Child Kills Burglar with Mom's Gun! Bravo!

A better course of action would have been phoning the police stating that an armed burglar had broken into the house. Police would have had the time to arrive and arrest them. Then throw the book at the burglars. Any burglar caught carrying a gun should be tried as someone who intends to use their gun, whether they use it or not. And I would apply that to any crime including crimes such as shop lifting

 

Ever been involved in a break in? I'm sure the answer is no. Because I have more than once , and from experience, there is no way in hell the Cops will be there in time. Even if they are next door. They come and clean up the pieces and haul away anything they can arrest to justify their time wasted "protecting " you.

Sell your BS call 911 (*)(*)(*)(*) to someone that has never needed combat aid in half of a second. Because it is a bunch of lies.

 

According to an affidavit:

"The two suspects fled in their car, and the boy continued shooting at them as they drove away, according to an affidavit."

 

In my eyes, this kid's a hero. He did what he had to do to protect himself and his home. He, single-handedly, thwarted an unknown number of future murders and armed robberies, for which those saved victims will never be able to express their gratitude; a community service that SHOULD have been done by our criminal justice system long prior to this event, but wasn't.

We shall see what they will do with the accomplice. My bet is, inside of 5 years, he is back on the street.

Until such time as our criminal justice system starts doing its job by forcibly segregating violent criminals from our peaceable society, The People must be prepared and equipped to protect themselves.

 

Ironically, in this case it WAS a wise thing to have a gun in the house. House was not robbed, child was not killed or harmed and one scumbag dead. Seems like a happy ending all around to me.

 

So, you'd rather be talking about a 13 year old who was killed by burglars?

Then explain all of the accidental shootings.

If you don't have a gun, leaving is probably the best option (unless you're a master knife thrower). If you have a gun, the best option is to stand your ground.

Of course you would.

Self-defense is never worrying.

Based on your ideological leanings, I am going to assume that this is sarcasm.

 

The kid had a better solution, he dialed up Smith & Wesson, who solved the problem immediatly. No tax dollars wasted, kid safe, home safe and the local crooks know to stay the hell away from that house in the future.

 

Potential outcome: The armed thugs would also have time to harm or kill the kid.

Actual outcome: As it turned out, one thug is dead and no longer a parasite on the tree of society.

The other thug is in jail charged with murder.

Which outcome do you actually prefer?

 

In your country, armed robbers might hang about for a spot of tea and strumpets, but here, the average armed robbery lasts 90 seconds, beginning to end. Police here arrive in 15 minutes, best case. Just in time to draw the chalk outlines, and do the paperwork.

 

Then "you" need to look at your police force. It is not as if the boy was living in the middle of nowhere.

 

The burglars attempted to come through the back door. The boy could have got out through the front door

 

He was supposed to know no one else was outside how? Why not talk about what actually happened instead of playing the What if game....

 

In those 90 seconds they would have got 2 tvs and perhaps a pc. Well worth the risk of the death of one child?

 

What part of, "You have a right to protect yourself, your home, and other people" do you have a problem with?

 

Because the boy saw the car driving around the back and two men approach the back door. By going down your route, why did the boy then follow the car shooting as he did not know if anyone else was outside.

 

Did the child die? Oh wait.. That's right he didn't.. Instead he successfully defended himself against 2 armed adults.

Stop playing the what if game, the outcome is clearly specified.

 

If I was there, I would risk my life protecting my property. I do not want my children risking their lives protecting our property.

 

That's funny. You figure out how to make the Cops pyschic so they can be there when the baddies show up. Me , I'll keep living in reality where , when one person called 911 and I combated a gunman it took the LEO 4:54 to show up. Yes the time was documented. 5 minutes was way too long. As I was on top of the crook for 4+ minutes. Waiting for LEO would have meant , LEO arrived at a home with 4 dead and no suspects in sight. That is the Truth and Justice way huh?

 

They were armed with at least one .45 caliber handgun, which they had already drawn as they approached the house. They would have shot and killed the kid, because the kid could have identified them. Then, they would have done the same thing to countless other victims going forward. We are a safer society for the actions of this kid, he acted heroically and properly.

On the other hand, if our justice system had locked these guys away THE FIRST TIME, then this whole thing would have been avoided entirely.

 

Yes I would have, exactly the same as my parents said to me. I would give up everything for the safety of my children.

 

Hope you never come home to find claw marks on your gun safe and your dead child right below.

 

No one else was there. He was home alone.

 

The burglars did not know that the house was occupied.

 

Wrong again Pal. I'm in the city and 5:00minutes is a very good response time to a call of an armed man in the house.
Where are you that the response time is less?

 

And? ....