Mother defends kids, shoots intruder

[seta-san]

Seriously?

Cops give multiple warnings before they open fire on someone, you cant just empty your magazine just because someone has broken into your house with a crowbar.

I would pull a gun, give him a warning, if he moved anywhere apart from backwards I would try and shoot them somewhere non-vital. I know its easy to say not being in that situation but you can't just shoot someone in the face 5 times then claim self defence.

Shocking how gung-ho pro-gunners are, looking for any excuse to pull the trigger.

cops have extensive training and backup and bullet proof vests. They are paid to put their lives on the line. This woman is a citizen with children in the house. It's not even nearly the same situation. Shoot to kill is the best solution.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

no. you still shoot even when they run. They don't get a pass simply because they realize you have a gun. all that means is that they survive to intrude into people's homes whom don't have guns. This is a happy story of heroism.

Disagree. As soon as someone tries to flee it becomes less about self-defence and more about vigilante-ism. It's not your place to make the assumption that they'll break into more homes nor your job to stop them from doing so. If they were a first time burglar then coming face to face with a gun might put them off for life. See how these what ifs work?

[KingCracker]

I don't agree that you shoot even if they run, in some states like CA you do that and you're facing prison time. However, if the person just killed your kids or raped them and they take off running, i'd shoot.

[Silpheed2K]

Why do people always think they are smart when they can come up with a couple of cities that tried more restrictive gun laws?

It doesn't work if you can just cross the border with no checkpoints, and get to the guns that are illegal in your city or state.

It needs to be a country wide regulation.

Is that so hard to understand or are you just trying to be thick?

It's funny how you think you can just walk into the US without going through any security or trouble. You make it sound easy and lax.

Yet every anti-gun person denies every piece of factual evidence provided to them and still tries to say their argument has credibility. Who's actually being thick in the head? It certainly isn't the pro-gun people in this thread. Gun control is proven to not work, yet you still suggest escalating the situation.

Time and time again I provide proven facts and the anti-gun people deny or ignore them. Every reason presented by them is based on an unfounded and uneducated fear of guns; and they've provided no proof to add validity to their fears or outrageous arguments/statistics. It's quite idiotic to jump in an issue and suggest a serious course of action without being educated on the topic you're talking about. Especially when you want to take away other peoples rights or when it doesn't even involve your culture or country.

I stopped replying a while ago, when the idiocy in this thread reached ridiculous levels. It's obvious I'm talking to people who don't want to be educated on the issue. Instead they'd rather remain ignorant of the truth.

[seta-san]

Every year in America roughly 10,000 people are murdered with Guns, In the UK 20, in places like Japan even less. So yes I'd say it works. You act like the American Government is just waiting to commit Genocide, and a few people with guns are the only thing stopping them.

There's a difference between places like the U.S. and places like the U.K. and Japan. The U.S. has a southern boarder where there is a huge gang war that is spilling over into our country bringing in a lot of guns, drugs, and violence. Japan and the U.K. on the other hand are islands that can actually reasonably control whom and what comes into their countries. You look at the illegal immigration in japan and compare it to the U.S. and you realize that the difference is obscenely huge. They actually do control their borders.

Disagree. As soon as someone tries to flee it becomes less about self-defence and more about vigilante-ism. It's not your place to make the assumption that they'll break into more homes nor your job to stop them from doing so. If they were a first time burglar then coming face to face with a gun might put them off for life. See how these what ifs work?

no, my assumption is that he's either going for back up, a gun of his own, or will simply be back later. Death is the correct response to these people. Breaking into someones house should be considered agreeing to die. It's the only form of legalized assisted suicide.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

I don't agree that you shoot even if they run, in some states like CA you do that and you're facing prison time. However, if the person just killed your kids or raped them and they take off running, i'd shoot.

Agreed in those circumstances.

Read this story as its very relevant here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/20/appeal-court-frees-man-burglar-attack

Man got sent to prison after attacking an armed burglar who fled his home after tying up his family and holding them at knife point. He was released from prison on appeal. There was a massive amount of public outcry over his jailing.

no, my assumption is that he's either going for back up, a gun of his own, or will simply be back later. Death is the correct response to these people. Breaking into someones house should be considered agreeing to die. It's the only form of legalized assisted suicide.

