NRA's answer: armed guards in schools

[DemonDelight]

PUBLISHED: 10:50 EST, 6 January 2013 | UPDATED: 10:59 EST, 6 January 2013


Unidentified woman fired all six rounds, missing only once

A would-be burglar was looking to cash in, but instead found himself in a world of pain when a Georgia mother, who refused to be victimized, shot him multiple times in the face and neck. Suspect Paul Ali Slater was found bleeding heavily in nearby driveway after crashing his car


The  woman, who was not identified, was in the home with her 9-year-old twins on Friday afternoon, when someone began ringing the doorbell. Thinking it was just a door-to-door salesperson, she didn't answer.

But after the ringing persisted, the person began prying the door open with a crowbar.
She quickly retreated to an attic crawlspace with the children, but not before she also picked up her handgun.

The burglar,did a room-by-room search of the home, and when he reached the attic, she was ready.The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he’s staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver.' She reportedly fired all six rounds, missing only once. The other shots hit Slater about the face and neck.

Busted: The suspect was identified as Paul Ali Slater - who has a long rap sheet and was recently released from prison

Sheriff Chapman told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 'The guy’s face down, crying. The woman told him to stay down or she’d shoot again.'Slater did eventually get up and managed to return to his vehicle that was parked outside the home, but his injuries left him unable to drive, and it wasn't long before he crashed into a wooded area. He was found by sheriff's deputies, bleeding heavily in a driveway on the block.

He was pleading with his deputies, saying: 'I'm dying. Help me.

'He was carted off to Gwinnet Medical Center for treatment of the gunshot wounds, and he is expected to survive. Slater has a long criminal history and was released from prison in August.

The woman's husband, Donnie Herman, is just glad his wife and kids are safe.
Mr Herman told WSBTV: 'My wife is a hero. She protected her kids. She did what she was supposed to do as a responsible, prepared gun owner.'

'NOUGH FUCKING SAID

Janus

Agreed!!!

[Janus]

Did you even read the article?

Apparently not   

If you are prying open doors and searching houses what the fuck do you think? Searched every room in the house? Gimme a fucking break. They went to the last place in the house for protection. The attic crawl space. What was she to do? How would she know what his intentions were? 

You are going to say Poor guy?

Did he not have this coming to him for breaking in to the family dwelling?

Janus

[Grm]

I think the mother was reckless, what if the burglar had also been armed and started shooting back? Those kids would have been in the firing line and maybe she and her kids would be dead now, she was very fortunate.

[Janus]

I think he is fortunate that he isn't dead.

The Mother was reckless that she hid with her children giving the intruder ample opportunity to leave the house? He didn't he had to go everywhere in the house. It is a huge violation of a personal space.

How did she put her kids in harms way? She didn't break into his house. If he had not have done what he did, he would be around to break into another's home.

Janus

[horny guy]

Janus

Agree with you totally. She did great. Still wonder how she put 5 rounds in him and he was able to survive. I would have placed 1 round correctly. The terrible thing is.. society will protect the criminal and try to fault the innocent one.

And I try to stay out of these ploitical topics too.

[Janus]

This poor woman was scared out of her wits. She didn't aim. She was freaked the fuck out. I can't blame her for missing his brainpan. I feel bad for the kids getting violated by this EX-CON.

Having to see theri mom protect them. Scary shit.

Janus

[horny guy]

So... What you are saying is.. the way she should have handled it would be like. Hello sir, do you have a gun, do you plan on hurting my kids or I? Please feel free to break into my house, take anything you want and ill make you a sandwich with milk before you go.

Be real. He was wrong for breaking and entering. What do you really think would have happened as he was just released and she could identify him thus locking him back up.

I applaud the woman

[Janus]

The article doesn't say she didn't call 911. The cops would have taken a long time to get there. She had no other option but to pull the trigger. He should not have been there in the first place. It's his own damn fault.

I don't see your logic here GB. Not at all.

She should have reloaded and finished the job.

Janus

[horny guy]

Definately reload. No question about it. Apparently she did change his mind about the importance of him being in her house uninvited

[TinyDancer]

Seems like it would have been faster to retreat out the back door than go all the way up to the attic. 

She acted foolishly, he could have had a gun also.  Not to mention the terror her twins must have felt seeing a man get shot that many times.

[Janus]

This was her safe place. It's her home. He violated her and her kids.

I know you better than that TinyDancer. It ain't like you don't have a piece in case of an intruder. Don't even go there.

Janus

[TinyDancer]

Janus, I live in an armed household, but I do believe that better gun control is needed.

In this instance I think this woman acted foolishly, putting both herself and her children in needless danger.  Much safer to be out of the house than trapped in an attic.  She had ample time to leave out a back door.

[horny guy]

Td

That would have been an option to leave out the back if she thought it was safe. After all... They might have been trying to get in that way as well. The kids already would have been affected by the idea of someone breaking into their home. I think the mom gave more than enough leeway by going to the far edges of the house first. If they were just thieves they wouldn't have searched that far. In my opinion, since he did go as far as looking in the attic, he wasn't there for just the tv set.  I believe, the way this turned out for him, he may not try about breaking into a home again, thus, saving more families from hurt or trauma.

