This is actually a great subject (tangent) that stems off the original question. Interjecting yourself into a situation that you don't have an intimate understanding of is very dicey.

A popular scenario thrown around in concealed carry discussions revolves around encountering two men in a fight. John Doe intervenes only to find out the the opposing party was a plain clothes police officer. Shooting a police officer (in plain clothes or not) typically does not look good on a resume.

Specifically, in the scenario initially posed by the OP, in my local I would be justified in using deadly force to prevent the abduction of one of my kids. That does NOT mean that I'm going to shoot someone pulling a screaming kid into a car even under suspicious circumstances.

If I were to observe what appeared to be an abduction in progress I would call 911 and do everything in my power to make myself known & remain in contact with the actor(s) until police arrive. If an abduction is really playing out, hopefully the perpetrator will release the kid and run. At the very least they now have to deal with a physically capable, armed adult male instead of continuing their attack on the child. If the scenario playing out is benign then the actor(s) can explain it to the police when they arrive.

Shooting someone, even a guy who is kidnapping your child, is awfully dangerous. The kid is squirming and fighting.. suppose you hit him? Even police officers with a lot of training have shot the wrong person. The farther away you are, the more likely you are to hit the wrong person. And if you miss, where is the bullet going? How far? What (or who) is going to end up stopping it?

If you're close enough to get a good shot, you're probably close enough to do something else.

From what I've seen of most men fighting, most of them don't seem to be very good at it.

Use women's self-defense tactics, instead. Here are some things I would attempt:

* If you can kick him as hard as you can in the side or front of the knee, do it immediately. I'm not talking about pointy ballerina kicks -- you know how you set a stick up against a log and slam your foot down on it to break it so it fits in the campfire? THAT'S the kind of kick you want to do. You're trying to fold his leg in a direction is isn't meant to go. It's intensely painful and will probably cripple him for life.

*Don't grab the kid, grab the guy.
1) If you can grab one or two of his fingers, bend it all the way backward. Thumbs are good. Or,
2) If you're coming up behind him, grab his ears and twist them, dig your thumb nails into them and don't let go, or,
4) Reach around for his Adam's apple dig your fingers deep, like you're trying to rip it out, or
5) Reach around with both thumbs extended and jab him in the eyes.
6) Grab his lower lip and yank it downward.

If he gets away, get a good description and the license plate. If you have a pen but nothing to write on, write it inside your forearm.

Even if you get your kid away from him, but he gets away, be sure to call the police. He will try again with someone else's child.

Put your kids in a basic self-defense class. You won't always be around.

(Shooting out tires is just for movies and TV shows, and possibly for a cool, expert marksman. Those bullets don't just evaporate when they miss their target, they ricochet and kill people.)

As a sentence? Nope, no one outside the military uses firing squads any more, AFAIK, and they haven't used it in a long time. Even one of the "cleaner" methods of capitol punishment is highly unlikely for "just" kidnapping, even under these circumstances. I don't think Canada even has the death penalty for treason.

Now, if you are asking if you can use lethal force to prevent the commission of a felony, in most states here. Not sure about Canada, but most civilized nations seem to be OK with the use of force to prevent the battery or sexual assault of another, or arson of an occupied building, so I'm thinking kidnapping of a young child would fit into there. Again, not sure about Canada, and not even willing to guess on the UK, but....

Sue, I hope you don't dislike the way I wrote this. I REALLY hate the way it looks but I agreed with most of the things you said, disagreed with a couple and had comments for others. It was just complicated enough that I thought this was the best way to do it so that it didn’t get too hard to follow.

Shooting someone, even a guy who is kidnapping your child, is awfully dangerous. The kid is squirming and fighting.. suppose you hit him? Even police officers with a lot of training have shot the wrong person.
Lots of variables. Skill, distance, threat, proximity to child, etc.

Absolutely agreed that the time to try your first head shot is not in the heat of the moment. All those action movies folks watch are not technically considered training. Adrenaline and a pulse rate of 120 do interesting things to your ability to place rounds where you want them. I know people that have trained like this and I know many, many more that only wish they had.

The farther away you are, the more likely you are to hit the wrong person. And if you miss, where is the bullet going? How far? What (or who) is going to end up stopping it?
Always applicable; good general advice.

