Armed homeowner stops 3 early morning (armed) intruders

[Bold Lib]

Police say that three armed men broke into an Alexandria, LA home around 4:30AM, intending to rob the occupants. The homeowner reportedly grabbed his gun and fired in self defense, striking two of the intruders and causing the trio to flee. One suspected intruder is said to have died from his wounds, police say. The two suspected accomplices, one of whom was himself shot as well, each face 2nd degree murder charges, under the felony murder rule, for the death of their alleged accomplice, according to news reports.

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDefense-Examiner~y2010m8d5-Armed-homeowner-stops-3-early-morning-intruders


And there are some on this forum that would insist that this home owner be made defenseless.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bold Lib]

6. You'd be wrong, and wrong again.

[Vinnie From Indy]

2. Really?

And, I guess there are some on this forum that will post stories like this and then claim that there "some" that would want "this" homeowner be made defenseless without naming a SINGLE poster with that view. In addition, there are some on this forum that approach issues like this exactly like a twelve year old that thinks they are being clever.

Cheers!

[TPaine7]

3. Naming a poster with that view would violate the rules and get the thread locked. n/t

[Vinnie From Indy]

5. Hardly!

If a poster has expressed an opinion on this subject, there is absolutely nothing inappropriate or against the rules by posting that opinion and naming the poster. What IS against the rules is calling others names or other forms of harrassment etc. Simply offering the written opinions of others that appear here is not.

[Bold Lib]

7. The previous poster is correct. It would be considered "calling out" a

D.U. member and is expressly forbidden.

[Vinnie From Indy]

10. I am slightly amused at your understanding of what DU is.

This place, by its very nature, is a debate forum where posters identify their opinions with handles like Bold Lib or Vinnie From Indy. Now, if I or anyone else expresses an opinion on a thread it is NOT against the rules for any DU'er to offer the Bold Lib wrote this or Vinnie From Indy wrote that in a post. This really is not rocket science and I am shocked at your position in regard to posting the opinions/quotes of others here by name.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. Please see post #1

[Bold Lib]

13. I really do not care about your lack of understanding DU rules so I'm

confused as to why you are posting on this subject. It is obvious that you have not seen such posts deleted as I have. Perhaps you should read up on the D.U. rules on civility.

[Vinnie From Indy]

15. Fair enough!

In the spirit of civility, maybe you could simply post the link to a previous thread here on DU where posters indicate that this man should not have been allowed to defend himself with a firearm in the situation described in the OP. Short of that, I would politely offer that you are simply making shit up and your observation is fantasy. Cheers!

[Bold Lib]

16. Ha Ha Ha. funny post. I caught that irony, even if you did not.

[TPaine7]

9. For your edification

Do not "stalk" another member from one discussion thread to another. Do not follow someone into another thread to try to continue a disagreement you had elsewhere. Do not talk negatively about an individual in a thread where they are not participating. Do not post messages with the purpose of "calling out" another member or picking a fight with another member. Do not use your signature line to draw negative attention to another member of the board.

link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

[TheCowsCameHome]

17. Nice idea, if only it was enforced.

[Bold Lib]

4. Yep, really. Maybe you don't open them. Some

just turn a blind eye and make childish remarks.

[Vinnie From Indy]

8. WTF does that mean?

It appears that you posted this solely to make the accusation that there are some here that would deny "this" homeowner the right of self-defense with a legal firearm against ARMED intruders in house late at night. I challenged you to offer some sort of evidence that your assertion is true. You have not and I doubt you could. I will leave it to the fair-minded readers to determine for themselves the merit and honesty of your OP.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. There are enough examples of that here to be self evident

I would name names, but we all know the penalty for that.

[Bold Lib]

14. And I would challenge you to show me exactly

where or why I should give a rats behind about your challenge? I really don't care - you obviously don't know enough about the subject so if YOU care so much I suggest you peruse the gun forum a little. It won't take long. Heck, I'll even challenge you to it. Ha Ha Ha.

[safeinOhio]

18. I agree with you that there are some

perhaps 1 or 2%. Hardly enough to use as a comment on your post.

Then there are those that think anyone should be able to buy a machine gun.

Most people here think that some kind of reasonable restrictions are acceptable.

[cleanhippie]

24. And therein lies the problem....

What may be reasonable to you is oppressive to another.

[Bold Lib]

28. See post number 21. See, there are numerous examples right here

at D.U. of people advocating civilian disarmament. I do not see any examples of anyone advocating "anyone should be able to buy a machine gun." Such claims seem to be made by those that favor strict gun control to try and call for "compromise" when wanting another new gun control law. You do realize though, that the M-16 was used as an example in Heller as to what would be an acceptable rifle for the militia don't you?

[shadowrider]

21. I can think of a minimum of 9 posters who would have

preferred this homeowner be unarmed in this exact situation. I can't name names but if you read threads regarding defensive uses of firearms, you'll find them.

[cleanhippie]

23. .

self-delete

[Endangered Specie]

19. Pretty amazing that the homeowner (victim) survived a 3 againt 1

attack... and gun grabbers wonder why we insist on standard capacity magazines.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. Knowledge of the terrain helps

Every time some like that happened to us, that was critical to winning the scrum

[Bold Lib]

29. Yep, another meme should to not be true. Two actually.

1) if you have a gun the bad guy will just take it from you.
2) you cannot defend against more than one person with a gun
3) no way you can beat a bad guy to the shot if his gun is already drawn.

Ok, that was three memes.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

25. You are right!

Everyone should take better measures to secure their home. At the same time, if criminals knew there was a very good chance that they would be shot breaking into someones home, that would be huge deterrent as well.

[spin]

26. While I agree, if all else fails a firearm is a good self defense weapon ...

In most cases your advise will stop an intruder or at least buy enough time for the police to arrive.

If he continues to break in and manages of overcome all your safety measures and you shoot him, there will be very few questions as to why you felt it necessary.

Shooting another person should be reserved for those occasions in which there is no other choice to stop his attack.

[benEzra]

27. They're not mutually exclusive. (n/t)

[Bold Lib]

30. Bottom line. If a person doesn't want the chance of being shot - Don't break into peoples homes.

All the other stuff is argumentative. Should you do those things? I have but why do I, or anyone else, have an obligation to do so? The criminal is the problem. It may be too bold a thing for some to conceptualize, but the criminal activity is what causes the legal lethal response.

This guy had multiple layers of security yet still had to resort to a firearm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uw-0nfVC2Rk

[safeinOhio]

31. If you don't want to own a gun

just look at Dog the Bounty Hunter. Goes after armed bail jumpers armed with only a 32 oz party size can of bear spray.


My problem with post like this one is there seems to be a cheering section on this forum when the bad guy gets what's coming to him. On the other hand there are some that cheer when there is a story that goes the other way.

I'd like to see most if not all news stories carry more information. Where the gun came from or traced back the ownership of all illegally used handguns. What type of security, if any did the victim have? Perhaps a professional opinion on how the crime may have been prevented in the first place.

[Bold Lib]

32. I suggest you pick up a couple of books by Massad Ayoob.

He has a couple of books that are nothing but case studies of self defense shootings. He breaks them down with the kind of information you are asking. The problem with those questions is that they cannot be answered quickly, hence they don't make it into a story that is "just breaking". You also run into reporters that do not know enough about the issue to ask the right questions - assuming that correct answerers would be given. It takes an in depth analysis and time to pull all the information together. Ayoob has done this professionally for some time now. You may be surprised about some of the incidents that he goes into.