My wife is a hero: mom shoots intruder 5 times, saves kids

[bernard75]

Really strange what different cultures consider as heroism.

[MoonShadow]

Nice response, thanks . In depth, and I think I agree with you on most things you said. I've just been wondering, wanting to get a look at what a gun-supporter's mind is thinking. I'm trying to formulate my own opinion on the matter still.

To clarify my own position, I'm not opposed to gun regulation per se; but I am opposed to efforts by anti-gun political factions attempting to impose social contraints that are presented as "sensible regulation".  For example, while the 2nd amendment most certainly does grant me the right to own & carry a weapon, that doesn't mean that I get to do so without conditions.  The CCW license movement that swept across the US during the 1990's is an excellent example of such.  I don't have to ask for permission to buy the handgun, but a formal process that notifies the police of my intent to carry concealed for my own protection is in my own interests, whether I were to call it a permit or a notice.  But the idea of people who don't understand how firearms actually work attempting to dictate the maximum number of rounds that I may have in my handgun is not "sensible regulation".  As noted, I carry a Sig Sauer Mosquito handgun, which is a medium compact framed semi-auto chambered in the very small 22 Long Rifle.  Statisticly speaking, a single shot from a 22LR isn't even lethal enough to even be considered a "lethal weapon" under the law, because less than 20% of adult single gunshot wound victims actually die, at least not from the initial trama.  (impact trama is the 'one-shot stopping power" that large caliber fans harp about)  So, should I ever get into a real firefight, I'm either going to have to be accurate enough to hit a vital organ (i.e. headshot through the eye socket, not likely under the influence of adrenaline) or I'm going to have to be able to hit my attacker several times rapidly to approximate the level of trama that a larger caliber weapon can achieve in a single shot.  Up to four when comparing a 22lr to a 45 Mag.  So artificial limitations on shot capacity only serves to favor the larger caliber handguns, is unlikely to ever have any non-negligble effect on the lethality of some crazed gunman on a rampage, which is the official reason for such a "sensible regulation".  Spend enough time listening to the anti-gun crowd and their ideas, and anyone who has any real experience with firearms will learn that the group is composed of two types of people; one group that doesn't understand how firearms work or how they can actually be used as a defensive tool to the improvement of socity, and another group that does know but is opposed to firearms for some political or ideological reason that is unrelated to their professed motivations.  It's the latter group that thinks up the details of the "sensible regulations" they then can easily sell to the former group, since the former group doesn't actualy know enough about firearms to know better and have long been conditioned to believe that pro-gun rights types are wrong in the head and shouldn't really be listened to.  I know that it's cliche, but it's still very true in politics.  Gun control isn't about controlling guns, it's about controlling the public debate; and the pro-gun crowd tend to be the least manipulatable group.  Even the long conditioned anti-gun crowd in Australia and Britain are starting to second guess their own presumptions, since they are finally acknowledging that they have a rising rate of violent crime while the US overall has a long running trend of falling crime.  While it's not fair to presume that the increase in CCW license holders is the only cause, or even the major cause, of such a falling crime rate; it is certainly a positive contribution to the net trend.  A fact that can be proven in every single state that has already passed such laws.

[MoonShadow]

Really strange what different cultures consider as heroism.

Would you care to elaborate?  What part of this story would you disagree with? 

[bernard75]

Ive been over this with Americans a dozen times, a dialog is not possible because like i said the cultures are too different.

[Biomech]

If you refuse to protect your kids from harm (including becoming orphans), you are the shittiest failed parent ever.

And what about introducing your kids to harm? (hint: recent school shooting).

Dunno where you're coming from, but my take is this. Schools are disarmed. By law. "gun free" zones. Which in reality means that only the criminals/crazies will have guns.

This is just one of about a zillion reasons why my kids will NOT go to public schools. If no crazy shoots them up, they will have their minds filled with meaningless tripe that drives out reasoning skills.

I have yet to find ONE example of a mass shooting occuring where there were armed people capable of a response. They have all been in places where it is illegal to defend yourself. I regard such laws as an affront to civilised behaviour. Such laws should be ignored on the basis of reality.

Despite the rhetoric in the so-called news, cops do not have any duty to defend you. I am personally aware of at least three supreme court cases where this has been explicitly stated. In point of fact, even if they had such a duty, they would be unable to perform unless there was a one to one ratio of humans to cops.

Making the fantastical assumption that cops had the best interests of the sheep in their hearts, they are at best agents of vengeance after the fact. Given their abysmal 3-4 percent solve rate, they aren't even good at that. Most cases are broken by citizens. This is even obliquely admitted in the shows that glorify the police on ID and similar channels.

