Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Two Words Edition

“Investigators said a man and woman were inside their apartment when they heard a knock on the door. When they went to answer it, they said a man armed with a pistol and wearing a mask barged in.” Just another night in Nashville? Maybe not, but the unidentified homeowner who opened the door and fought with with the intruder didn’t have to look far for his gun . . .

From newschannle5.com:

There was a brief altercation, and that’s when the man inside the apartment pulled out a gun and opened fire on the intruder, killing him.

The local 5-0 is trying to determine if there’s more than meets the eye here – as in why that particular apartment was targeted. Whatever the motive, it appears that Mr. Homeowner had a gun with him, either on his belt or in his pocket, when he went to the door. So we can sum up the moral of this little story in just two words: home carry.

comments

  1. avatar caffeinated says:

    Sounds like the typical dope ripoff attempt. A lot of times the dopers hit the wrong house or apartment.

    1. avatar Jeff, Formerly of California says:

      Yup–happened to a friend of mine. He lived at one end of the hallway, the drug dealer lived at the other end. The robbers got the wrong end.

      1. avatar Peter says:

        Did he at least give them some lead?

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      A lot of times the dopers hit the wrong house or apartment.

      So does SWAT.

      1. avatar Peter says:

        At least the dopers usually don’t have assault weapons.

        1. avatar MadDawgJ says:

          Or shoot your dog

        2. avatar caffeinated says:

          No they usually use poison in these parts.

      2. avatar caffeinated says:

        Though true, it’s magnitudes less than the constant drug ripoffs.

        1. avatar MadDawgJ says:

          And that’s why you should not put up with known drug dealers living in your neihborhood. You are allowing a greater chance of violence to exist.

        2. avatar caffeinated says:

          The neighborhood in general needs to put up the fight. I am fortunate enough to live in a decent neighborhood; not everyone has that choice.

        3. avatar CarlosT says:

          It’s also why legalization will reduce violence. When was the last time you heard of legal whiskey distributors doing a home invasion?

        4. avatar GS650G says:

          Right, because dope addicts will get jobs and buy their drugs at Kmart once legalized, right>?

        5. avatar caffeinated says:

          Just look at the pharmacy robberies (and killings) for pain killers and anxiety drugs. Legalization is not a cure all.

        6. avatar rybred says:

          Just like alcohol users? Why yes, why not?
          Look at the mayhem that arose in Portugal (or not) over the full legalization of all drugs? In the last decade drug abuse was cut in half! How could that possibly be with all that easy access to evil narcotics?
          That doesn’t even take into account the end of any drug related tired wars…

        7. avatar Greg Nicholas says:

          Don’t bring up Portugal. They went from 1% to .5%. The US supposedly has 9% abuse, or roughly 2.7X the population of Portugal itself.

        8. avatar caffeinated says:

          Just look at pharmacy robberies and killings for pain and anxiety pills. Those are legal with a prescription that any pain clinic will churn out.

        9. avatar Jwhite says:

          Maybe not, but if they are dopers one or more of the following is true..
          a) You dont know about it
          b) they already have a job
          c) they buy their dope from shady people is risky/shady parts of town
          d) its their body, who are you to tell them what they can and cant do. No victim no crime, right? I mean, this is a free country, right? get high if you want, not my thing, but who am I to say what you can and cant do, especially if it doesn’t affect me one bit? I would be pissed to know your operating heavy machinery dopped up, but thats probably already happening somewhere at a construction site near you. I dont know man. All this ” “Merkin values, freedom” stuff is completely superseded by personal beliefs, opinions, and faiths.

        10. avatar Jwhite says:

          Dont like drugs? Dont do them.
          Dont like Porn? Dont watch it.
          Dont like abortions? Dont get one.
          Dont like gay marriage? Dont have one.
          Dont like guns? Dont buy one.

          Dont like your rights taken away?
          Dont take away someone else’s.

        11. avatar caffeinated says:

          Plenty of homeless folks kick the crap out of each other for malt liquors. It’s a nightly occurrence.

