Chris Gaither (courtesy dailystar.co.uk)

I going to take some heat for this, but I reckon 11-year-old Chris Gaither (above) is an irresponsible gun owner. Before I make my case, a quick note to pedants: if you’re holding a gun and it isn’t illegal for you to do so, even if the firearm doesn’t belong to you, at that moment you “own it.” You are a gun owner. OK, so, young Master Gaither was at home alone in Talladega, Alabama when a burglar came calling. The UK’s Daily Star, of all things, tells the story with attaboy gusto . . .

The little lad grabbed a 9mm handgun that was kept in the house and went to confront the thief.

While the robber was making off with the stolen goods, Chris fired eleven shots – but failed to hit the target.

The man was climbing over Chris’ fence and was just about to get away – before the fearless kid fired one last shot at the stash the man was holding.

The bullet passed through the loot – becoming lodged in the man’s leg and Chris said: “He told me he was going to kill me” . . .

Police in Alabama did not release the name of the man shot – but Chris’ mother was convinced the same man had tried to rob their house before.

The brave boy paid credit to his stepdad for showing him how to shoot – and fired one final warning shot to the robber, saying: “I hope you learned your lesson coming to this house.”

Easy guys! I know you have zero — as in no — tolerance for bad guys. Whether it’s “a good shoot” or not, when a criminal gets what he deserves you consider that a positive result.

And I bet you’re ready to celebrate Master Gaither’s quick thinking and adrenalin-fueled ballistic bravado — despite the strategic inadvisability and illegality of firing at a fleeing felon (subject to certain conditions, such as a kidnapping in progress) — or firing a warning shot.

But seriously, this isn’t how we do it.

Responsible gun owners don’t fire eleven shots hoping they hit the perp (and nothing else, though the scene looks plenty rural) who’s definitely leaving. Who didn’t hurt anybody.

With certain exceptions (as noted above), responsible gun owners don’t shoot at another human being unless they pose a credible, imminent threat of death or grievous bodily harm. And there’s a reasonable chance that said human being will stop the bullets traveling hither and yon.

Even in Texas, where defense of property is sufficient legal justification for shooting at a thief, there’s a moral imperative to hang fire. In my opinion, Master Gaither was an irresponsible gun owner who screwed the proverbial pooch — and could have paid the ultimate price (the perp said “I’m going to kill you” after he was shot). OK, your turn . . .

126 Responses to Chris Gaither: Irresponsible Gun Owner of the Day?

    • Let’s review…11 years old, living in Al-a-Bama, someone rat f-in his suff, when master B goes hard jerk on the bang switch and he’s suppose to know the finer points of law? I give the kid a pass and a cold beer. Next day take him to the range and work trigger discipline and counsel him on the man and making rounds count.

      • I agree w/ 90% of your comment, but I’m going to have to give you an “Irresponsible Beer Owner Of The Day” award. We don’t give 11 year olds beer around here. That’s not how we do it. /sarc

        But really, a pre teen ballistically defended his home, didn’t hurt any innocents or himself, and winged the bad guy. Great job. After this we’ll teach him better aim/trigger control/finer points of the law, but the core premise worked.

    • To what audience, Sir Bob, are you addressing your preach? Me thinks your noble words hath fallen on deaf ear with much of the TTAG youth. Guns are for shooting. Given that much content here floats fringe aspects of controversy, suddenly taking the high road dot com is, well, interesting.

      Itching to shoot is disease.

      • 1. 11 year old kid was alone in his own home. 2. Kid confronted robber who was stealing property. 3. Kid felt threatened by robber in his house and used weapon to defend himself. 4. Kid fired final shot at robber fleeing with his property.

        Honestly, I think the kid acted in a very responsible manner to defend himself and his home. He was undoubtedly scared to death and that influenced his poor accuracy. Something that’s especially true for little kids and women, if you are confronted by a thief in your home not defending yourself could very well result in your death. There were several important boundaries that were crossed in this incident and, overall, the kid deserves praise—he’s 11 for cryin’ out loud! I think he did everything right in defending himself. His accuracy was about as bad NYC cops, although his last round counted.

      • “Itching to shoot is disease.”

        Say what? I have 2 new guns which I have not yet shot, and I am itching.

  1. Tough one. On the one hand, the robber is fleeing and is thus a no shoot. On the other hand, he was armed and threatened the boy’s life.

