this lady's case, 10 on one is not good odds , unless you have a weapon or are Jackie chan.

reply to post by DataWraith


I am in total support with the mother in this case. Cops can shoot and kill people who pose no threat and get away with it, yet when a woman protecting her child uses her wits in a scary situation shoots a non lethal warning shot she gets charged?!

What kind of idiocy is this? Please, someone answer me this. I realize that what goes up, must come down. And yes, that can be a danger. But come on, this woman should get a reward for showing some restraint.

But no, let's demonize a mother doing what mothers should do: Protect their children. Oh poor potential attackers/rapists/murders! How dare she scare them off? Give me a break!

reply to post by DataWraith


If this is not considered self defense because she was able to walk away but her daughter wasn't, what was she to do? Toss the gun to her daughter to fire?

And let me get this straight. A mother can't fire upon the boys (I would have said i just missed) but the pigs can kill a 13 y/o in cold blood? Just another example of rules for them and rules for us. It's getting so blatant that I know of no one who trusts any cop anymore. You guys (cops) created this atmosphere of the us vs. them mentality. I hope you reap what you sow.

The problem with a rule regarding warning shots in these situations is that they have to be blanket rules for everyone in all situations. That leaves a lot of discretion up to the shooter and prosecutors too. I got into an argument about this once. What if your warning shot ricochets of a light pole and hits some one? What if it is in an urban area and the shooter holds the gun at say 80 degress instead of perfect 90 degrees and the bullet goes through the window of a high rise? What about indoors? Would you shoot your neighbor or kids through your ceiling? If you or someone else are not in imminent danger of being killed or receiving great bodily harm( ie. rape or beating that could be fatal), you shouldn't be shooting anything. Period. There is also a big difference between being scared and being scared for your life. The trouble is the subjectivity of the experience and how everyone processes fear differently. If your attackers weren't armed and no one had a finger laid on them, but you're firing your weapon to scare someone, the local prosecutor may label you trigger happy. Even in self defense situations, you are completely liable for anything you hit, intentionally or otherwise.

reply to post by kountzero


Bullets fired at the ground have great capacity to ricochet depending on the angle of impact and composition or the surface.

From the link in the op:

The misdemeanor charge is just one thing Ms. Gaither is dealing with in the aftermath of the weekend confrontation. As of Tuesday evening, Brianna was missing. The teen, who went to her grandmother’s house after Ms. Gaither was arrested, disappeared Sunday.

Ms. Gaither has been frantically attempting to locate her daughter, even as she prepares for an Oct. 30 arraignment on the gun-related charge.

reply to post by DataWraith

Changes need to be made with regards to conceal carry laws.

We're told that if we're not legally allowed to use our guns, that we're not even permitted to brandish it, which is total BS.

Often times, just brandishing or showing the weapon is enough of a deterrent. Clearly, theres a difference between brandishing a firearm for defensive purposes vs intimidation.

People should be commended not punished.

If no one was injured, this woman should be given a small fine if that, nothing more.

Theres an incredible amount of stress and tension when forced into a situation where you fear for your life or well being,

Goddamn people want to have the right to bear arms, but get all anal when a weapon is employed in safely difusing a mob scene??
Are Americans brain dead?
IF there was any harm committed by the warning shot, the woman should be responsible....there was none....
case closed......give her a medal instead.......

Ludicrous. Call the police. Rofl.
Sure, let a man keep punching your daughter in the face until you can't recognize her.
Effing brilliant.
Next time shoot the sob that's hitting your daughter then leave before the cops come.
If you can no longer protect yourself and your family legally then the law is WORTHLESS.
Welcome to DC and suburbs btw.

Eta: I see after throwing the mother in jail her 15 year old daughter is now missing.
Do the right thing and get screwed for it.
USA! USA! USA! USA!

Warning shots are always bad.

Besides the obvious danger of that bullet having to stop/land somewhere there is the fact that if you have time to fire a warning shot then you are not in fear of your life or the lives of others and that gun has no business being out of its holster.

If you're hand is on the gun then you honestly believe a threat to your life is coming. If that gun is out of its holster then the threat to your life is staring you in the face and you're about to send 230 grains into its chest.

Warning shots are a bad idea all around.

Same goes for the "blanks" idea. While I commend the search for some sort of failsafe it defeats the purpose of drawing that gun. Not unlike the common notion of pumping an unloaded shotgun to frighten off an intruder or attacker. Ideas like that are great until the first time it doesnt work. Then what? We read all the time of assailants taking 5, 7, 10 shots before going down. You really want to make shot #1 a blank or an empty pump?

I cant imagine any jury convicting her if she had shot one of those 10. Being surrounded by 10 hostile strangers in a parking lot is more than enough to reasonably fear for your life. A dead moron, a free mother and another DGU on the books would have made us all better off.