BLUE MOUND, Texas — When two gunmen smashed through the glass front door of her suburban Fort Worth home, Kellie Hoehn didn't think twice.

The 34-year-old mother of two grabbed a shotgun that had been pointed at her face early Wednesday, starting a struggle that ended with one intruder killed with his own weapon and another in the hospital.

"I wasn't going to let them get to my babies," she said, recalling the moment when she pushed up the muzzle of the shotgun, pointing it away from her children's rooms.

Although the intruders told her to keep quiet, she screamed for her husband. She told her 12-year-old son, who was awakened by the sound of the shattering glass front door, to get his 5-year-old sister and hide.

"It was like a horror movie," her husband, 32-year-old Keith Hoehn, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "I thought I was a dead man. We're fighting for our lives."

With Kellie Hoehn clinging to the weapon's muzzle, her husband tackled the man who held the shotgun. She knocked the intruder in the head with a jar candle, giving her husband a chance to wrest the shotgun.

By then the tussle had spilled out onto the front lawn. Keith Hoehn shot one of the men who had a pistol, police said. Wounded, that man ran away.

Then the intruder who initially had the shotgun charged Keith Hoehn.

Kellie Hoehn told The Dallas Morning News that she screamed at her husband, "Shoot him, shoot him, shoot him."

Her husband fired the shotgun and the man fell to the ground. Then the shot man lunged a second time.

"Well, I shot him again, and I guess that was it," Keith Hoehn said.

Dakota Scott Benoit, 20, of Richland Hills, was pronounced dead at a hospital. John Garland Pierson, 25, of Haltom City, was in critical condition and in police custody at the hospital.

"I am not happy that someone is dead," Kellie Hoehn said. "But I am glad that my family is alive."

Police said Pierson was shot in the left arm and the bullet pierced his diaphragm and other organs but his condition was improving. He will face charges of burglary of habitation with intent to commit another felony, police said.

Investigators say the couple were just defending their family and probably won't be charged.

source

Good for them.

You just gotta lay a finger on a burgular in the UK and thats it, they'll sue you, even if they have broken into your home and they are armed.

^
Same in Denmark.. Completely ****ed, i like the rules in USA a lot more.. A lot more survival of the fitness

Except thats not true - youre allowed to defend yourself if no other options is possible

Thats why you need a 22 stone english mastiff to protect you, just saw this article, thought it was quite funny

The parents did what they had to do

Don't mess with Texans. ...... That'll teach them

we are allowed to defend our selves with reasonbl force, but whats considdered reasonable when your life is at risk.

Got to love criminal rights. It is sad.

The dog looks very gentle.

OWNED

I should tell my grandmother (who is against the 2nd amendment) about this.

Good for them!

Don't mess with Texans babbby!

She did the right thing, if my life or someone I care about was at risk I would have done the same thing not out of fun, but out of defense especially if they are in my own home.

I wonder if the owners will still want to live in their home.

Why? It wasn't the homeowners who owned the gun it was the criminals. This would just help her to show criminals shouldn't have the right to bare arms.

Sure they would, and why not?

Anyone who attempts to come around and rob them knows they're gonna die!

Guns ftw.

Kicking a$$es and taking names....

or killing a$$es... same difference.

Second Amendment doesn't come into this.

If guns were not widely available, the crooks might not have got them, to be able to be shot when they were turned against them.

If they were able to get guns anyway, because they are crooks, the same thing would have happened anyway.

The homeowners did not use any guns that they own in this incident.

They don't criminals have their right to bear arms revoked after a violent crime. However they still acquire them illegally, which the government can only detour and not stop.

The person who killed the intruder didn't own the gun he used. While he may own a gun -- the story doesn't say -- he defended himself by getting the intruder's gun with his wife's help.

Interesting story, though. Seems the family acted in a smart manner.