    I personally would have shot earlier while the robber was in the home, not when he was fleeing. But I wasn’t there.

  2. Totally with you on this one, this was a bad shoot IMO. We have the same thing here where you can shoot to protect property but I’ve always thought it was kind of an aberration.

    • Just how in the hell is an 11 year old child supposed to know the VERY intricate laws relating to self defense? Esspecially as they are subject to change any given year. It’s hard enough as an adult to keep up with the nitpicking ROE the state imposes on the populous.

      • Maybe the parents shouldn’t make a firearm available to him then? He can’t be expected to know the intricacies of the tax code, either. I doubt the parents have him file their return, though.

        • An 11-year-old girl a few block down the road from me grabbed her mom’s pistol in the closet and shot the man stabbing her mom. I’m sure she didn’t know the finer points of the law beyond “don’t stab my mom”.

        • Seriously?! Things are replaceable. People are not. Explain to me (and the court) how shooting someone (who is fleeing) for your television or jewelry is the same as a girl saving her mother from an active attempted murder?

        • Thieves and killers are all too replaceable. If you think you can steal with impunity, don’t come to Texas, we will kill you. And you might want to consider your holier than thou attitude after you have been robbed of everything you own 8 or 10 times, with reason to believe it has been the same people people breaking into your home again and again, while the police have no clue who might be constantly stealing your life away. There actually are people whose lives have no value whatsoever, who should be stomped into the mud.

      • Amen, brother. Dad needed to hit him with the why instead of just how to shoot, but at least he knew how to operate it.

  3. The young man’s actions are the direct result of irresponsible PARENTS, who failed to teach him safe, effective and legal use of that gun. Not shooting at a fleeing criminal is the correct choice in most cases, but it is not instinctive. It doesn’t come naturally, by any means, and must be learned. If anything, he learned what he knew from TV shows. Very sad, and complete negligence by the parents.

    Give that young gentleman some decent role models, good training, friendly advice and strong support/incentive to learn what he needs to know. He was not “irresponsible.” He was ignorant, and that can be fixed.

    • “but it is not instinctive.”

      Yep. We have a lot of predator in our heritage, and going after a fleeing enemy is one of the traits.

      I blame the parents. (And they should also take the kid to the range more.)

    • May I suggest that in the future all IGOTD ‘winners” be supplied with a copy of the “Shoot-Don’t shoot” DVD mentioned in an earlier post? At least those where the award was presented for scenarios such as this one.

  4. I agree with the author, a fleeing felon means the firearm has done it’s task,
    making the perpetrator flee the scene.

    Besides, shooting anyone in the back is just bad form…

      • Ron White’s comedy about being on a turboprop when an engine fails is *gold*.

        Oh, yeah, the kid.

        I’m with Mamma Liberty on this one, the parents trusted him enough to give him access, they damn sure should have impressed the proper decision-making on him.

        His “I hope you learned your lesson coming to this house.” comment after the shoot indicates to me he lacks the maturity for the gun.

        In my opinion, a can of 30 foot-range ‘Bear-B-Gone’ pepper spray would be an appropriate weapon for him at this point…

    • This is why the law makes a distinction between children and adults. State of mind, maturity, etc.
      As far as I’m concerned, he afforded the thug the same courtesy the thug showed for their property rights.
      It was only a bad shoot because the perp isn’t room temperature.
      When we go back to public hanging you’ll see the crime rate plummet.

      • Funny how theft is slavery yet few people make the connection.

        If someone holds a gun on me and forces me to pick their cotton, weed their crops, or wash their clothes, that is kidnapping at first, but eventually (a week? month? year?) people call it slavery. It’s about as abhorrent a crime there can be, short of murder, and there are very few people who would consider it criminal to shoot the crook.

        But if someone steals something from me which took a week or month or year to pay for, it’s just called theft, and I’m supposed to let the crook go.

        Sure, insurance can pay for it, but insurance costs money, the insurance company also lost money on the deal, there’s the effort to go buy a replacement, there may be irreplaceable sentimental value, and all in all, I fail to see the difference.

        • Kid’s alive and well. Perp his hurting and didn’t get away with their hard-earned property. A good day in my book. I’d give the kid a handshake and a pat on the back.