If he had a gun of his own don't you think he'd bring it in in the first place?

The other two are wild guesses.

Your point is not a good one I'm afraid. :(

[seta-san]

Agreed in those circumstances.

Read this story as its very relevant here:

http://www.guardian....-burglar-attack

Man got sent to prison after attacking an armed burglar who fled his home after tying up his family and holding them at knife point. He was released from prison on appeal. There was a massive amount of public outcry over his jailing.

If he had a gun of his own don't you think he'd bring it in in the first place?

The other two are wild guesses.

Your point is not a good one I'm afraid. :(

my point is that the other guy can make his point after he recovers from a slight case of death. Until then, we'll just have to go with my version of things.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

my point is that the other guy can make his point after he recovers from a slight case of death. Until then, we'll just have to go with my version of things.

I hope the law in whichever part of the world you live in agrees with your viewpoint. Many jurisdictions don't. Otherwise you might find yourself facing life imprisonment.

[shakey]

It's funny how you think you can just walk into the US without going through any security or trouble. You make it sound easy and lax.

Yet every anti-gun person denies every piece of factual evidence provided to them and still tries to say their argument has credibility. Who's actually being thick in the head? It certainly isn't the pro-gun people in this thread. Gun control is proven to not work, yet you still suggest escalating the situation.

Time and time again I provide proven facts and the anti-gun people deny or ignore them. Every reason presented by them is based on an unfounded and uneducated fear of guns; and they've provided no proof to add validity to their fears or outrageous arguments/statistics. It's quite idiotic to jump in an issue and suggest a serious course of action without being educated on the topic you're talking about. Especially when you want to take away other peoples rights or when it doesn't even involve your culture or country.

I stopped replying a while ago, when the idiocy in this thread reached ridiculous levels. It's obvious I'm talking to people who don't want to be educated on the issue. Instead they'd rather remain ignorant of the truth.

Our fear is people who shouldn't have guns having them and killing people... Your fear is people who shouldn't have guns having them and killing people... Same fear. Ignorance is something you should look up, because you display a lot of it. If we are both scared of the same thing, probably best to regulate that thing we are all scared of...... but it's way easier though to regulate guns than it is people, so I say regulate guns.

All this chicken I'm smelling in here though is making me hungry.

And again, it's not a proven fact if you have no proof to back it up.

[seta-san]

I hope the law in whichever part of the world you live in agrees with your viewpoint. Many jurisdictions don't. Otherwise you might find yourself facing life imprisonment.

our police recommends to unload everything you have until you can be assured that you have neutralized the threat.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

our police recommends to unload everything you have until you can be assured that you have neutralized the threat.

See I'm confused as to how somebody running away is a threat, but that's just me.

[seta-san]

See I'm confused as to how somebody running away is a threat, but that's just me.

They are no longer a threat when they are out of range.

[KingCracker]

I'm not sure if my jurisdiction allows it or not but me personally I wouldn't if the guy is 50+ yards and running off to me that's not self defense. Again it all depends if he just killed or raped your family then that's a totally different story.

[F_C]

"The Loganville mother of two assumed the knocks on her front door Friday afternoon were from a solicitor.

?Don?t answer,? she yelled to her 9-year-old twins playing downstairs.

When the visitor began repeatedly ringing the doorbell, she called her husband at work.

?Get the kids and hide,? he told his wife."

I don't understand why you would have that reaction if you thought it was a solicitor at the door?

[dvb2000]

I can't be the only person who thinks it's wrong to just kill someone because they broke into your home?

Well first of all he wasn't killed, but even if he was, then I would not penalise the woman in any way. Any burglar who breaks into a house, deserves anything he gets, one armed with a crowbar even more so.

Different story about having guns, this was INSIDE their own home. There should be a law that says, anyone who violates that deserves to be shot.

As for your assertion, that he didn't know anyone was there, I say rubbish! The kids downstairs were screaming and yelling and asked if they should open the door, and the mother yelled back NOT to open the door. He would certainly have heard that!

[Rohdekill]

"The Loganville mother of two assumed the knocks on her front door Friday afternoon were from a solicitor.