If you're close enough to get a good shot, you're probably close enough to do something else.
IMO there are simply too many variables involved to make such a generic statement.

I’m guessing (dangerous I know ;)) that you’re assuming the assailant is unarmed. General advice is going to run against kicking the knee of a man holding your child and a firearm.

From what I've seen of most men fighting, most of them don't seem to be very good at it.
Agreed, BUT assuming how well someone can handle themselves is extremely dangerous. Several of the most dangerous people I know look as “normal” as can be.

If he gets away, get a good description and the license plate. If you have a pen but nothing to write on, write it inside your forearm.
Good advice Sue. The only part of this I would change is that you should try and develop a habit of getting a description immediately, don’t wait.

Even if you get your kid away from him, but he gets away, be sure to call the police. He will try again with someone else's child.
Amen sister!!! Too many people stop when the threat to them and theirs ends.

Put your kids in a basic self-defense class. You won't always be around.
Agreed. The attitude of active resistance and the understanding that they can help themselves alone is worth a lot. I am amazed at the ability of my son to put his feet on people effectively. He’s taken more than one of my adult friends to the ground and he weighs about sixty pounds.

(Shooting out tires is just for movies and TV shows, and possibly for a cool, expert marksman. Those bullets don't just evaporate when they miss their target, they ricochet and kill people.)
A broad generalization with many variables and assumptions. Believe it or not, particularly in rural areas, shooting tires out still happens. Just in case anyone thinks police officers are super human shooters, typically they are not any better than anyone else you pluck out of the general population that has been through a little formal training.

Several rounds through the radiator or tires before the car even moves may decrease the likelihood of escape.

I would be more concerned with whether shooting the pedophiles in question is the correct course of action. You are either putting the child in mortal danger - if , as mentioned above, the kidnapper is close - or dispensing vigilante justice if the kidnapper is a safe distance away from the victim.

I'm having difficulty imagining a realistic scenario in which bringing guns into the equation actually helps the child. It seems more likely to me that the OP's endgame here is to murder a pedophile and get away with it.

First off, in the hands of an abductor the child is already in mortal danger.

I must be the only one here with a little imagination. lol

Let's say the bad guy grabs your daughter in an attack similar to the Dugard case. You are able to close on the car as the bad guy is climbing in and or starting to drive off. There are a number of angles from which shooting the driver without putting a passenger in more danger would be very possible. You might also be able to disable the car as they are attempting to flee.

Everyone is getting caught up with being too close to use a weapon or too far away to use a weapon. A LOT of CQB training courses include shooting at contact distance.

I would comment on the last sentence in your post but I'm having trouble keeping my response civil.

If and when there is a situation when the choice is having a kid abducted and using deadly force I don't see a jury convicting you. That said I am having a pretty hard time figuring a situation where it would come down to knowing an abduction was taking place and you either shoot or let it happen.

It isn't like child molesters wear distinctive molester uniforms or look any particular way. It is also possible that what you are seeing may not be an abduction. Kids can often kick and scream and make a fuss when being hauled off by their parents. Some kids have also learned that if they make it sound like an abduction they will cause a fuss. This alone should cause you to pause before doing anything you can't take back, like shooting people.

Must have been eight or ten years ago there was a molester stalking school bus stops. He would talk up the kids and had exposed himself more than once. Clearly he was building up to something bigger.

The police were alerted but he was working a wide area. One day a lady saw what generally fit a rather vague vehicle description and saw a man pull up and talk to kids at a bus stop. She dialed 911 and followed the vehicle while keeping a safe distance. Using her minute by minute description the police were able to get the vehicle and driver.

Point here is that intelligent use of a phone and vehicle can be as effective, and a hell of a lot less risky, as using force. If the guy had not been a molester the police would make their apologies. Shoot someone you think is a molester and then they find out your wrong and your looking at a lengthy court case and jail time. You could be sued for everything you own and lose you house, vehicle, job and reputation. Good intentions don't mean a thing. Shoot someone and you had better be right.

You can't let your desire to be a hero, to 'save the children', or to 'rid the world of scum' affect your judgment. Before taking any action that can't be taken back you need to be absolutely sure your know what your seeing. Misreading it could be tragic for everyone if you use deadly force.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't keep your eyes open and react. If the situation resembles an abduction call the police. Memorize the description of the vehicle, license plate number and driver. Given that cell phones with cameras are so common take a few snaps. Call 911. If it seems prudent follow the vehicle. Get creative.