[Janus]

Janus, I live in an armed household, but I do believe that better gun control is needed.

Yes she should have taken better aim. Her house is her safe haven. She should have stood her ground. She did what should have been done. She was in a panic. He was breaking into her house. She only thought of hiding. IN HER HOME where we are supposed to feel safe. It takes about 3seconds to break in. Tell me you would think clearly. How did she know that there wasn't somone else outside. She didn't. She did the right thing. She protected her kids.

Janus

[horny guy]

Deterrent was administered correctly. She avoided the conflict as far as she safely could have. If he did ha e a gun like the conversations always seem to mention.. than it would definately  be in her best interest to keep the element of surprise in her favor.

Why is it more socially acceptable for victims to be hurt or killed than it is for a criminal to be hurt or killed by people defending themselves or family.

[DemonDelight]

We don't know what we would have done in her situation. If my kids were upstairs, I would run up to get them and I would hide. I can't imagine I'd feel safe enough to try and exit my house knowing he is downstairs. I mean come on, who looks in the attic unless you are looking for the person(s) that live there.

Better gun control would be nice, but I honestly can't say I wouldn't have done the same damn thing. I don't think she put her kids in danger, just the opposite. Maybe now that guy will think twice before breaking into someone's home. He was the dumbass who had to search every room on the house. He was looking for trouble and he found it. He got what he deserved.

[MissBarbara]

THIS IS JUST AN ARTICLE I COPIED AND PASTED. I thought it would shed light on my stance about gun control. I just don't trust the Government.

I know there is a History Buff around here somewhere, so maybe it can be researched....?

Well, it's not an article, it's an opinion piece. And a very slanted one (and, I might add, a very poorly written one). And I recognize these are someone else's words, and not your own, but since you equated your personal views with those of this writer, I think I can safely assume that you agree with what he says here.

Perhaps I'm being selfishly presumptuous in assuming that I am the "History Buff" you refer to. But you don't need a history buff. You need an expert at finding and analyzing statistics. And I know there's at least one board member who's an expert at that. 

But I am a sufficiently critical reader to note that this piece is loaded with baseless and invalid comparisons, namely:

1) Comparing Soviet Russia in the 1940s and the U.S. today
2) Comparing the situation in the early 1780s when the Second Amendment was written and the situation in the U.S. 230 years later
3) Comparing other types of violent deaths with gun deaths
4) And, especially, comparing death totals, and finding some more valid than others, some better than others, some "disproving" others

One of my most hated polemical arguments is the "X was bad, but..." argument. You hear it a lot when modern-day neo-Confederates and their Conservative and Libertarian allies discuss slavery, e.g., "Slavery was a bad thing, but..."

In this instance:

"20 dead children in Newtown is certainly a tragedy, but what about the 25 children killed by our government at Waco?"

What about them? Are you arguing that the fact that five more children died at Waco mean that we should dismiss the five fewer children who died in Newtown? Or that, killing children having become some sort of norm, we should ignore what happened in Newtown, and not take a single step -- or even have a discussion -- to insure that what happened in Newtown never happens elsewhere again?

Another line that jumped out at me:

"As we all know by now, since banning most firearms, the UK has become the most violent country in Europe."

Though it strains credulity, I'll accept the accuracy of that statement. But for it to be germane to this discussion, the author would have to compare statistics between the U.K. and the U.S., and not the U.K. and the rest of Europe. (Well, he'd also have to demonstrate cause and effect between banning firearms and increased violence in the U.K., which he clearly does not.)

One final point that you have demonstrated over and over in your many posts on this topic: you remain absolutely blinkered and monolithic in your thinking. Over and above what Farmer Miles accurately describes as your "bloodlust," you fail to realize that the majority of those who favor stricter controls on the sale and possession of firearms and ammunition do not support an outright ban. Though this author (and, I assume, you) would disagree with this, there is nothing remotely incompatible (or hypocritical) with the point of view I support:

* I strongly believe that much stricter controls on the sale and purchase of both firearms and ammunition must be enacted, and at the federal level, if necessary.

* I strongly believe that those who demonstrate they can responsibly purchase, own, and maintain firearms -- and demonstrate they are trained to use them properly -- must be guaranteed the right to do so.

Imagine that! An intelligent and nuanced outlook!
 

[Athos131]

[Janus]

Janus, I live in an armed household, but I do believe that better gun control is needed.

In this instance I think this woman acted foolishly, putting both herself and her children in needless danger.  Much safer to be out of the house than trapped in an attic.  She had ample time to leave out a back door.

You live in an armed household for a reason. So by this post I am under the assumption that you would run out the other door, should an intruder break into your home. More than likely the intruder would search your house, one room at a time. Maybe he will find the guns that are in there. Then he may decide that he could use those guns to take more stuff away from other people or God forbid Injure or kill them. I know from past posts that you don't lock your guns away. At least not all of them. So you aren't a very responsible gun owner (IMO) if you aren't using the tool for HOME protection as you say they are for. You are just using your home to help a crook with a supply of guns.

If you aren't going to use the damn things, than perhaps it may be a good idea to get rid of them. That way you can't be part of the problem or part of the solution.

Janus

[Grm]

Barbara, a great post, sane, intelligent and balanced, unlike some others in this thread.
woo