    • “shooting anyone in the back is just bad form”

      Get that reality from Gary Cooper? Roy Rogers” The Duke”

        • Fair fights are for suckers.

          A man’s home is his castle. Those who breach the walls get everything they deserve, even if they’re trying to get back across the moat.

        • I’ll enlighten you as to what’s a “cowardly act”, an adult burglar/home invader when caught in the act, threatening to kill an eleven (11) year child in the kids own home, THAT’S “cowardly”.

        • Wow, I must be at the height of cowardice. Half the people I’ve killed didn’t even know I was there.

        • Boy, JWT, I never had that problem. Between burning white phosphorus and several tons of high explosive and jellied gasoline flying around, along with a few fighter aircraft, everybody for many miles around knew I was there!

    • Bad form? Do you think this is a game?

      I can think of a number of situations in which shooting an individual in the back might be a perfectly appropriate action. (Subject to the laws of the jurisdiction of course.)

      1. Turning to reach for a dropped weapon.
      2. Heading toward your wife/children.
      3. Perhaps to prevent him from fleeing with stolen firearms, explosives, or similar items.
      4. Fleeing with irreplaceable or uninsured high value item.
      5. You have reason to believe allowing the individual to escape presents a significant danger to others.

      The above case probably doesn’t fit any of these situations. Regardless, I can’t condemn the kid – especially if it was a rural location and no one else was at risk. If the cops are fine with this shoot, why shouldn’t I be?

  5. If his Play Station might have been in that hamper, I could probably understand the aggressive recovery of property efforts.

  6. Meh… The way I see it, lethal force is justified to stop the commission of any felony. That includes a burglar running off with your boosted stereo.

  7. He’s not a gun owner, because he’s 11(illegal for him to own one), so he can’t be the IGOD.

  8. The kid is 11, I mean, not like he finished the guy off. Many adults loose their cool in defensive situations, this kid handled it much better and with more calm, it seems, than we usually see from people 2-3 times his age.

  9. I’ll go with immature gunowner. 11 shots and the bad guy’s already outside fleeing with whatever he could hold while hopping a fence? An adult gunowner I’d ticket with something minor, class C misdemeanor with some nominal community service. This kid? Maybe a stern lecture from the judge about overkill and the dangers of firing indiscriminately, but that’s it.

  10. “He gave credit to his step dad for teaching him how to shoot.” Boy can’t help it step dad was a former NYPD cop.

  11. I’m not ready to jump on the bad shoot bandwagon just yet. Had it been an adult in question, absolutely bad shoot. But we are talking about an 11 year old kid who likely doesn’t understand the myriad nuances of all the cryptic firearms laws. In the eyes of an eleven year old, his home was attacked several times. He had been threatened with death at least once that was reported, but possibly more than that. There’s a good chance this bad guy will return, and I guarantee the kid will be in danger again. You are expecting that kid to make calm, rational, ADULT decisions throughout the entire dangerous situation. This should be used as an opportunity to teach the kid the law, train him on how to handle this next time, and use this situation to teach your own kids how to handle this kind of situation. Yes, he potentially put others at risk, but I can list HUNDREDS of cases when trained police officers have put bystanders at even greater risk, and many cases injured and killed innocents. I think we should be focusing on the real problem, the thief.

  12. Irresponsible Gun Owner of the Day

    I think you misspelled Gun Hero of the Day.

    He’s 11 years old and fought off a bad guy by himself.

    I’ll bet that when you were 11, you would have been crying for your mommy.

    Tell me I’m wrong and I’ll believe you. Well, not really.

  13. Your are right in your analysis but too quick to take judgement. He didn’t make the decision that an adult should have but the law recognizes that minors often make poor decisions hence juvenile court. If, as they should, public schools taught marksmanship, self defense and gun safety I would hold the kid more accountable.

    And I gots to say it “Responsible gun owners don’t fire eleven shots hoping they hit the perp…” But so many cops do!

  14. The boy was most deffenitly in the wrong for the last shot. Stepa needs to teach him how to shoot straight so the first 11 would have hit the perp. Another thing, why do we know the name of and have a picture of the child, but, the police will not release the name of the perp? That is the most wrong here.

    • This^^^. If you are going to show your step-kid where you keep your guns it is your responsibility to teach him/her how and when to shoot it and hit your target. Also when to STOP shooting.