Maybe you can block the vehicle in. If your damned sure get your car in front of theirs and stand on the brakes so you have a low-speed collision that destroys his radiator but doesn't risk life and limb. A wrecked car is better than a lost kid. If it turns out it is the kids uncle picking up the children you can claim 'a cat ran in front of my car'. And everyone gets to know the auto body shop owner.

To be honest, I had the same thought as Rodion, no offense intended to the original poster or to follow-ons.

8 years ago I had to say goodbye to a part of my career, where I had to receive warrants from law enforcement for access to online services, and assist with lawful recovery of evidence in cases of pedophilia. The evidence recovered in the first few cases were bad enough, but the photographic evidence recovered in the fourth case was enough not only to make me cry but convince me I wasn't cut out for this task. Just talking about it now is tough, it screwed me up good. I am afraid that in a kidnap situation, I will flash onto those memories, and over-react. I don't carry a gun, but am afraid what I would do to subdue a kidnapper. If the kidnap victim was my own kid, I know there is no rationalizing, just reaction. I honestly have difficulty treating pedophiles as human beings.

Just from what I've heard/read, most child snatchers aren't armed. They either get the kid into the car by asking them if they want to see some puppies (etc), or they just step out and grab them, like this Garrido creep. Garrado's wife was driving the kidnapping car. If it were my kid, I think I would probably take the chance that he wasn't armed and try to take him down. Or cripple him. Or both. I wouldn't be adverse to breaking both his legs.

Yes, lots of variable and adrenaline could alter the situation, which is my main reason why shooting could be a very iffy way to handle the situation.

"From what I've seen of most men fighting, most of them don't seem to be very good at it." I'm sorry, I wasn't clear about what I meant. I meant the father of the child may not be much of a fighter, not the perp. I still think if anyone could get the perp from behind, they would have some advantage.

Following with a car and cell phone would be excellent, if you could. But luck doesn't always work like that.

Last month near Seattle, a boy saw his 4-yr-old sister taken into a man's car, and he chased it down and grabbed her out of the car. You do what you can with what you've got.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009213659_kidnap13m0.html

If you intervene in an abduction, you better be ready to take a life. The reason I say that, I have intervened in an abduction. No, I didn't shoot anyone but it did get physical, it was scary and it was the worst fight of my life.

That's coming from a guy that bounced some of the biggest honkey tonk bars in "real cowboy country" in the U.S. Yea, I've been in a few fights.

I was in high scool, 17 years old and driving home from school one day when I noticed a car on the other side of the road with 2 young girls about 8-10 years old and a stereotypical frail, little old blue haired lady standing on the curb by the car. One little girl was screaming for help, the little old lady was screaming at the driver of the car to "let her go" and the driver was hanging onto the other girl by the arm trying to drag her into the car. I pulled over and ran to the car, asking the little girl do you know him? as I approached.

She said no and the driver bailed out of the car and came at me. He was a full grown man probably mid to late 30's. Again, I was a 17 year old kid. This was over 25 years ago before the age of cell phones, internet, and instant access to sex offender registries. (You should look up your area online for your own safety by the way)

He came at me and the fight was ON. At a couple points he tried to break away and flee but by that time I was hurting, pissed off and knew he was up to no good. I was NOT going to let him go. Someone in a nearby house called 911 and the police finally arrived. I was conseravitely, actively fighting the man for 10 to 12 consecutive minutes.(That's a damn long time to spend rolling around on the ground getting hit, kicked, gouged and bit if you've never done it.) I was black and blue for a while.

The aftermath: the cops determined he was a known child molester. He tried to lure both girls into the car and the old lady happened to walk up as it was happening and interfered. Being afraid of getting caught again, he admitted to the cops he tried to "disable me from identifying him and then get away." The cops never even mentioned the possibilty of me being charged with assault or anything like that. He was arrested on the spot and went to jail. I never heard another word about it. Of course things were different then. Now days you get sued if a criminal falls and breaks his leg breaking into your house. And he wins in court.

Just food for thought, if you were to get involved with something like this, chances are it's a repeat offender who will NOT want to get caught again and may be very desperate. Desperation = danger.