Drooling Iguana wrote:Seeing as how she thought that her car was more valuble than a human life, she'd deserve to be in there.
Considering what happened, I'd call it her car PLUS the emotional trauma the afflicts every victim PLUS the (at least perceived) possibility of injuries up to and including death versus the normal value of a human life MINUS the deduction for him being an obvious asshole and criminal.
I won't be very surprised if the former added up to be bigger than the latter. If I had a gun, I'd have computed it the same way.
In any case, the Golden Rule (not perfect, but a good start) says that treat people as you would expect to be treated. If you infringe another person's rights, expect to have yours infringed.
IMHO, When you conduct assault in an area that allows concealed weapons for self-defense, you are voluntarily forfeiting your right to live. Since you had already forfeited your right (whether you know it or not)...
A question: If the woman put the assaulter's life at risk without the gun. Maybe she was a super-expert at unarmed combat or whatever, but the man is now in the hospital and at risk for his head injuries. Would you say the woman placed her car above that scum's life, and thus deserved a long prison sentence?