In the event of a sudden, armed attack, your two best assets are a cool head and a gun. Contrary to all the bravado and bullshit I frequently hear, in such an event you SHOULD shoot to kill. Not a head shot, though, unless you are insanely skilled. I'm a very good pistolero, and I would still shoot for the center of mass. Head shots are tough, and in that split second decision you do not have that kind of time. If you do, you can probably defuse the situation without shooting. The cooper pattern is your friend. (two to the chest, safety to the head. Quick.) Should the assailant survive, sure, let 'em live. The gun and you did their jobs. Said assailant is highly unlikely to try it again.

Again, contrary to popular opinion, a headshot is not invariably fatal, as demonstrated by the article in the OP. Dead center between or just above/below the eyes, pretty much. Deviate just a little, and the frontal sinuses do their job, absorbing impact and deflecting the bullet. Obviously less likely with more powerful bullets, but the most common pistol is a .22. Nasty little bastard, but not much peripheral damage. It's like being hit with a heavy needle. It either hits something vital or just punches a hole.

For home defense, especially for women, my recommendation is a shotgun. 12 gauge with a pistol grip, as the recoil is less likely to knock her down than a traditional buttstock. With a shotgun, you don't have to be real accurate, and the sound of the slide racking will put any potential assailant in a cold sweat. Up close, there just is no substitute unless you are an expert.

Personally, I prefer two pistols, but I am an expert shot. For my wife, I want a mossberg 500 "persuader" at easy reach.

Hopefully, she'll never need it, and I won't need my pistols except at the range. But it is better to be prepared. I would rather be heard by 12 than carried by six.

[TheButterZone]

Show/Hide

So, you just execute hit-and-run quasi-libel attacks on us instead? Brilliant.

[Biomech]

Sorry, but thats just sick.
Noone except the law enforcement should be allowed to carry weapons...

If i have the chance and time to shoot 6 bullets in head and NECK of someone else i cant be in mortal danger - hence the use of arms is unjustified.

Horseshit. I can put 10 on target in less than 2 seconds with ANY decent autoloading pistol. If you do not shoot, and are unaware of the capabilities of guns, you should educate yourself before making blanket statements.

Hell, you can put 12 .32 caliber balls in the head and neck with ONE shot, if you're using .00 buckshot in a 12 gauge at less than ten feet.

Also, you should bear in mind that small cal bullets do not necessarily STOP an assailant right away. Forget tv. In reality, the physics of the situation make it impossible to blow an assailant seriously backwards without doing the same to YOU.

I've been shot in the leg with a .25. Went clean through my calf muscle. Didn't even slow me down as I was running the fuck away. Didn't even hurt till the adrenaline wore off. Guns are not magic. They are constrained by physics. A follow on shot, or multiple follow on shots, could be very easily justified if the assailant don't STOP. A .38 special is not a particularly powerful gun. They're a compromise between recoil and penetration power. If it's not a dead accurate shot (which is highly unlikely in such scenarios) then follow on is not only justified, it's inevitable.

[Biomech]

I want to see some multiculturalists saying "judge people from his actions, not skin color!" The situation is always this way and I never heard opposite way (white man invading home of black women with kids).

Happens all the time. White guy usually has a blue costume on, though.

+10000

[MoonShadow]

Ive been over this with Americans a dozen times, a dialog is not possible because like i said the cultures are too different.

Ever considered the possibility that it's your cultural upbringing that's in the wrong?  Because I certainly have, and concluded otherwise. 

[MoonShadow]

Ive been over this with Americans a dozen times, a dialog is not possible because like i said the cultures are too different.

What if there was a uniformed policeman who was in the room with the mother and children, and had fired the five shots at the same man under exactly the same conditions.  Would your culture have considered that man a hero for doing his job, and for being in the right place at the right time?  If not, why not?  If so, then why not the mother under the same conditions?  Really, I'd like to know.

[drduck]

Ive been over this with Americans a dozen times, a dialog is not possible because like i said the cultures are too different.

Ever considered the possibility that it's your cultural upbringing that's in the wrong?  Because I certainly have, and concluded otherwise.  

In the wrong? I guess statements like that are the reasons why a lot of people say that they don't like Americans.

Most people in Europe with a differentiated opinion don't judge the way you think about guns, they just find it suspect.

[termhn]

If no crazy shoots them up, they will have their minds filled with meaningless tripe that drives out reasoning skills.

Meaningless tripe that drives out reading skills?!?! I've gone to public school my entire life (up until this year when I went to a private high school) and my head is definitely NOT full with "meaningless tripe that drives out reasoning skills." In fact, public schools often have better teachers than charter schools because charters can pay teachers less than public schools. I have no idea where people get this weird stigma against public schools, but it's utter bullshit and doesn't make any sense.

