Mother hiding with kids shoots intruder

reply to post by polarwarrior

That psycho bitch

Just not to have this post removed and so provoke me to post more crap about how retarded you are until I get a posting ban....

(insert imaginative and insulting remark about you belittling your intelligence and hold on reality in a condescending tone)


So you would prefer that this "poor" guy rape and kill her in front of her kids, maybe hurt them?

I swear, I know you are a troll but Jesus, well, I hope you are a troll......

Please, end your suffering......

Originally posted by xxdaniel21
Fired 6 shots? Jesus. That's a bit much. He had only broken in at that point. He wasn't coming for her or the kids.

That could have possibly killed him. Why intend on killing him when his intention is unknown. That's actually taking his life. I know that he "might" have been crazy, but repeat that word for me. "Might". Does that "maybe" warrant actually trying to kill someone?

I don't understand this logic.

She could have actually learnt how to aim a gun and possibly shot 2 shots... in the legs. The way the article describes it - it's as if she sprayed 6 shots, hoping for the best.

I'm not saying ban guns, i'm just saying ban them from people who don't know how to use them, like this idiot.

In actual fact, she's exactly the same as these psychopaths who go on shooting sprees, only her intention was defense... She still has the same "trigger happy" mindset of those that use them recklessly.

edit on 4-1-2013 by xxdaniel21 because: (no reason given)

yes its soooo easy to say when you not in the situation , come on your not doing bullet control when an unknown intruder is in YOUR HOME & your protecting YOUR KIDS !!!!! let me guess you dont have any kids........sad

reply to post by xxdaniel21

Q. Why intend on killing him when his intention is unknown

!!??

A. his intention is unknown.......

do you ever ask if you are going to be raped and killed?

He said if Slater survives the night, doctors will try to operate in the morning to repair the damage

If? Try? Interesting.

to this woman. I'd like to think that no one who breaks into my home would walk, crawl, or drive away though.

Okay, just for the sake of clarity:

The MSM has released this story with multiple "contradictions." -- The article itself - a short one, btw - has varying descriptions. The video of the newscast on the street quotes "Chapman said he was shot five times in the face and neck."

But, the article says he has four exit wounds: Both lungs, stomach, and liver punctured; was put on a ventilator. So - she aimed at his trunk. Good for her...!!!
(Must have only hit his face/neck ONCE. IF HE SURVIVED the night, they were going to try to repair the damage -- and then he would be charged with burglary.)

Also - was she in the attic? Or a crawl space? Those are opposites - a crawl space is generally UNDER a house with no basement. Perhaps it was a dormer-room closet - a triangular-shaped storage area, walled off from the attic office area?

Okay, the only reason I bring those points up is to show how the MSM cannot be counted on for accurate details.

SECOND OF ALL:
GOOD FOR HER!!

I can hardly believe my eyes that some members say "maybe he was lost." ??? "Maybe he was needing to pay for some medication for his daughter." ???
"She didn't ask any questions."

???!!!!!

No, he had BROKEN INTO HER HOME, and FOUND HER in her hidey-hole; she was on her phone with her husband the entire time...
she chose to flee while the guy was immobilized, and got herself and the kids to safety. I'd say she had great presence of mind; and anyone who is a mother would understand this. Like others have said, "You don't corner a mother and her kids...." I agree with her husband, who said she was a hero.

I know how to shoot, and in our home there are several handguns in strategic places, within easy reach if needed. I grew up with a "fear" of guns; I used to believe that "if you have one, eventually you'll need one." I don't think like that anymore.

Do you "anti-gun" people have the capacity to realize how SCARED you would be? You're going to offer the guy holding the crowbar some tea, and a friendly chat? Give him your map? REALLY?!!!!

There is NO QUESTION that an armed populace is a safer populace. NO AMOUNT OF GUN BANNING will stop the criminals from having guns.

It's ALREADY ILLEGAL for convicted offenders to own weapons; once they are out on parole or probation. Does that stop them? OF COURSE IT DOESN'T!!

