Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Tables Turned Edition

Landrum Photos

If you needed a reminder to carry your gun, you don’t need to do much more than read the story of the unidentified woman from Landrum, South Carolina who was attacked as she left work early Sunday morning and was approached by two attackers. “When I tried to get back away from them, he shoved me up against the door and I felt the gun in my back pocket and I was like, ‘Dang, I’ve got that gun.’ I forgot it,” she said. “I said, ‘I’ve got a lot of money. I’ve got a lot of money in my back pocket.’ I said, ‘I’ll give you what I got.’” She gave it to ‘em, alright . . .

Sunday must have been her lucky day because the woman told police that was the first time she’d carried the gun. That’s why she initially forgot she had it in her back pocket.

The 41-year-old woman had left through the back door of her business at about 1 a.m.  She said she got her car from the parking lot, and pulled up to the back door to retrieve an umbrella she had left inside. She said when she stepped back outside, two men confronted her.

She said when she asked the men what they wanted, one of them jerked her necklace off and the other man tore her earrings out of her ears.

The woman said that the men shoved her up against the door and told her to open it and get inside. She said when she refused and told them the door was locked, one man punched her in the jaw several times. The police report said one of the men yanked down her shirt and bra and grabbed her breasts.

“I don’t think robbery was the main agenda with them because my car was running, my purse was in it, my business checkbook, my laptop, everything and my cash.”

Probably not. She managed to get a shot off with her .32 and while it’s not clear if she actually hit either of them, it was more than enough to send both of them tear-assing down the street as fast as possible. They even dropped the jewelry they’d grabbed.

Looking back, the woman told wyff4.com,

“That won’t happen again, or if so, I’ll have a bigger gun,” she said. “I’m not giving up. They’re not going to win. They’re not going to scare me off.”

She said, “Every woman needs to get a concealed weapons permit and carry a gun, because it hadn’t been for that, I wouldn’t be here.”

Kinda says it all, no?

77 Responses to Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Tables Turned Edition

  1. avatarMotoJB says:

    I hope she hit the scumbag…

  2. avatarMoonshine7102 says:

    No way. It’s only a valid DGU if the BG is killed.

    [/sarc]

  3. avatarJoseph says:

    I understand the sentiment, but a DGU is anything that saves your donkey. I hope one of the turds has a .32 caliber tummy ache.

    • avatarMoonshine7102 says:

      “I understand the sentiment, but a DGU is anything that saves your donkey.”
      —–
      Agreed. Thus the [/sarc].

  4. avatarVincit veritas says:

    Also a good reminder to try to figure out what kind of scum you’re dealing with. A pro would take the most valuable things he can sell in the shortest amount of time and leave. Anytime somebody wants you to go to a second location is the time to start fighting back. Also a reminder that what starts as a robbery might turn into something else entirely in an instant.

  5. avatarPatrick B. says:

    Um…. Is that the first time she carried a gun, or that gun? Maybe it’s just me, but the first time I carried concealed I was overly conscious. She’d be no fun on a Wally Walk.

  6. avatarJason says:

    MikeB…. hello, MikeB, you there? I bet you don’t comment on this one.

    I know you think most people are too stupid to defend themselves. Is she smart
    enough for ya?

    • avatarAnthony Meruelo says:

      First time she carries her gun? She obviously doesn’t frequent sites like this one. Is she, dare I say, the average gun owner? No, the common people are too stupid to defend themselves. They should just leave that to the police. Baaahhh….

    • avatarRalph says:

      Please, Jason, don’t call him out. It’s like saying “Candyman” in the mirror three times.

    • avatarmikeyt95608 says:

      Do you really think that our pet troll will have the audacity to respond? If he does he will probably lament that the “underprivileged and often misunderstood men” were simply taking what society owes them…
      Don’t hold your breath for an adequate response from that (self flame deleted flame deleted flame deleted…)
      Sorry to assassinate your character Mr. (should I use a lower case b?) Bonomo. Ok, not really sorry…

    • avatarSilver says:

      He’d just call it an anomaly (despite it, well, not being one). That’s how those types work, whenever proof surfaces they call it an anomaly so they don’t have to do any self-examination into their own beliefs and perhaps admit to being wrong. Examination would prove that there are tons of stories like this and that’s just not acceptable.

