DGUOTD: Wisconsin Grandmother Draws on Robber

Grocery store owner Ernestine Aldana practiced with her firearm. Twice. And then, when her life and property were threatened, she brought her firearm to bear on the bad guy. There wasn’t a “Wild West” gunfight per se. The robber fled. How many times does this happen? In 1991, a study found that 164k Americans successfully used a gun to defend themselves or their loved ones in a life-or-death situation. Ahead of next Tuesday’s gun control proposals, Vice President Joe Biden repeated the assertion that civilian disarmament legislation is worth it “if one life is saved.” Yes, well, if local, federal or state gun control measures had disarmed one percent of those people who used a firearm to save their life—completely discounting statistical evidence about deterrence—that’s 1640 lives lost. There’s no getting around it. Whether it’s facing down bad guys or enabling mass murder, disarmament = death. 

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

16 Responses to DGUOTD: Wisconsin Grandmother Draws on Robber

  1. avatarSpoons Make You Fat says:

    We’ve heard it said, when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. How will the bad guys get their guns? Simple:

    Gunsmith makes a rifle with a 3D printer

    So if we do see a gun ban who will turn in their guns? Everyone? The bad guys? Or just the good guys? We all see current efforts are focused on control, not on reducing violence.

    As for Ms. Aldana, good on ya!

  2. avatarRokurota says:

    Thank you! I have repeated this ad nauseam, but I may as well be speaking Khmer to people. You can’t argue with this “if one life is saved” angle.

    • avatarIng says:

      The most you can do is try to turn it around. A life for a life, so to speak. Unfortunately, not all lives are equal. Their “one life saved” is worth more than yours.

  3. avatarRalph says:

    Studies from the early ’90s, when concealed carry was in it’s infancy, would seem to grossly underestimate defensive gun use.

    • I would like to see some new studies down. One problem is that if someone like the NRA, SAF, or GOA promotes the study to be made, they will just discount the results based on who backed it.

  4. avatarEd Rogers says:

    Right on!! It’s unfortunate that we absolutely need to be prepared but that’s life. I hope they catch and prosecute the dirtbag.

  5. That is great. I read about this earlier this morning, but hadn’t seen the video. The security footage is hilarious.

  6. avatarSilver says:

    Yeah, but those 1640 lives lost would be gun-owners, who sociopathic leftists and antis have time and time again said they’d like to kill themselves.

    I think it’s the very reason that guns save their owners’ lives that makes antis want to disarm them.

    • avatarRalph says:

      I think it’s the very reason that guns save their owners’ lives that makes antis want to disarm them.

      I don’t think that you missed the mark, Silver. Gungrabbers do not want people to be able to defend themselves. The ‘grabbers want people to be defenseless, dependent and compliant.

  7. avatarshawmutt says:

    Another successful dgu cataloged at http://www.reddit.com/r/dgu! Thanks guys!

  8. avatarBilly Wardlaw says:

    One word: Succinct.

  9. avatareugene says:

    +1 to Ernestine

    Talking about gun grabbing, I’d just want the people up top go down to the worst neighborhoods to talk to the people that they really want to grab the guns from – the bad guys.

    Ask them, “if we pass a law to take away guns from the streets, will you turn them in?” and just see the responses.

  10. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Yes, if the anti’s can kill 10,000 good guys to save one gang banger its all worth it. Good going lady, I’m hoping my friends in Chicago can start real soon serving justice on the spot, Randy

  11. avatarLarry says:

    Not to be too critical, but 164K is 164,000 and not 1,640.

  12. avatarmountocean says:

    I love math, espicially hypothetical math.

Leave a Reply

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