[MoonShadow]

If no crazy shoots them up, they will have their minds filled with meaningless tripe that drives out reasoning skills.

Meaningless tripe that drives out reading skills?!?! I've gone to public school my entire life (up until this year when I went to a private high school) and my head is definitely NOT full with "meaningless tripe that drives out reasoning skills." In fact, public schools often have better teachers than charter schools because charters can pay teachers less than public schools. I have no idea where people get this weird stigma against public schools, but it's utter bullshit and doesn't make any sense.

You're too close to the issue, and obvious to everyone by yourself, well conditioned. While it's true that most public schools actually can pay higher wages than private schools, there are mitigating factors that result in a great many of the very best teachers choosing to teach in a private school setting, or simply leaving the profession.  My wife went to public school for 12 years, and is very well educated.  I won't imply that it cannot happen.  But I went to a private school for 12 years, and have had teachers that were considered the best in the entire state in their subjects, some of which had PhD's.  Today, my wife has a BS degree in Biology, and worked for a time as a microbiologist for Proctor & Gamble; but she is a stay at home wife & mother who homeschools five children from age 13 down to age one.  I'm not required to do so, but every few years I have my older kids take standardized tests, just so that I can compare their progress against their age peers.  When my oldest daughter was 10, she tested equal to an average (nationally, not state) high school junior (second semester) across all subjects.  My oldest son (who might literally be a genius, like my brother) took the same test at aged 8 (while running two grades ahead) and rang in as a first semester freshman.  In college.  (My little brother once took a IQ test with me, that was also a application exam for Mensa.  While both of us passed; the test was geared for a young adult.  I was 18 starting my first year of college, while my brother was 11.  I just squeeked in with an IQ of 136 and a percentile of 98.5 or so.  My little brother rang the bell on that test, and maxed out it's measurable range at 160+ IQ and a percentile of 99.9.  Today, my little brother has two degrees and is working on a third; but also has a mild case of Asberger's Syndrome, and has never held a job that pays more than $9 per hour, never been on a date with anyone as far as anyone in my family is aware, and is morbidly obese with absolutely zero career ambition; while I have five kids and have earned six figures for the past 6 years straight.  Raw IQ is no indication of success in life.)

This is not to say my kids are particularly smart (which could be true, but), it's to say that a homeschooled education is the only way to get the quality of education in this country that compares on equal terms with the quality of the public education systems in most of Europe or Asia.  At least for any reasonable tuition level.  You will one day look back on your public (and private) school career and either feel like you've been cheated of a quality education, or feel like those were the best years of your life. Either outcome is sad, IMHO.

BTW, I have a mild case of dylexia, so if I start moving letters around, it's because I'm tired (and MS Internet Explorere doesn't handle long form entries well) not because I'm illiterate.  When I went to (private) school, they tested for dylexia but didn't find mine, but when my father attended the same exact school decades before I, they treated his left-handedness as a mental dysfunction, and spent a great deal of time and stress on forcing my father to write with his right hand.  It's not like modern medicine didn't already know better by that time either.  All schools are institutions, and all institutions suffer from bureaucratic inertia and entrophy.  As a homeschooling parent; however, I can change my childrens' curriculum at any time, should I learn something new or discover an error.  In fact, I do this regularly.  Google, Wikipedia and Youtube are regular contributors to my childrens' education.

[MoonShadow]

Ive been over this with Americans a dozen times, a dialog is not possible because like i said the cultures are too different.

Ever considered the possibility that it's your cultural upbringing that's in the wrong?  Because I certainly have, and concluded otherwise.  

In the wrong? I guess statements like that are the reasons why a lot of people say that they don't like Americans.

Most people in Europe with a differentiated opinion don't judge the way you think about guns, they just find it suspect.

That is part of the issue.  It's not about the guns, it's about the basic human right to defense of self.  It has very little to do with a small metal object that makes loud noises.

http://www.a-human-right.com/

[Biomech]

I was going to reply the public school issue, but I got pretty well Ninja'd by Moonshadow. While my circumstances are not the same, my conclusion is.

I graduated early via the California High School Proficiency Exam. Supposedly, it was indicative of what you should have learned by 12th grade. I have NEVER taken an easier exam, on anything, including the laughable written tests that pass as driver exams. That was 2 and a half decades ago.