      • avatarCarlosT says:

        Wow, called it.

        I sometimes wonder if Robert paid some Javascript genius to hack together a bot that would scrape content from anti-gun sites and then set it loose to troll through the posts to drive up traffic. Then somewhere along the line, like SkyNet, it gained sentience, but instead of starting World War III, it moved to Italy, started it’s own blog, and kept spamming the site.

    • I just saw it now.

      It’s a cute story if true. This part makes be dubious.

      “one man punched her in the jaw several times.” I find it difficult to picture that. Was she like a superhero who can take a punch and turn her head right back for another one?

      The main problem I have with these DGU stories is, and whoever posts them knows this to be true, you have to wade through scores of misuse-of-gun stories to find one of these. I think the ratio is about 100 to 1.

      • avatarrybred says:

        but if it saves 1 life…

        • avatarSilver says:

          Score!

        • avatarScott Henrichs says:

          Mikeb doesn’t care about saving even one life. For him it is all about the gun ban. Unarmed victims and well armed criminals in Mikeb’s world.
          Anyone got a band-aid? I think mikeb got a paper cut while shredding our Constitution.

      • avatarMark says:

        Mikeb,
        whats your data? do you have metrics to back up the 1 in 100 ratio or are you talking out your arse?

        • Before YOU run off at the mouth, you should try googling “shooting” or “gun.” Report back with your findings, just rough estimates will do.

      • avatarGrant says:

        I guess you’ve never been punched in the face (seriously, you should try it sometime). It usually takes more than 1 punch to lay someone out, even if they’re a 41 year old lady.

      • avatarRobert Farago says:

        Horsepucky. I read 100 firearms-related stories a day (and surf YouTube) looking for BOTH Defensive Gun Use of the Day and Irresponsible Gun Owner of the Day material. I’m going to keep track of the ratio. But my best guess is that the ratio is 3 to 1 DUGOTD to IGOTD. Easy. But I will do the study because I am a rational human being who believes in the primacy of objective data. Oh and to quote you: “By the way, why do you keep making absurd statements without providing links and proof? I hate that shit.”

        • Google “shooting” and tell me what you get.

        • avatarDaveL says:

          You don’t think that might reveal more about the way that specific word is used than about the ratio of proper-to-improper gun use? For example, when someone accidentally shoots themselves that’s generally the only angle from which to write a headline – but when a homeowner shoots and armed intruder it’s not just a shooting, but also a foiled burglary or home invasion. And since the burglary would be the underlying crime that occasioned the shooting, it’s proper that the headline reflect the former rather than concentrating on the latter.

        • I didn’t suggest googling “accidental shooting.”

          “Shooting” is about the best word to uncover all those millions of DGUs you guys keep talking about.

          Trouble is, they just don’t come up except at about the ratio I mentioned.

        • avatarCarlosT says:

          Except that 85% of DGUs don’t actually involve shots fired. The mere presence of a gun in the hands of a law-abiding citizen is enough in those cases to make the perpetrator to break off the attempt. So “shooting” will completely miss those DGUs. And yes, they’re DGUs, because they don’t work without the gun.

          And the “research by Google” is completely unscientific. The 2.5 million DGUs per year statistics were compiled in peer reviewed research by criminologists. They laid out their methodology and the processes they used to avoid bias, and to avoid overstating the case. They detail how they went of their way to throw out data that could have potentially raised the number. They wanted to make sure they arrived at a completely defensible result. Go and find some research of similar quality and then we can have a real discussion.

        • 85% huh? And you accuse me of making stuff up???!!

        • avatarCarlosT says:

          No, you demonstrate that fact yourself daily.

          We’ve got peer reviewed research on our side. You’ve got “research by Google”. Do better.

        • Well, that’s pretty much the point. In order to identify defensive gun use stories, you have to search for very specific things. And even then you don’t get all that many in a given day. On the other hand, to find misuse of gun stories any of the other words will work and you’ll have a long list.

          Isn’t the Google search engine an accepted method of determining these things?

          You know how Clayton used to do it? He had hundreds of fans all over the country searching for him and sending the links in. That’s another way to beat the system, I suppose.