?Don?t answer,? she yelled to her 9-year-old twins playing downstairs.

When the visitor began repeatedly ringing the doorbell, she called her husband at work.

?Get the kids and hide,? he told his wife."

I don't understand why you would have that reaction if you thought it was a solicitor at the door?

You have a lot of solicitors that continuously knock or ring the doorbell? At most, I've ever had was someone ringing my doorbell twice. A person without bad intention would realize no one is home or answering and then leave.

It is only logical, especially in a house with kids, that some type of sound or voices could be heard by the person outside and they continued to ring/knock - knowing full well someone was in the house and not willing to answer. Anyone meaning no harm would simply leave.

[seta-san]

Well first of all he wasn't killed, but even if he was, then I would not penalise the woman in any way. Any burglar who breaks into a house, deserves anything he gets, one armed with a crowbar even more so.

Different story about having guns, this was INSIDE their own home. There should be a law that says, anyone who violates that deserves to be shot.

As for your assertion, that he didn't know anyone was there, I say rubbish! The kids downstairs were screaming and yelling and asked if they should open the door, and the mother yelled back NOT to open the door. He would certainly have heard that!

i hope he was left with brain damage

[F_C]

You have a lot of solicitors that continuously knock or ring the doorbell?

According to the article even the first time someone knocked on their door she was screaming at her children not to answer.

Though I have never had a solicitor knock at my door nor have I ever expected one, so I have no idea if this is the norm or not! ;)

[Rippleman]

i wonder, had she answered the door (under no obligation to do so) had the whole thing been averted with the Robber simply knowing the house was not empty. Hate that the kids went through the traumatic event. target houses for thieves are "no one home" houses.

[ncoday]

I can't be the only person who thinks it's wrong to just kill someone because they broke into your home?

He didn't just break into her home. He also endangered the safety of those inside.

Look at this article where the criminals who broke into someone's house also murdered and raped the mother and her daughters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders

[necroxd]

Why do people always think they are smart when they can come up with a couple of cities that tried more restrictive gun laws?

It doesn't work if you can just cross the border with no checkpoints, and get to the guns that are illegal in your city or state.

It needs to be a country wide regulation.

Is that so hard to understand or are you just trying to be thick?

Well son analyzing your own comment would tell us that there's no point. You said it yourself what's the point of gun control if people are just gonna smuggle them in. See apparently you don't want gun control you want guns gone from the whole world. I guess the US is full of warmongerers and savages since you keep dismissing arguments about cities with strict gun control having the highest crime rate. Ok youngin you want a country, Australia.

[DocM]

our police recommends to unload everything you have until you can be assured that you have neutralized the threat.

That's what our police commissioner and carry permit & combat tactics trainers told us, plus in Michigan we can shoot a fleeing felony suspect. Now, once they're down and not a threat you can't perform a coup de gras, but if they then reach for a weapon it's Round Two.

[necroxd]

That's what our police commissioner and carry permit & combat tactics trainers told us, plus in Michigan we can shoot a fleeing felony suspect.

Here in Texas we have the fleeing felon law. We are allowed to shoot aslong as they have committed a felony or greater.

[Dane]

He didn't just break into her home. He also endangered the safety of those inside.

Look at this article where the criminals who broke into someone's house also murdered and raped the mother and her daughters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders

Don't bring that up. It goes against their bull**** agenda. That can't happen! I remember that story.

[Stoffel]

Well son analyzing your own comment would tell us that there's no point. You said it yourself what's the point of gun control if people are just gonna smuggle them in. See apparently you don't want gun control you want guns gone from the whole world. I guess the US is full of warmongerers and savages since you keep dismissing arguments about cities with strict gun control having the highest crime rate. Ok youngin you want a country, Australia.

I'm not even for a total ban on guns. I do feel there need to be more control on who has what.

I also don't think what the woman did is wrong at all, the 5 shots do seem excessive but I can see that being more of a reaction then blood thirst.

But I can't believe you don't see the difference between a couple of cities in a country banning guns and the whole country banning them.

If they would go that route they obviously have to work on stricter border control with Mexico and Canada