      This was what I did with my 12 year old step son and 16 years later he has never shot anyone.

    • Teach the kids to use the rifles, or hide. Handgun fights with adult criminals is a bad idea for an 11-year-old. Actually, now that I think about it, a 12 gauge is a valid choice, as well. Recently proven!

  15. If you use the Obama administration’s definition of “imminent”, it was imminent. The intruder did threaten to kill the child.

    “The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”

    I am being ironic.

    Ref:http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/leaked-drone-memo-creates-more-questions-than-amswers/

  16. Irresponsible, as if he shot while the criminal was hopping the fence and he is not fully grown, I have to assume that he fired at an upward angle, meaning, if he had missed on that shot who knows what he could have hit, that’s the irresponsible part in my mind

  17. Wow. 11 years old and being ragged on. Too bad the criminal didn’t expire. Would you’all be OK if this was a girl? Expecting responsible behavior from an 11year old by himself. Alone. I’m with Ralph…you’re not wrong(and I get you are an attorney).

  18. He’s 11 man. What would’ve YOU (anyone reading this blog) done at 11 with someone breaking into your house? Probably cry, shit, and piss yourself.

  19. He shouldn’t have confronted the BG in the first place. He’s eleven: barricade the door, point the gun at it, call 911. He had no reason to place himself in that kind of danger, or shoot a fleeing person. If you’re going to teach your kid to shoot, which you should, teach him when to shoot as well. Bad parenting that cant be faulted on the kid

  20. If the person pulling the trigger in this case were an adult I would say entirely bad shoot, but he’s 11. Adrenaline dumps already do a number on the minds and bodies of grown ass men and women. I shudder to think at how scared out of my tree I would be fending off a burglar in my own house, alone, at such a young age. Sure, dad may have neglected to teach all the legal intricacies of home defense, but he probably wasn’t planning to do so until his son got to high school, maybe junior high. This was a terrible case of bad timing, and now the dad can jumpstart some real marksmanship lessons. So the kid said some dumb sh!t, who cares? At least he didn’t plug the wounded burglar a la Hollywood or launch an errant round into a neighbor’s house.

  21. I dunno. I could see myself taking a 12 gauge and blowing off the crook’s nuts at 11 years old.

  22. You better hope that millineal with balls becomes a sheepdog to protect your aging self. Don’t dog him for being 11 instead educate and build on that thing he has that you can’t teach!

  23. An 11 year old made the best decision he could an followed through with it. A criminal got shot while breaking the law. I am O. K. With it.

  24. Bad shoot. 1) it took 12 rounds before he finally, through luck, hit the target. His dad didn’t teach him jack! 2) He fired on someone who was, even if a threat earlier, no longer a threat. 3) It is illegal in MOST states, to shoot at a fleeing felon, even if he/she has your property in his/her possession, unless that felon is presenting a threat to someone else’s LIFE or is in danger of causing bodily harm. While he did what he thought was right, I’d say that the “IRRESPONSIBLE” gun owner was his MOM and STEP-DAD! They are more to blame for his poor marksmanship and irresponsible use of a weapon than he was – an 11 year old is not capable of making adult decisions without proper guidance from adults that is constantly reinforced through practice and training. Had his step dad done his job, he’d have known when he could and couldn’t shoot.

    • “3) It is illegal in MOST states, to shoot at a fleeing felon,”

      Not for 11-year-olds, I think you’ll find. Like, not for cops, as well. Absolutes are absolutely wrong.

  25. You have a right to defend your property wether it is recognized by your local overlords is a different question too bad the kid missed soo much I would think 11 rounds should do the job center of mass

  26. An eleven (11) year old confronts a home invader and you’re worrying about eleven (11) shots? I’ll bet the kid was sh** scared, nearly pissing himself at first and what was happening not “registering” mentally.

    If anything we should exploit this incident and use it as an example whenever Liberals propose “magazine capacity” restriction legislation because if this handgun only held ten (10) rounds the eleven year old boy might be dead after all the perpetrator DID threaten to “kill” him.

  27. If the kid were a LEO, it would have been instantly proclaimed a good shoot.

    So if a 11 year old kid performs to an acceptable standard for trained law enforcement, where’s the problem?

  28. I REALLY want to say “good job kid”. But, bad shoot. If the only thing you’re defending is something that can be replaced, it’s not worth taking a life.