          The fact is the you guys lose on this one and you just hate that.

        • You made up a number & lied about it.
          The numbers being used to illustrate DGU are extremely conservative & deliberately understate such occurrences. The CDC figures also make your assertions look like what they are; pure fantasy.
          If you can’t argue your side using facts, then you have NO platform whatsoever, except of course your subjective & irrational fear of armed, law abiding citizens.
          I suggest you point this fear towards those who really WOULD do you harm; the criminals your liberal fellow travellers refuse to incarcerate.

          You lose – every time.

        • avatarAlaskan Nutkase says:

          +1+1+1

        • That’s bull, Mike, and you know it.

          “The numbers being used to illustrate DGU are extremely conservative & deliberately understate such occurrences.”

          Give me a break, will ya? Are you referring to the oft-mentioned 2.5 million a year?

        • No; I’m referring to the 60,000 bandied about by people like you.
          Now tell me where the 6 million criminal uses of firearms are that you say happen.

        • Sorry, you lost me. Did I say 6 million something?

      • avatarmikeyt95608 says:

        I guess Silver was right on the money. Good call!

      • avatarIdahoPete says:

        THE BOT! THE BOT! IT MOVES! RUNAWAY RUNAWAY!

      • mikeb302000 says:
        “I think the ratio is about 100 to 1.”

        That’s your biggest problem; you believe what’s inside your head, rather than the more than ample evidence that what you “think” is utter tosh.
        If the ratio were even 1:1 don’t you think your beloved media would be all over it?

        No matter what the actual circumstances of the confrontation were; there’s a woman alive & neither raped or robbed today because she had a firearm on her.

        • Yes, and for every one like her there are about 100 incidents of misuse, some of them resulting in death.

          This is from the media. They are covering it every day.

        • That is what is known as a lie to normal people.
          I guess in your twisted world, it’s called some thing else – like “affirmative truth”.

  7. avatarAccur81 says:

    This would be a great story for a talk show.

    Their lack of interest might wind up costing them in a moment like this.

  8. avatarmp says:

    what’s a wally walk?

    • avatarRalph says:

      When someone first gets their CCW, they strap up and walk around Walmart. They reach, bend, stretch, just like they weren’t carrying. It’s an important right of passage.

      • avatarmikeyt95608 says:

        Something as mundane as using a public toilet can quickly become an IOTD situation, so a quick jaunt through a grocery store IS an excellent litmus as to whether or not a chosen carry mode will actually suffice. Tactical, practical concealment is a lot more than just picking what the Pro’s use, rather it is deciding what will work for you in a day to day world.
        Driving a car/truck-all fine and good until you have a sidearm tied to your hip. Suddenly you are squirming for comfort as you attempt to merge into traffic at sixty miles an hour. (Try sitting at an office chair with a new weapon)
        I do not care if you have done years of active duty with hot weapons- when you first start to carry under concealment there is a learning curve.
        The woman in this story used an advantage that may have saved her considerable pain (and her life), and perhaps there is a lesson in this that we who stand to pee can learn.
        Just food for thought.

        • avatarAPBTFan says:

          My biggest concern is getting hit with an emergency dump and having to drop trou in a public restroom. I carry IWB but when the drawers have to go down – what to do? I don’t want my heater laying splayed out on the ground for whatever schlub is in the next stall to see and possibly freak out. Depending on what I wear my pockets may or may not suffice for a quick switch to keep my heater hidden. Then again, my life is really good if that’s one of my biggest concerns.

        • avatarDouble A.D. says:

          Stuff it down your pants leg so that it sits inboard next to your ankle. Your pants should do a pretty good job of concealing it from view.

        • avatarKelly in GA says:

          This isn’t the most comfortable answer, but I’ve gotten pretty good about pulling my pants to my knees and holding my pants up by pushing out with my knees. Keeps the gun in position, up and out of view. And away from someone else’s inability to hit the toilet. *yuck*

        • avatarMichael B. says:

          If the toilet has a back to it I’ll just put some toilet paper down on the tank cover and place my pistol on it.

          Just don’t forget your piece when you’re done doing your business.. like some cops do.

        • avatarRalph says:

          I carry IWB but when the drawers have to go down – what to do?