I have worked in food service most of my life, which can be cause for ridicule, but it also put me in close contact with the results of the public education system. It has gotten HORRIBLE. 18 year old children in today's America don't have a skill set, unless you count texting... badly. They are not fit for ANY job upon exiting high school. As a manager in that field, you pretty much have to start with basic reading comprehension and what would have been third grade maths when I was in school. And it was awful then.

But they can talk up the "merits" of social welfare, and various war related fantasies. And they can play the hell out of video games.

They are taught to NOT question ANYTHING. We have at least two generations of engineered morons. The few who manage to get an education usually did it by non traditional means, or just plain ignored the curriculum like I did. From third grade until I escaped, the only things of value I learned were during my (frequent) periods of detention. I quickly discovered the bias that teachers have against books. Their idea of punishing me for asking inconvenient questions was to send me to the library. Which was where I wanted to be anyway, so this was hardly "corrective" action.It did, however, allow me to self educate and find that the "exam" that had a 75 percent failure rate was the easiest fucking test every put in the english language.

Hit rewind a couple of decades, and public schools were alright. My dad learned two useable trades before he graduated high school in 1954. I graduated in 1984, and everything of value I learned was outside of or in spite of the system. It continues to get worse.

There were some good teachers, too. But they were universally hated by the establishment, hamstrung on what they could teach, and most gave up in disgust within a couple of years.

As for the pay in public schools being greater than that in private schools, I have seen no evidence of that. And I have looked. My preferred model is homeschooling, but right after that is private. Because I have some say in what and how my child is educated. They still idolize the state entirely too much, but they do at least teach some subjects of value, and teach them well.

With this I will drop the derail, as this is a subject worthy of it's own thread.

[Dabs]

In the Philippines, it is against the law to own or possess (much less carry) a firearm without a proper license (and that includes registration.)

That does not stop entire regions from being fully armed, both concealed and openly carrying. The only people who die are either criminals or rebels fighting against government forces.

These people have been carrying a weapon since the Spanish invasion and colonization a few centuries ago. They've just upgrade from sticks, to knives, to guns. For some reason, the 1911 in .45 ACP is still very popular despite the proliferation of 9mm glocks and other firearms.

I personally just have a single stacker with me everywhere. (And it's legally covered.)

[termhn]

I was going to reply the public school issue, but I got pretty well Ninja'd by Moonshadow. While my circumstances are not the same, my conclusion is.

I graduated early via the California High School Proficiency Exam. Supposedly, it was indicative of what you should have learned by 12th grade. I have NEVER taken an easier exam, on anything, including the laughable written tests that pass as driver exams. That was 2 and a half decades ago.

I have worked in food service most of my life, which can be cause for ridicule, but it also put me in close contact with the results of the public education system. It has gotten HORRIBLE. 18 year old children in today's America don't have a skill set, unless you count texting... badly. They are not fit for ANY job upon exiting high school. As a manager in that field, you pretty much have to start with basic reading comprehension and what would have been third grade maths when I was in school. And it was awful then.

But they can talk up the "merits" of social welfare, and various war related fantasies. And they can play the hell out of video games.

They are taught to NOT question ANYTHING. We have at least two generations of engineered morons. The few who manage to get an education usually did it by non traditional means, or just plain ignored the curriculum like I did. From third grade until I escaped, the only things of value I learned were during my (frequent) periods of detention. I quickly discovered the bias that teachers have against books. Their idea of punishing me for asking inconvenient questions was to send me to the library. Which was where I wanted to be anyway, so this was hardly "corrective" action.It did, however, allow me to self educate and find that the "exam" that had a 75 percent failure rate was the easiest fucking test every put in the english language.

Hit rewind a couple of decades, and public schools were alright. My dad learned two useable trades before he graduated high school in 1954. I graduated in 1984, and everything of value I learned was outside of or in spite of the system. It continues to get worse.

There were some good teachers, too. But they were universally hated by the establishment, hamstrung on what they could teach, and most gave up in disgust within a couple of years.

As for the pay in public schools being greater than that in private schools, I have seen no evidence of that. And I have looked. My preferred model is homeschooling, but right after that is private. Because I have some say in what and how my child is educated. They still idolize the state entirely too much, but they do at least teach some subjects of value, and teach them well.

With this I will drop the derail, as this is a subject worthy of it's own thread.

First, as far as pay, I never said PRIVATE, I said CHARTER. There's a big difference. Anyway, the results of the public education system are much less due to the teachers or the schools than it is the parents. If a parent is constantly driving their kid and motivating him (or her) to do well, they will do well. They will learn more. If there's no motivation, and no discipline if the student is not doing well, then they will get nothing out of it. If you believe your child should, or could, be ahead of where the normal education is, there is almost always a public advanced pull-out program. I have been in one since fourth grade. I was taking junior-level maths as a 7th grader, without problem. You just need to look. Plus, going to a public school was one of the best things that could have happened to me in my opinion. I got to learn how to interact with other kids of all demographics, a skill that you DO NOT get to learn if you are homeschooled, but which is an invaluable tool in almost every profession today.