You can't do that everywhere in the US, I know up here in Massachusetts you would be arrested for it even though YOUR house was broken into, YOUR family was at risk... UGH I HATE THIS STATE... full of liberal assclowns..

Are you serious? That's ****ed up.

In PA, if you fear for your life, or life of another person. You may use lethal force.


Just recently in my county, two guys followed a store manager into the store, had a TECH 9 I believe its called. Pointed to his head and demanded money, then attempted to shoot but his gun jammed. the manager turned and fired two shots missed once, hit the second time. Both ran, the shot one died after running a few feet.

Gun control is not the answer, its gun SAFETY. Everyone should own a gun, not only for hunting and fishing, but for protection against those whom impose their will and way of life on you that takes away your freedoms as a human. Thats why we have the 2nd amendment, so if the government or anyone else tries to take our freedoms, we can take their power.
2nd amendment is there so that WE THE PEOPLE can protect freedom from those who wish to do it harm.
This families choice turned out to be a good choice, but it could have ended worse. If they had owned a gun in the first place, they could have just shot the intruders instantly, not putting as many people in danger.
When more people are protected the right way, there will be less crime, as who would want to risk dieing for something so petty. A robber will think twice about robbing a bank if he knows everyone else will have a gun and defend themselves.
But in the end, it all comes down to proper safety. Not everyone should own a gun, just like not everyone should have a drivers license. Some things just arent for certain ppl.

It should be mandatory.

This would also go to show that if the man had a weapon of his own he could have better protected his family. I'm sure that he is going to invest in a pistol after that.

Just because this story had a good ending doesn't mean that a situation like it would likely end in the same way. It could have very easily ended with the man killed, and the wife and children raped, mutilated, and then killed. They were lucky this time.

In California if you are in your home and someone breaks in, you have the right to use deadly force.

Good for the family

Yeah, it's bloody ridiculous.

Mastiffs generally are, but they can be guard dogs, my friend used to have one and you really wouldn't want to get it annoyed.

gotta have one of those signs on my front door

Not if they are dead.

Good for them. I couldn't believe what it would be like to be home when armed intruders are robbing and perhaps there to kill you.

that's the reasoning IMO. people in the US shouldn't be allowed to have guns themselves. but since it is so easy to get a gun, this is the result. allowing all the population to have guns is also allowing the criminals to have guns. so there's no turning back.




THe problem is that a certain percentage of YOU THE PEOPLE end up being the ones firing the arms against innocents. If getting a gun in the US hadn't been as easy, the intruders might have not had a gun in the first place.

They deserved it smashing through a window isn't a very covert way into a robbery

Yeah then you would go to jail for manslaughter/murder in the UK.

Good for the husband and wife. I would have done the same exact thing without hesitation. Even if I knew I was going to go to prison, there would be nothing to stop me if I knew my kids were in danger.

I'd rather be in prison and my family be alive than have THIS happen, any day of the week.

Actually, we are 'allowed' to kill burglars in the UK if you have to.
Source.

For those of you who can't be bothered to read the article;

House owners in the UK are allowed to use any force they deem necessary to protect themselves and their home in a burglary situation - including killing the burglar. You aren't, however, allowed to set traps or be seeking revenge - it very much has to be a heat-of-the-moment, fearing-for-your-own-life kind of thing.

that's what astonishes me, i would never ever try to take away the gun from an armed robber while my children were in the house. just give them what they want, material goods you can replace (or they are insured anyway) but not your children.

I laugh whenever I see this argument. Drugs are illegal, but yet they are still obtainable. Taking away the right to bear arms only insures two things.

1. The criminals will be the only ones who have guns
2. The prices of guns will skyrocket.

good for them.

Got a rifle near my bed
(for defending, since my dad is a drug dealer.
and from 12 year old we can have own rifles "hunters only")
no need licence. just animal "killing" licence.
Greenland only

<snipped> Got OWNED!!! (Who charges a guy with a shotgun pointed at you?!?!