        12. avatar CarlosT says:

          Here’s what it boils down to: violence by drunks (or addicts) will always happen. The question is, do you want to add in violence by producers and distributors as well?

          Early in the 20th century, we decided the answer for the alcohol market was yes. So instead of the random incident of a drunk here or there committing a crime, we get the St. Valentines Day Massacre. And as a side effect, the NFA. Thanks, prohibition.

          The fact is that producers of legal products have no reason to shoot each other, no matter how heated the markets get. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates never needed to try to lure one another to a garage somewhere. They can just try to out compete on another with lower prices, more appealing products, better marketing, or what have you.

        13. avatar caffeinated says:

          I’m not against legalization. There are just too many people who think it is the silver bullet to end all drug violence. As you’ve stated yourself there is plenty of violence fueled by alcohol and prescription drugs already.

        14. avatar Philthegardener says:

          I don’t know much about this but something about the thought of legalized drugs makes everything in my system shout “Danger Will Robinson – Danger”

        15. avatar CarlosT says:

          Drugs are associated with danger because they’ve been an illegal market for so long and illegal narkets are inherently dangerous. The liquor market was literally murderous in 1929, but it’s just another market for just another product now.

          A similar thing would happen with drugs. The markets would become normal markets, and the production and distribution would be taken over by legitimate businesses (or the current producers would go legit). Either way, the violent methods would become unnecessary and counterproductive.

  2. avatar Mike OFWG says:

    It might be an interesting experiment to legalize drugs, it wouldn’t require a constitutional amendment. I suppose they could be re illegalized if it doesn’t work out.

  3. avatar Accur81 says:

    I think it’s pretty safe to assume that legalizing hard drugs like crack, cocaine, PCP, heroine, etc. will have a negative effect on our society. All I ask is that you spend some time at your local skid row and check out the hard core drug users who have dedicated their entire lives to the next fix before you disagree. Take a whiff, look at the track marks, the open sores, check their teeth (if they are still there), and see if you can engage in a meaningful conversation of any sort. Now imagine a whole lot more of that.

    So what, pray tell, are the benefits of legalizing such drugs?

    1. avatar Schisms says:

      Question is, are the benefits of having drug use/abuse illegal outweighing the costs of keeping them that way. Given the overwhelming corruption of the entire legal system and the absolute trampling of public rights in general over the issue in the last fifty years or so, I would have to vote “no”.

      Let’s face it. Having my dogs killed, my family brutalized, my house trashed and possibly myself killed in a mistaken “raid” with virtually no possibility of any meaningful compensation for that insult for my family, my community or the public in general, an event that happens to innocents on practically a daily basis nation wide, does not seem to be an acceptable price to pay for the “benefit” of having a few fewer derelicts on skid row.

      We can have a free society again, or we can keep the current police state. There simply does not seem to be any “happy medium” to be found anywhere in the real world. Which is “extreme” is better for the nation as a whole?

    2. avatar Schisms says:

      There’s also the issue of the criminalization of pain relief/treatment. How many doctors are leery of or actually refusing to properly treat acute/chronic pain because doing so may bring them to the attention of the DEA for enabling addicts? Even a fruitless investigation by the federal prohibition police (who know next to nothing about the medical aspects of pain relief and care less) is financially challenging and injurious to a doctor’s reputation, not to mention that even if he’s fully exonerated he’s still on the radar for future investigations “just because”. None of which considers the appalling effects on those who suffer from such pain and are unable to get relief because such relief requires “drugs”…which we are “at war” against.

      Talk about counter productive!

      1. avatar caffeinated says:

        The doctors who get audited and investigated by the DEA are not the ones just treating a few chronic and acute pain patients just FYI. The doctors being investigated are usually the ones running “pill mills” with armed security at the door (aka pain clinics). These seem to be on every street corner in Florida.

  4. avatar Janie Hines says:

    We have a rifle and handgun at the door! Nobody would make it in!

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      That’s one theory.

    2. avatar caffeinated says:

      Unless you aren’t at the door when the door kick robbery occurs.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email