stories about people protecting themselves and others with guns

lifegoesonbrah

Well-Known Member
The MSM ignores the other side of the story:

Homeowner halts crime spree, WAFB, Baton Rouge, La. January 18, 2013
Jeffersonville, Ind. homeowner Mike Dreyer was allowing his ex-wife to stay in a storage building on his property, when two burglars attempted to break into the shed. The ex-wife was inside when the thieves struck at 4:30 a.m., and used her cell phone to alert Dreyer, who was across the property in his home, to the threat. Dreyer retrieved a gun, came out of the house and confronted the criminals. Upon seeing the gun, one of the thieves dropped to the ground, while the other fled over a fence. After a brief standoff with the criminal who had jumped the fence, Dyer managed to call the police and hold the remaining burglar at gunpoint until they arrived. Clark County Chief Deputy Prosecutor Jeremy Mull told media that the captured criminal and his partner were on a crime spree before reaching Dreyer’s property. Mull went on to alert burglars to the dangers of their behavior, warning that “many more homeowners are now armed.”

Armed Citizen halts car theft, KENS, San Antonio, Texas 01/15/12
A man was visiting family inside a home in San Antonio, Texas, when he overheard a pair of thieves attempting to steal his SUV that was parked outside. The SUV owner retrieved a gun, went to confront the criminals, and fired after seeing one of the thieves holding what looked like a gun. The SUV owner’s shots struck both men. One of the wounded criminals attempted to flee in a getaway car, but crashed into a parked vehicle after making it only a block. Once police arrived on the scene, they discovered one of the thieves to be dead and took the other to a local hospital. Police noted that the SUV owner is not expected to face charges.

Father protects infant son from violent attack, The Columbus Dispatch, Columbus, Ohio 01/08/12
After pulling into the driveway of his brother’s home in Columbus, Ohio, Kelby Smith removed his 2-month-old son, still in his car seat, from the vehicle. While still in the driveway, an armed robber approached Smith and demanded money, prompting Smith to kneel down to shield his son. Smith, a Right-to-Carry permit holder, handed the man a small amount of money then drew a pistol, at which point the criminal retreated. But during his escape, the robber turned and pointed his gun at Smith, prompting Smith to shoot the criminal. Police captured the wounded robber a short time later after he sought medical treatment at a local hospital. Smith and his son were not harmed during the incident and police have not charged the armed citizen.
Mother of two protects children from home invader, The Atlanta Journal Constitution, Atlanta, Ga. 01/04/13
A mother of two was home with her children in Loganville, Ga. when she heard a repeated knocking at the door. Concerned, the mother called her husband, who told her to “get the kids and hide.” The mother complied, retrieving a gun and taking her children to a crawlspace. By the time they were hidden, the criminal who had been knocking at the door had made it inside the house and was making his way towards the closet where the family was hiding. The home invader opened the crawlspace door, at which point the mother fired six shots from a .38-caliber revolver, striking the criminal five times. The mother kept the revolver trained on the home invader as he exited the house. Once outside, the criminal tried to flee in his vehicle, but only made it a short distance before he was captured by police. Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman commented that “When you got five bullets in you, it makes you kind of disoriented.” The proud husband praised his wife following the incident, stating, “My wife’s a hero… She protected her kids. She did what she was supposed to do.”

source and more:

http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx
 
I have seen groups of stories where the lack of a seatbelt saved the lives of passengers or drivers in their car. They were thrown free, or they managed to escape a submerged auto.

It is one thing to marvel at these stories, quite another to use them as some sort of reasoning for a heavily armed population.
 
For every justifiable homicide you can find, I will find 3 accidental gun deaths.

OK.

1240 British sailors and 1200 Germans KIA during the revolutionary war during invasion on America is a good start. Find me 7320 accidental gun deaths then we will move to the next.
 
ACCDTHRT.png
 
It is one thing to marvel at these stories, quite another to use them as some sort of reasoning for a heavily armed population.

Lol - %.000000001 of the population gets killed in a school shooting and Obama rushes to limit magazine size.

Seems like basing policy around freak occurrences is the norm.
 
[TABLE="class: yiv1024531657ecxMsoNormalTable"]
[TR]
[TD] Just a Shotgun




[TABLE="class: yiv1024531657ecxMsoNormalTable"]
[TR]
[TD]You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.

At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.

In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.

One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.. Yours was never registered.

Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.

When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing.
"Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them..

Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.

But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters..

As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars. A few months later, you go to trial.

The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you.. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.

It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.

In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term...

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.

This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license.
The
Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns..

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.


Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerfordmass shooting in 1987.

Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions.
(The
seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals.
Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners.
Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns.
The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearm’s still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism.
Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun.
Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,
"We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times,
and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences.
Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.

Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law.
The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.

Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns?
The guns had been registered and licensed.
Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

"...It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
Lol - %.000000001 of the population gets killed in a school shooting and Obama rushes to limit magazine size.

Seems like basing policy around freak occurrences is the norm.


Good point. We go overboard over the little things and ignore the big things. Hundreds of thousands of children get diabetes but someone limiting the size of sugary drinks is made fun of (sort of a magazine limit for sucrose?). 3000 people die in a freak situation where a group of cave dwellers manage to fly airplanes into buildings and we enter into a war in a country other than where the caves are. And now this - a couple of children get shot and we are all ready to bring out the ultimate in misdirection - limit a man's ability to pull the trigger of his weapon continuously until he must do something else in order to continue fireing.

We are foolish people.
 