    I’m pretty sure in my state (Iowa) the parents could end up in jail for what he did.

    • “it’s not worth taking a life.”

      Yes, it is. Some lives are completely without value. I would never support killing someone for stealing groceries. For stealing a Bentley? Adios, MF.

  29. He’s 11. He did what he had to do to the best of his abilities in a high stress situation, with a real & imminent threat to his life.
    He’s good to go in my book.

  30. “Even in Texas, where defense of property is sufficient legal justification for shooting at a thief, there’s a moral imperative to hang fire.”

    Moral imperative? Are you trolling us Robert?

    What sort of message does a statement like this send to potential thieves?

    “We have guns. Don’t worry though. You can steal our property and you’ll be fine as long as you don’t directly threaten us.”

    Not saying I would necessarily take a legally justified shot at a fleeing thief. However, it would be an act of mercy – not a result of any moral imperative.

  31. You folks that are advocating shooting someone (i.e. capital punishment) for theft are scaring me. Please never run for public office.

    • It’s not capital punishment. Capital punishment is government sanctioned execution, by definition. This is defense. Maybe piss poor defense,but definitely not capital punishment.

      The real question is mostly rhetorical and not really directed at you: where’s the appropriate line? Some guy, unarmed, kicks in the door and starts filling a pillowcase with your valuables. It’s that a good time to shoot him? If he’s not threatening you? Should we gently suggest he leave? Maybe direct him to the fine silver?

    • It’s perfectly legal in Texas to shoot someone if they are leaving with your property and you reasonably expect that you cannot get it back without using deadly force. There is no limit to the value of the property.

      So, if someone steals your paper clip, and you reasonably believe that no cop is going to take the time to find the crook who took your favorite paper clip, then you may use deadly force to stop someone from fleeing with it.

      The catch is in the word “reasonable.” Which means whatever a jury thinks it should mean. I wouldn’t rely on the text of the law to kill someone over a stolen paperclip because a jury is very likely to conclude that it wasn’t reasonable.

      But it’s not true that deadly force can’t be legally used to protect property. In civilized states such as Texas you can.

      • I haven’t looked for a decade or 2, but when last I did, there was a monetary value of $500 involved, by whose valuation I did not understand.

        Still, point taken, in TX you can shoot a thief, as in everywhere else if you retrieve your property and depart before anyone knows shit.

    • Ah yes, the silly argument anti-gunners make comparing civilian (police included) defensive shootings to capital punishment.

      The purpose of a defensive shooting is not punishment. The purpose is stopping a criminal in the act of committing a crime (or, in rare cases, preventing his escape). Two completely different standards apply.

      By your logic there should be virtually no defensive shootings because most crimes, even violent crimes, don’t qualify for the death penalty.

    • “You folks that are advocating shooting someone (i.e. capital punishment) for theft are scaring me.”

      Amazing. So, if no one can be shot for theft, then thieves and armed robbers can ply their trade without fear? Is that your concept? I can steal hundreds, or thousands, or fucking *MILLIONS* of dollars from you, and you are not allowed to protect yourself from me? Is it even POSSIBLE that you can be so stupid as to claim that is somehow “obvious”? Your lack of any sign of reason is scaring me. Microaggression! OMG! Help, Help!

  32. There’s a pretty good debate on at what age a child develops a moral sense of right and wrong. The ages range from two years to 15. That’s one reason for the juvenile court system.

    Here we have an 11 year old tha knew is was wrong to take stuff. Did he understand the fine print of the law? Did he appreciate what it meant to shoot someone?

  33. “Even in Texas, where defense of property is sufficient legal justification for shooting at a thief, there’s a moral imperative to hang fire. ”

    Nope.

  34. At the point he’s running away, he’s the popo’s problem. If I have a firearm in my hand WHILE he’s making with the smash and grab there is no such thing as a hang fire.

  35. Heck cops sometimes miss that much right? He’s safe at the end of the day and he didn’t zap a bystander. Moving target, stressful situation, general absence of life experience, heaven only knows what other considerations… I’m not about to second guess him.

  36. I love happy endings. I am not seeing any moral dilemma. The kid acted on the perfectly natural instinct to protect himself and his stuff. He stopped when the robber stopped. I don’t know what the law is in Alabama, but good luck finding a jury to convict the boy of anything.