          With a Remora, it’s easy. Once seated, you can place the gun (in it’s holster, natch) right in the banana hammock and do yer business. With a belt holster it’s a tad more difficult.

        • avatarMadDawg J says:

          Grab a hair elastic (the ones used for ponytails) or tie a loop with some paracord and carry it in your pocket. Slide the loop into the holster’s clip and then hang the loop on the hook on the back of the stall door.

        • avatarJuanCudz says:

          I think we have another idea for an “Ask Leghorn” article :-)

  9. I had the usual problems when I started “carrying.” At first I carried IWB. “Is it showing?” “Has anyone noticed?” “How do I deal with it in a restroom stall?” Eventually I got used to the fact “it” was there, and quit worrying. Now I carry in a fanny pack. No one seems to notice , even when I pull out a cell phone or PDA. The only real problem has been where to hang it in a restroom stall. If there’s a hook on the back of the door, problem solved. If not, the next best thing is looping it over the corner of the door before closing and latching the door. Not a really desirable solution, but it works. As for what to carry, I used to carry a 1911. When I started reading about flash mobs, I decided I needed more ammo. Now I carry a ParaOrd P-12. These solutions won’t necessarily work for everyone, but I offer them as something that has worked for me.

  10. avatar"Dr."Dave says:

    I usually take my pants down one handed, other hand on my firearm, then i’ll sit down, and put the firearm in my pants or underwear, which forms a kind of cradle.

    That not only keeps it concealed, but guarantees you cant forget it: You gotta grab it to put your pants back on.

  11. avatarDave says:

    New to using this site. As always, has some whiny kiddies arguing with each other, just like any other site anymore. But much relevance still there.
    Been CCW for years. Mostly, 1911A1, sometimes small .357. Learned really quick, in the stall, don’t drop them past your knees and hold them there using outward pressure. Ya get used to it. As for driving any distance, hip carry is a pain with 1911A1, I either move it to back and pull it up a little, or remove and seat tuck it. I will admit that after all this time I am considering a compact model, or something else. But will stick with .45 ACP. Worked ER, never saw anyone hit with those giving and problems to anyone.

    • You know the funny thing is you guys have to discuss in detail how to go to the bathroom while armed. Wouldn’t a reasonably intelligent man be able to figure that out by himself? Of course he would. But the truth is too many of your fellow CCW guys aren’t even intelligent enough for that.

      The obvious solution just dawned on me. An IQ test for the carry permit. Let’s say below 110, you’re out of luck.

      • avatarBuuurr says:

        “The obvious solution just dawned on me. An IQ test for the carry permit. Let’s say below 110, you’re out of luck.”

        Could we also apply it to blog owners too?

      • avatarmikeyt95608 says:

        Tell us again how you were able to cope with the day to day rigors while carrying concealed? How did you reach to open a door with a SOB holster without printing? How did you bend over to tie your shoe with a cross-draw? How did you buckle a seat belt with a strong side pancake? And yes- how did you cruze your favorite public restroom for your, umm, “personal” reasons…
        I guess the idea of openly discussing the various discomforts of carry might bore you, so stick to pulling rosy self righteousness out of your widened orifice while those who actually have accomplished these “mundane realities” discuss something that you have no concept of, responsible carry.

  12. avatarbrigo05 says:

    Man, this thread really tuned my skills on how to take a dump with a firearm.
    And its easy! My carry is a Sig P229 and I have a wonderful custom holster from Winthrop Customs ($55! v.s. a $200 milt sparks w/ 3 month turn around??) IWB dual snaps, never take my belt off, just unsnap and unzip!
    As for the actual story — +1 for DGU —

    And long live the wally walk! Sep’rates the boys from the men! +1 for Ralph! Ralph forever! Ralph for President!

