Originally Posted by Obi
I really don't think that is what was meant. The first post indicated, and I would tend to agree, that the man in question *probably* stopped when she walked in on it. At that point all she needed to do was throw the a## out and call the police. Taking a gun and killing him was not necessary; it was revenge. And there is a difference between revenge and self-defense. If she tried to stop him and he resisted and continued harming the boy, then I can see her using deadly force. But somehow I don't think that's what happened. To use an example, if some guy takes a swing at me and I take him down with a foot to the groin, that's self defense. If I then proceed to beat the crap out of him and then kill him while he's incapacitated on the ground, that's NOT self-defense. You use enough force to protect yourself or others, and that's it.