There is no way that the USA will EVER be free of guns. Ever. Not going to happen. There are too many of us, and it's too easy to get a gun...
since that is the case, HAVING A GUN makes you safer! Safer from tyrannical governments or dictators; safer from wanna-be car thieves, or intruders, or people skulking around the neighborhood. Safer from known offenders who are your neighbors and who KNOW YOU HAVE A GUN.....

This post is going to be very difficult for some people because it is paradoxical. If you have difficulties with logic perhaps you should skip it....


Fair warning.

1) THat mother is my kind of person if you break into my home you will have to suffer the consequences and I refuse to take chances with your sorry ass!

Please read my opening paragraph again.

2) Given the slaughter of those children and a raft of other shootings some kind of gun control is needed. Maybe only assault weapons or rapid loaders. We just can't have another school shooting! I am terrified of certain law abiding citizens with guns because I know some of them could not hit the side of barn at 100ft!


The constitution has become holy write but HAS been changed from the original. We should all go back and read it. Like any legal or quasi legal document it represents the letter of the law and the spirit of the law..Context is everything. Taking a fundamentalist view of the constitution is idiocy!

Tiger5

Nice post. And good for that mother. Awesome job!

Personally i'm so sick and tired about these anti gun threads. In this day and age we need the right to bear arms. The tricky part is keeping them out of the hands that shouldn't have them,unfortunately the bad guys will figure out a way to get them anyway.

at one of my previous apartments I was robbed at gun point by 3 men. 2 had pistols and one a shotgun. I had no protection so all I could do was beg for my life. luckily they didn't get away with much, they didn't hurt me in any way and i'm ok. it took me a long time to get over that. alot of nightmares, panic attacks, and even sleeping in my room mates bedroom on the floor, cause I was so scared. Let's just say since then I've got myself some protection and if there ever is a next time, which I hope not, they will be on the receiving end of the gun, not me.

The problem isnt guns at home stored safely in a locked gun cabinet. The problem is guns on the streets or in the kitchen drawer.

Originally posted by Manhater
I'm surprised she shot him 5 times and he's still walking. Fool should have of never been let out in the first place. Glad her and her twins are Okay.

edit on 4-1-2013 by Manhater because: (no reason given)

I'm glad too.

It's not surprising that you would think that.

Contrary to popular belief (thanks again, Hollywood), it's much harder to kill someone by shooting them than one would think.

Most bullets tend to make smallish holes (especially handgun bullets, pipe down you .45 guys, same goes for them), thus the hole needs to be placed in a specific area or two, thoracic cavity or occular-cranial cavity, to cause enough shock trauma to drop a person, and even then it's not a guarantee.

Bullet entry is a dynamic event, bones deflect bullets,and whatnot.

reply to post by RN311


This guy in this YT vid is just an ordinary guy just like the rest of us and he sums up his feelings on the 2nd Amendment quite nicely and matter-of-factly. Well worth a watch. S+F op and my hats off to the mother for protecting herself and her kids.

I'm all for better gun controls. But there was nothing wrong with this case imo. She was fully justified in what she did, good on her. And no one knows the situation - by the time she rounded up her two kids, there may have been no place to "escape.." she may have chosen the only place she felt she would escape notice. It's not as if she came barreling into the room with the dude an shot him. She was the only thing between him and her kids. She probably reacted somewhat out of fear too. Once you start, you don't stop.

I can't believe someone would defend someone who was already in jail for battery - and broke into someone's home.. AND tried to hunt down the residents. What a dummy.. he deserved what he got.