[TheButterZone]

I got to learn how to interact with other kids of all demographics, a skill that you DO NOT get to learn if you are homeschooled

You're implying the home school is a dungeon? BS. All my friends' homeschooled kids have spent plenty of time on extracurricular/social events, and while I did independent study (closest thing you can get to homeschool without leaving the public school system) from 8th grade until 1-year-early graduation, there was no lack of offline interaction, as I could choose practically anything at any school or organization for electives (including PE, such as a dojo, swim class, sports league, etc); I just needed a supervisory adult to sign off on my attendance and performance. From what I know of actual homeschooling, those same choices are available, and encouraged, by all non-isolationist/cultist-type parents.

And to bring this back on-topic (self-defense), there's something that I noticed as an independent study student (and reminded me of when I was full-time in public schools from K-7), and which anyone else should be able to see, is that public schools (and maybe private and charters too, I never experienced them) are about as secure as putting yellow tape around a baby in the middle of a prison of baby rapists. So many open points of access, not controlled by armed security at all times, gates, holes in fences, short fences that you barely have to put any effort into climbing over... it's a wonder there isn't a massacre at least once a year at every single "gun free" public school in America (save the extreme statistical outlying amount of schools that are secured properly).

IIRC, I was only ever challenged once (by an unarmed faculty or staff member, who must have been posted there for a specific one-time threat) at the back gate of one school I was taking electives at, and another time by a lady behind the lobby desk, after I graduated and needed to take pictures of a performing arts event there during school hours for the local paper (as a professional, I chose to be an overt interloper despite knowing I could get in the back). The rest of the time, there wasn't even the slightest difficulty to getting in and out, through that wide-open back gate. At another high school, all I had to do was open the unlocked door to the music room, right off the street. Need I go on about the amount of weapons I could have brought in my rolling briefcase, instrument cases, the multitool with a blade I carried in a belt pouch both pre- and post-9/11... my adult appearance and maturity when I was 16 would have only been a mitigating factor IF SOMEONE ACTUALLY WAS THERE to see me, and try to stop me. Except for those 2 instances of little more than human shields, there never were. Scary stuff.

If the right to self-defense is only going to be half-ass protected only in the home, by SCOTUS, then the home is going to be the safest place of learning. You take your chances once your kids step past your fenced curtilage and you're not able to protect them without breaking some "gun control" law that only ever controls innocents out of being able to legally defend ourselves.

[Lethn]

I got to learn how to interact with other kids of all demographics, a skill that you DO NOT get to learn if you are homeschooled

This has always been a weak arse argument that pro-mandatory education people make, with the way the education system works children are forced to interact with each other they don't interact with each other by choice and that is always going to lead to conflict much like as if they were in a prison environment. Then there's the fact that if they defend themselves in any way in my experience they almost always find themselves getting in trouble because it makes the schools look bad, social interaction should always be by choice and some people don't learn well in a classroom environment particularly when they've got someone being an absolute cunt to them every single day.

People being homeschooled can easily learn how to interact with people, it's called going outside, I do it every day and I'm technically homeschooling and not going to university, sure, everybody I meet isn't necessarily my age and in some cases I'm bloody grateful for that ( The amount of times I was close to getting into a fist fight with those twats was ridiculous and it was because I was forced to deal with them ) it also means you get to deal with a wider range of demographics rather than the surly arrogant prick of a teacher who just wants their pension or the gaggle of douchebags that belong in a mental hospital rather than a school.

You don't get to learn how to interact with people being cramped up in a classroom all day while having to ask permission to take a dump when you need to, if you really think that you haven't been out in the real world properly and I'd also like to point out that I've met much more interesting and unique people on the internet, particularly here that I can even get along with well than the people I've met in my hometown.

[termhn]

I got to learn how to interact with other kids of all demographics, a skill that you DO NOT get to learn if you are homeschooled

( The amount of times I was close to getting into a fist fight with those twats was ridiculous and it was because I was forced to deal with them )

You're gonna be forced to deal with people in the future. You can't just hide from interaction you don't like forever. And, I'm not just talking about interacting. Sure, if you're homeschooled you get that easy. I'm saying, at the school I went to, there was a majority of families in poverty, and even one kid who lived in the park next to our school. It's that kind of interaction that you most likely won't be exposed to.