  37. “responsible gun owners don’t shoot at another human being unless they pose a credible, imminent threat of death or grievous bodily harm…

    Even in Texas, where defense of property is sufficient legal justification for shooting at a thief, there’s a moral imperative to hang fire.”

    It’s sad that even some gun owners have accepted the idea that they owe something to criminals who break into houses to steal and kill. Sure the law may prosecute you for giving some crook his just desserts but that’s because the law now protects criminals from honest people and from justice.

    Such tender concern for the well being of scumbags is part of the reason everything is so screwed up in this country.

    In a sensible world if you’re in commission of a serious crime against someone else you take your life into your own hands.

  38. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be robbed while you’re home. It would have to be pretty scary.

    Unarmed perp? So what. Disparity of force.11 year old vs adult (assumption).

    Did he do well? He’s alive and no one that matters was hurt. Not the best gun handling. My advice would be to get a smaller-caliber weapon and spend some more time on weapon handling in these type of settings.

    He now has a threat against him and crooks aren;t know to obey the law or have respect for life, limb,or property.

    If the crook had suspected an armed response, he would have probably gone somewhere else. Crooks are usually stupid but not crazy.

  39. What’s shocking to me was the gun was accessible to a minor and the parents aren’t being charged with improper storage, or some such horse hockey. I guess it’s Alabama and not IL or NY and that’s the difference in this story.

  40. Clearly the parents are to blame for this bad shoot..Just look how fat the child is. Parents must not push fitness or healthy eating habits either.

  41. Money is time. Or, rather, wealth is time. Whether you spent hours making yourself a chair, or you spent hours digging a ditch for your neighbor in exchange for a chair he made, those are hours you can never get back. You spent those hours working for someone else, for the chair-purchaser or the ditch purchaser, on the faith that those hours spent would come back around to you as food, shelter, and clothing for you and your family. And now the fruits of your labor in good faith are gone, as if those hours of your life had never existed.

    Theft is not a crime because it’s a theft of things. It is a crime because it is a theft of life, some portion of your finite, irretrievable supply of hours on this earth. The law as written may not recognize it, but the theft of justly produced or purchased goods is a little bit of murder, and lethal force in defense of justly produced or purchased property, in the moment of the theft, to stop its flight, is absolutely just in turn. The law is wrong.

  42. Legally, probably IGOotD; however, if the perp did threaten his life then I say good shoot.

    Even grown adults with uniforms and badges tend to continue firing when they should not.

  43. I am conflicted.

    Part of me wants to agree, shooting to stop (the outcome of death is a distinct possibility) a robbery that has resulted in nothing more than property taken or damaged should not occur. Things CAN be replaced (for the most part.) All live is sacred and should be held in the highest regard, and only taken as the most dire of needs.

    However… part of me says, screw these fuckers who think taking what is mine that I worked (and frequently bled) for is their “right.” The more room temperature criminals such as these we create the better off society will be in the long run, either through attrition or reeducation that stealing other people’s things is a Bad Idea.

    I want to condemn the kid and his parents under the former. Under the latter however, I’d give him a “next time finish the job.”

    I don’t see an easy way to choose which one is the Right Answer.

  44. When I was 18 or 19 a neighbor called that had drove by our house and said someone was poking around one of our out buildings. I grabbed a shot gun and run outside to see a man pushing one our dirt bikes down the road. First feeling is anger, but I fired a shot in the air and not at him. He had his back to me of course so he didn’t know but he dropped the bike and took off running. I am glad I didn’t shoot him, but for an instant I wanted to.

    This kid was in the house and the man came into the house, and the clip I had seen I thought I heard the kid say the man told him he would kill him so he ran and got the gun. The man takes off, and is fleeing so yeah probably should have not fired. But seeing someone running off with your stuff causes anger, and add to it the fear from that person having invaded your home and issuing threats well that is a lot of adrenalin and excitement for such a young boy to deal with. That is the risk a thief is taking, it is a spin of the fortune wheel, he may encounter a cowering old woman, or an excited young boy with a gun. Being a thief is and should be a risky business.