  13. avatarAlaskan Nutkase says:

    Having read all of this I would just like to say…. Statistics or not:

    I would rather have a gun and not need it than need one and not have it.
    Apparently Mikeb3200blabla bla has never had his life threatened by a scum bag who wants to kill him for the 10 bucks he has in his pocket and a pair of worn out shoes, or has never been attacked by a random crack head while walking his dog at night or had somebody try to rape him or kill his family. That being said I hope he never does, I wouldnt wish that on anybody. But there are plenty of us who have had one or more of those things happen. I carry a gun every day, I dont ever want to kill a human being, but I would not hesitate to do so if my life or somebody that I care for’s life is being threatened.
    I have said it before on this website and Ill say it again. Gun restrictions only affect law abiding citizens. A crack/meth head or a rapist or a murderer or gang banger or drug dealer isnt going to stop carrying a gun just because there is another law against it. Think about what happened during proabition, it just makes criminals stronger….

    • avatarMike Taylor says:

      +1.
      A seat belt, life preserver, fire extinguisher and a sidearm all have what in common? That’s right, we have no desire to need them, but would sorely regret not having them.

      • You could ask which one of those does not fit in the group because it’s used to kill 30,000 people a year. That would make better sense.

        • avatarMike Taylor says:

          Try this:
          How many people would be saved each year if they were wearing a seat belt? How many lives would be spared from watery deaths had they been utilizing a life jacket? How many common kitchen fires could be handled with a simple fire extinguisher?
          How many victims of violent crime would never have been victims in the first place had they access to a legally carried firearm?
          The woman in this story had a bleak future ahead of her, and she used the means at her disposal ( a handgun) to avoid it. Would she somehow work better to your spin had she been subjected to violent treatment and a lifetime of wondering?
          mr. bonomo, you seem to have more cause to parade victims around than actually helping people.
          For the cheap seats, carrying a concealed weapon is not a license to kill. It is a declaration of self reliance that gives the carrier access to a means of survival.
          Like a seat belt. Just like a PFD and yes a fire extinguisher.

        • avatarAlaskan Nutkase says:

          +1
          You know MikeB, people didnt have ANY trouble killing eachother before guns were introduced. I would say most violent crimes dont involve a gun anyways.
          Here are some numbers for you…

          •Number of deaths: 2,437,163
          •Death rate: 793.8 deaths per 100,000 population
          •Life expectancy: 78.5 years
          •Infant Mortality rate: 6.39 deaths per 1,000 live births

          Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
          •Heart disease: 599,413
          •Cancer: 567,628
          •Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
          •Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
          •Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
          •Alzheimer’s disease: 79,003
          •Diabetes: 68,705
          •Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
          •Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
          •Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909

          this was taken from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention for 2009… now you said 30,000 people are killed by guns every year? wow… that is even lower than Suicide!

          If guns kill people, Pens mispell words…

  14. Mikeb302000 says:
    April 10, 2012 at 08:24

    Sorry, you lost me. Did I say 6 million something?

    You stated that there are 100 criminal uses of a firearm for every DGU.
    60,000×100=6,000,000

    Simples.

    • avatarAlaskan Nutkase says:

      here is a link to a picture of a graph (So that the intellectually disabled can follow along) of the nature of Homicides by weapons provided by ours truely Wikipedia.com

      http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

      this clearly shows that the number of handgun murders is actually decreasing, but the number of other murders remains the same. If you will observe the left hand side of the graph it clearly shows the number of handgun murders to be less than 10,000 a year. That being pointed out, the 6,000,000 or the 1,000,000 or the 30,000 numbers are sickly over estimated, and whats more the information I have provided a little earlier states that suicide is responsible for three times as many deaths as those provided by handguns… Is there really any point to you pushing your unbacked and unfactual argument. If you want to be helpless to protect yourself or your family from harms way, by all means do so, but you should hope that if the time comes, one of us responsible gun owners is there to save you from a would be assailant.

      here are some rape victim numbers for you in the US. I bet it would be substantilly lower if they had been armed…

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States

    • Good point, that must mean the 60,ooo is way too high. Otherwise, why would google come up with such a drastic proportion?

      • Google doesn’t; YOU do.
        You picked 100 out of the air, which is hardly what one can call “research”.
        DGU on the other hand has been thoroughly researched by competent analysts, who actually come up with numbers in excess of 60,000.
        If your assertion were true, it would also indicate a far greater need for citizens to arm themselves than is currently the case.

  15. avatarAlaskan Nutkase says:

    nothing to say when presented with real world facts? pitty, I was really interested in what you would have to say to try and debunk the facts that are presented here.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.