I have guns, i have a carry permit for them also. Id rather have a gun and not need it than need it and not have it. That being said, I have absolutly no idea why there is so many posts about guns on a growing site. Ive read numerous court cases where legal marijuana growers were charged because police found guns in or near the growing area. Guns only make you look like more of a criminal in the courts eyes even if you are legal. Its just another piece of evidence for the prosecution. Food for thought.... :):):)
 



D.C. police are investigating whether a man will face criminal charges for shooting a pit bull that was attacking a child in his neighborhood.
The incident unfolded Sunday afternoon, after three pit bulls attacked an 11-year-old boy as he rode his bicycle through the Brightwood neighborhood of Northwest, according to a police report.
When the man, a neighbor, saw the boy being mauled by the dogs, he went inside his home and got a gun. The man killed one of the dogs. The gunfire attracted the attention of a police officer in the area near Eighth and Sheridan streets, where the attack occurred. The officer responded and shot the other two pit bulls as they continued to attack the boy.
The police report, which did not identify any of the people involved, said the boy suffered severe lacerations. The Washington Post, which first reported the details of the shooting, quoted the boy’s uncle as saying the boy was also shot in the foot.
Metropolitan Police Department spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump said Wednesday that the entire case, including whether the man legally owned the gun he used to kill the dog, is under investigation.
While public opinion might be supportive of the man’s actions, he could still face significant charges depending on the outcome of the investigation, criminal defense attorney Daniel Gross said.
“I’ve seen cases where people used weapons in defense of others, but the U.S. attorney’s office is not always so understanding,” said Mr. Gross, who represents many clients charged with firearms-related crimes in the District. “There are certain defenses one could try, like self-defense or defense of others, but that wouldn’t really go to whether they charge you.”
The man could face a host of charges depending on the specifics of the case, including whether the gun used is a registered firearm that the man was legally permitted to own, Mr. Gross said. Possession of an unregistered firearm or ammunition is punishable by up to one year in prison and a $1,000 fine, and determining whether the man legally possessed the gun used will likely have greater bearing on the way the case is handled, Mr. Gross said.
Low-level unregistered firearms and ammunitions charges generally are prosecuted by the D.C. office of the attorney general, but additional charges could mean the case is bumped up to the U.S. attorney’s office.
“In this case, it would likely be the U.S. attorney’s office, and their discretion is sometimes less than local prosecutors,” Mr. Gross said.
Also to be taken into consideration is whether the man was within his property line when he fired the weapon — a small but significant distinction. Mr. Gross said it could mean the difference in whether he could be charged with carrying a pistol without a license.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

prod
 
Good point. We go overboard over the little things and ignore the big things. Hundreds of thousands of children get diabetes but someone limiting the size of sugary drinks is made fun of (sort of a magazine limit for sucrose?). 3000 people die in a freak situation where a group of cave dwellers manage to fly airplanes into buildings and we enter into a war in a country other than where the caves are. And now this - a couple of children get shot and we are all ready to bring out the ultimate in misdirection - limit a man's ability to pull the trigger of his weapon continuously until he must do something else in order to continue fireing.

We are foolish people.


I think most people are smart enough not to give their children 44oz colas.
 
[TABLE="class: yiv1024531657ecxMsoNormalTable"]
[TR]
[TD] Just a Shotgun




[TABLE="class: yiv1024531657ecxMsoNormalTable"]
[TR]
[TD]You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.

At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.

In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.

One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.. Yours was never registered.

Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.

When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing.
"Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them..

Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.

But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters..

As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars. A few months later, you go to trial.

The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you.. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.

It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second.

In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term...

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.

This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license.
The
Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns..

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.


Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerfordmass shooting in 1987.

Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions.
(The
seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals.
Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners.
Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns.
The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearm’s still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism.
Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun.
Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,
"We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times,
and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences.
Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities.

Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law.
The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.

Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns?
The guns had been registered and licensed.
Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

"...It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Bait and switch - England is not America. this "it could happen to you" rings hollow. The culture is different, the underlying laws are different, the history is different. It no longer matters why the founding fathers put the 2nd amendment in the document, it is there.


And there is one other detail. Gun related deaths are pretty low in the U.K. one wonders if it is worth a few tony martins (life in prison is one thing, we tend to simply put criminals to death here - I figure over all - they are a bit more civil than we). to keep our gun death rate totals below a hundred a year.

Of course I am sure you will disagree with that statement. Tell me, what IS your right to keep and bear worth in human lives?
 
Bait and switch - England is not America. this "it could happen to you" rings hollow. The culture is different, the underlying laws are different, the history is different. It no longer matters why the founding fathers put the 2nd amendment in the document, it is there.


And there is one other detail. Gun related deaths are pretty low in the U.K. one wonders if it is worth a few tony martins (life in prison is one thing, we tend to simply put criminals to death here - I figure over all - they are a bit more civil than we). to keep our gun death rate totals below a hundred a year.

Of course I am sure you will disagree with that statement. Tell me, what IS your right to keep and bear worth in human lives?


Not worth a higher violent crime rate like the UK, thats for sure.
 
I have guns, i have a carry permit for them also. Id rather have a gun and not need it than need it and not have it. That being said, I have absolutly no idea why there is so many posts about guns on a growing site. Ive read numerous court cases where legal marijuana growers were charged because police found guns in or near the growing area. Guns only make you look like more of a criminal in the courts eyes even if you are legal. Its just another piece of evidence for the prosecution. Food for thought.... :):):)


THose laws are just one more way for the gun grabbing government to slowly erode our 2nd amendment rights. First it was an additional manditory sentence for finding guns in a crack house, then it was for finding guns in places where there was marijuana (even though the drug is well known for its passive users).

What next? Guns found with houses containing significant amounts of sugar? Guns found next to cans of crisco?
 
Back
Top