    • A HS classmate’s father owned a gas station. One Friday, as he was preparing to go play in a football game, a guy came in the station and pulled a gun, demanding money. His dad pulled his own gun and exchanged fire, was shot in the arm, the bad guy ran out of the station, around the side. My classmate, 17 years old, went around the building the other direction, ending up popping around the corner behind the bad guy, and promptly converted him to dog chow with a 12 gauge. Then he called the cops, tended his dad, and took off to play him some football. That was 1963. To my knowledge, nothing was ever mentioned about a possibility that he should not have shot the punk.

  45. LOL nothing like watching a bunch of grown men victim blaming an 11 year old kid trying to defend his property!

    You guys should go back to tumblr and cry about how criminals need more protection against violence

  46. Personally, I am puke-sick of the ‘Gun Owners Morality and Behavior Police: Armchair Quarterback Bureau’.

    He’s an 11 year old kid for f’k sake.

    Who gives a rat’s hairy ass if, in the stress of a shit-sandwich scary situation, he dumped a bunch of rounds….he stepped up to the plate, didn’t choke and he did what he should have done, that being shoot the turd who was committing the bad-act.

    In addition, he belittled and derided the puke-fuck bad-actor. Good on you, kid.

    ‘Irresponsible’ my ass…he should be praised for manning-up and acting as he thought best in a crap situation. His DAD/PAPA/MOM/UNCLE-SKIPPY or other related person can address training issues and any constructive criticism, as THEY see fit.

    Pontificating about actions others have taken under high-stress situations and contextualizing them as ‘irresponsible’, simply places one into a category akin to a collectivist nanny-stater or do-gooder busy-body.

    Individuals do things or don’t do things…neither is reflective on everybody else and to imply so is to act in that specific just like a garden variety collectivist does, in my opinion.

    As for me….you did a damn good job kid. Proud of you.

  47. Well, what we have to remember is human nature. The boy was empowered. You can’t just take that back. He had the knowledge and that converted into willingness as soon as things went all moogly. Look you’re 11 years old. Help is definitely far enough away to not be definable as actual help. Mom and Dad are gone and you’re home alone playing Nintendo. Next thing you know there’s some guy in the house taking your stuff and ignoring you. It will not register to you that you’re being ignored. As far as you’re concerned there might as well be an army of ninjas bearing down on you. You’re scared and when people are scared they do things to make them not scared. Firing 11 rounds without hitting a thing shows us he was almost certainly peeing down his leg scared.

    Well the bad guy managed to start a lethal force situation, albeit unintentionally by all evidence so far, with someone poorly equipped to determine by any rational basis, logic/law/morality/etc…, where to draw the line and pull back from the encounter. That machine got pull started by a bad guy doing bad things. That the machine operated as it was programmed to by nurture and nature, with the ferocity of a true natural predator, is a compliment to whatever restraint he was taught.

    If you start a lethal encounter, you don’t just get to decide to leave and think that both sides are going to cease hostilities. Some folks take a little longer to spin down from fear of imminent death and that sucks for bad guys that suddenly think better of things but it’s absolutely mandatory for dealing with the bad guys that decide to double down and we can’t go second guessing until mindset is really properly accounted for.

    It’s also possible that the little tyke is just a completely callous and thuggish twit and shot the guy that last time as a sort of sarcastic parting gift and hoped the bad guy would get away and die of an infection. It’d be a well deserved parting gift if you ask me. Anyone that breaks into your home while you’re there means to kill you as far as I’m concerned. I don’t care why they’re there, and I don’t think as a matter of law it should either. When that policy ends up with a genuine tragedy we can all remember that occasional tragedy is the price of true liberty.

  48. Interesting views on gun responsibility there, Farago.

    On one hand the 11 year old is fully responsible for the gun even though he probably doesn’t know jack squat beyond what he’s seen on TV. As you say, HE OWNS IT. On the other and in a separate article, you think it’s pretty okay to forget what bag you left your firearm in to be found by the airport police because, hey, they just carry so often its easy to forget. Oh, and you revile law enforcement in general.

    I mean, are you sure you’re on our side? Because I sure as hell have a lot more sympathy for the kid who doesn’t know any better and getting robbed than the person who really should know better, making excuses about where he forgot he left his gun ala Barney Fife.

  49. NICE SHOOTIN SON! But seriously if he had done that in Ohio its illegal to shoot someone over property and people have been convicted for shooting people running away. In Cleveland a man fed up with people breaking into his shed shot a person running away and was convicted for it.

Leave a Reply

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