I just wish she would have been a better shot. This guy will probably be disabled to some extent and start collecting a check along with free health care. Getcha a scatter gun girl.......12 gauge i would say.

spez

reply to post by RN311


She will likely be tried for murder, even though he was breaking into her home, she shot him 5 times. LEO's say you only need to shoot someone once (and make sure you die it right). Sad as it is, it could happen, it depends on Georgia's laws. I know here in Arkansas if you shoot an intruder more than once the prosecutors here will come after you for murder or if the intruder survives attempted murder even though they invaded your home.

reply to post by FirstCasualty


Oh Canada.Nice place ,do you speak French? What inclination possessed you to prognosticate to me what kind of society I should be in? We here all of the worlds left rants chiding and cutting us ,Only rebukes and insults.
You're a casualty alright.

reply to post by RN311


I could try and argue reason and logic but no, no matter how much you guys hate it and probably have countless conspiracies about him because he's a douche. But bowling for columbine is incredible and michael moore was right. People on here know, if they've seen my posts that I think the second amendment is outdated, and people need to change.
That was BEFORE I even watched bowling for columbine, I can't believe how bad it is over there for you guys, there's something wrong with the average gun supporters view, fair enough everyone has their own but you guys don't realise that its your government doing this to you, but not because they want your guns, hell your guns ain't s**t on theirs.
They have you in TOTAL CONTROL everyone needs to fear their own government a little bit but yours seems to thrive off this. in no other developed country are citizens in constant of invasion from foreign threats, from sudden initiation of a police state, or killer bees.
The best part for me from bowling for columbine was the news guy saying "experts say one in five Americans have some sort of mental illness, so I urge you seek help now!" Or something like that, I mean seriously?!?! I don't mean to offend any Americans here, shame on your government

But tbf, the burglar checked to see if anyone was home so I doubt he would've bothered if he saw her, sat in her living room with the kids. This would have been nothing more than a petty criminal trying to steal a TV, or some booze. And she shot him five times?!?! Sorry but morality is fu**ed over there

To keep my reply short and simple. This is why homeowners (and renters) should be armed! Peoples homes would NEVER be safe from burglars if burglars were not scared of getting shot.

This is another thing that shows why you could need more then a 10 rd mag.
She fired 6 shots hit him 5 times and the police picked him up later.
She is lucky he did not get his hands on her.
As another poster put it

THANK GOD FOR GUNS!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Wongbeedman
reply to post by RN311

 

I could try and argue reason and logic but no, no matter how much you guys hate it and probably have countless conspiracies about him because he's a douche. But bowling for columbine is incredible and michael moore was right. People on here know, if they've seen my posts that I think the second amendment is outdated, and people need to change.
That was BEFORE I even watched bowling for columbine, I can't believe how bad it is over there for you guys, there's something wrong with the average gun supporters view, fair enough everyone has their own but you guys don't realise that its your government doing this to you, but not because they want your guns, hell your guns ain't s**t on theirs.
They have you in TOTAL CONTROL everyone needs to fear their own government a little bit but yours seems to thrive off this. in no other developed country are citizens in constant of invasion from foreign threats, from sudden initiation of a police state, or killer bees.
The best part for me from bowling for columbine was the news guy saying "experts say one in five Americans have some sort of mental illness, so I urge you seek help now!" Or something like that, I mean seriously?!?! I don't mean to offend any Americans here, shame on your government

edit on 5-1-2013 by Wongbeedman because: (no reason given)

Just a question for you....would you say that Moore's bodyguards are armed, or unarmed?

As far as the other part of the post, that is one of the reasons the 2nd amendment is here. To defend against a tyrannical government. And you are correct when you say that our guns are not # compared to theirs. That's why it says in there "shall not be infringed". When that happens, we the people's ability to use that rigt is slowly dwindled, using this news story, that movie, etc.

Point is, if a tyrannical government was going up against an extremely armed populace, vs a populace with no guns whatsoever, which situation would you rather be in?

1st the man broke in, that in its self is reason enough to shoot him, lawfully.

2nd Where there’s a will, there’s a way.
If someone wants to kill, that person does not need a gun to do it, but a gun can be used to stop them.

The worst school killing was not committed with a gun, but with dynamite.

freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com...

frontpagemag.com...