Your claim of justified self defense...or defense of others, must fit inside the justification window. Thus your actions must be contemporaneous to the event...to the assault, attack, etc. Contemporaneous means "close to" in terms of timing. So using our framework of decision-making, you can't justify shooting a prospective and potential attacker because you thought, one day, he might seek to harm you. Similarly, you can't justify seeking a subsequent contact with a past aggressor and claim retro-active self defense.
This is a point that is so internalized for many of us who've lead a violent lifestyle that we take it for granted, but it bears repeating since so many questions have been raised recently in this theme. The case was a thread on a sexual assault suspect in a bar. At first sight I would question the judgement of going to a loud and boisterous bar where this sort of thing might happen. Having been in a couple of bar fights in my younger years, I'd rather not get into another one. But in truth, this event could happen anywhere, so we continue with this example.
In short -
"According to the complaint, the suspect initially approached the first victim, a waitress at Cheddar's, and asked for a lighter. Upon receiving it, the waitress said the suspect grabbed her breast.
After the first victim pulled away, the complaint said Rhodes approached another waitress who was working at the bar. Again, he asked for a cigarette. After saying that she did not smoke, the victim stated that she tried to leave the bar area and the man blocked the exit. She asked him to move, but instead he grabbed her by the neck with both hands and started to choke her. The suspect then began to kiss her neck and face repeatedly. During this time, she began crying and begging the suspect to get off her.
When a co-worker saw the man put his fists up to her, the complaint said another waitress ran over and stepped between the suspect and the victim. The suspect then ran out across the parking lot."
Some points -
1). To the "my own defense is the only thing I care about people", I will ask you this simply - if the second waitress was your mother, wife or daughter, and you could whisper something in my ear - being the dude on scene and you not there - would you say, "channel male snowflake...its none of your business...run away"? Or would you say, "Sir, please save my daughter from that POS"? I suspect most men would ask and do the latter.
2). There are shooting events and non-shooting events. This is a non-shooting event that calls for some physicality. Something all men should have. Perhaps it doesn't need to be said...but this is the age of Homo-Pacificus.
3). Let's discuss timing - "The suspect grabbed her breast and she pulled away". Are you justified in intervening? In my perspective, the event is over. Granted, if it was a family member of mine, the suspect would be asleep and I would not be concerned over the gymnastics of justification. A price would be exacted. Just as if a man touched your wife on the street. A price would be extracted and the price would be painful. But that not being the case...the waitress a stranger, I think the event is over and any contact with the suspect may be seen as punitive.
4). Let's discuss timing - "...the victim tried to leave the bar area and the man blocked the exit. She asked him to move, but instead he grabbed her by the neck with both hands and started to choke her." Timing. The event did not conclude, it is happening now. It is easy to articulate the damage a physical assault could create, etc. The window of justification is open the moment he puts his hands on her and continues until he disengages and leaves the bar.
5). The greater the potential for injury or death, the sooner that window opens and the longer it stays open. In the story, the man is using physical force. Add a knife or the presence of a pistol in his hand and that window tends to open much sooner and stay open for much longer.
Ready - Discuss!