Houston Man Shoots Attacker Holding His Pregnant Wife at Gunpoint

defensive gun use Houston Man Pregnant Wife

courtesy khou.com

A woman pulled into her driveway on the south side of Houston Tuesday morning and got out of her car. There, she was immediately targeted by two men who held her at gunpoint, took her purse, and attempted to force her into the house.

Luckily, her husband was home to heroically rescue her and their 3-month-old unborn child. Hearing his wife screaming, the man emerged from his house with his gun and exchanged fire with the two attackers, hitting one in the head and chasing off the other.

The man said he couldn’t remember how many shots he fired or even what the attackers looked like – it all happened too fast.

According to police, the injured suspect was hospitalized in critical condition while the other still remains at large. Neither the woman nor her sheepdog husband were physically injured.

comments

  1. avatar m. says:

    …shall not be infringed, gun control t**ts

  2. avatar Hoodlum says:

    A bullet to the head will knock some sense into ya

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      Seems to have knocked it out of Giffords.

      1. avatar jeff says:

        stats don’t lie. of course there are instances where a gun saves your life….but there are many more where carrying results in death to the carrier. but keep living in superhero fantasy land.

        1. avatar Shane says:

          Statistics are irrelevant….being armed worked in this situation.

  3. avatar Ralph says:

    Good shooting, Tex! Your 3-month-old unborn child would be proud.

    Wait, what?

    1. avatar Removed_californian says:

      Yeah, couldn’t have found a more awkward way to say it. Should have just said pregnant wife.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Maybe it was a coldly deliberate phrasing.

    2. avatar Jon in CO says:

      So they can show people that it’s not an “actual child” so there’s still hope for the psycho liberals to have it aborted.

  4. avatar Bloving says:

    Sheepdog!
    Pity his wife was a sheep with no teeth of her own… I’ve never understood the thinking of a young mother who uses the “I have kids, so no guns” excuse…. and I delight in asking them how they would feel if someone attacked their child – “I would attack them!” they predictably reply. “With what?” I then respond. “Your instinct to protect your child is admirable, but you are a mother lioness who has had herself declawed and her teeth filed down – why do you think that made sense?”
    🤠

    1. avatar Just Sayin says:

      ^I’m stealing that and using it.

    2. avatar jwtaylor says:

      There’s nothing to suggest she was unarmed.

      1. avatar Ardent says:

        That’s what I was thinking as well.

        I’m something just a hair below paranoid and just above hyper-vigilant and have no trouble imagining this…
        Arriving in your own driveway with everything looking normal, no people visible…I have no doubt most people, even most defensive minded people could easily be ambushed in such a location/situation…and then what? Try to draw on a drawn gun? She may well have been armed, but hadn’t found opportunity to deploy her weapon yet.

        Knowing that my spouse is inside and armed (which she is) might make me plan to attemp to warn her so she can save herself and, hopefully, me.

        1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

          Most women who carry tote the gun in their purse. So even if she was armed, they had likely already taken the gun along with her purse.

    3. avatar Arizona Free says:

      Have you ever seen a woman swing a baseball bat? The vast majority will hold it with their hands a foot apart and instead of swing the bat they push it. If women get hit in the face by a decent punch they are done. A gun is the best option since they can hold onto or carry little ones and stop a threat.

  5. avatar FedUp says:

    Giffords is against violent criminals getting shot in the head while committing violent crimes.

    Giffords calls it ‘gun violence’ and demands that it be stopped.

    Giffords is a pro-crime activist group.

    1. avatar Bloving says:

      I prefer “anti-civil rights organization” staffed by Bigots. And I love telling such people that to their faces.
      And is no one going to make a crack about the Dead End sign outside the house?
      🤠

      1. avatar Just Sayin says:

        ^ Right!?
        First thing I noticed before reading.
        Double dead end.

        Too bad THAT wasn’t the outcome for the two perps.

      2. avatar Just Sayin says:

        Dang BLove ! Yer on a roll…
        I’m stealing the “anti-civil rights organization” also.
        Gonna whip up a few t-shirts for me and my friends.

    2. avatar GunGal says:

      Gabby wouldn’t be so anti 2nd, if she accepted armed LEOs instead of being a sitting Duck.
      Any elected official should understand there’s going be someone out there that hates you. Getting elected does not change that.

  6. avatar John Boch says:

    No plan survives getting punched, er, I mean shot in the face!

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      Well, unless the plan is to get shot in the face and then improvise from there;-)

  7. avatar Paul McMichael says:

    Well done sir! I am glad your wife and unborn child are safe. At your first opportunity obtain self defense training for your wife and the means to execute it. You may not be there next time. Also, for your child when age appropriate.

  8. avatar Brandan says:

    This notion that the downsides of gun ownership “outweigh” the positive benefits really chaps my ass. To hell with utilitarianism. This balance sheet view of ethics has stripped people of their liberty since time immemorial, particularly since the Progressive Era. Even if its true, statistics don’t apply evenly and furthermore their statistical case is made almost entirely by including suicide as a “risk” of gun ownership.

    But, even if I was to play their game for a moment…why should I surrender my firearms and therefore my ability to adequately defend to myself (for the promise) of reduced risk of being shot during an active shooting? I’m statistically much more likely to encounter a common violent crime than an active shooter. And yet the latter is treated by the anti-gunners as a more valid point of concern…and the occurrence which should drive gun policy…and concern for the former is treated a paranoid obsession of we “ammosexuals.”

    In my opinion the statistics are irrelevant because the legal reality is that the state bears no obligation to protect the individual and the practical reality is that even if they did they cannot guarantee the ability to do so. I’m so over these elitists who live in gated communities with armed guards and their paternalistic desire to legislate upon the assumption that I’m too stupid to know what is in my own best interest.

    But then again that doesn’t matter either because statists gonna state.

    Fuck ’em.

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      Bottom line with all of this sort of irrational thinking and speechifying about how restrictions on ownership/carry/use, No-Guns signs, etc. is that not one molecule of it has ever stopped someone intent on doing harm, and never will. The entire argument that it makes people “safer” is a hysterically hilarious fantasy that only exists in the minds of those who are divorced from reality, and those who are pursuing a design to reduce the people under absolute Despotism.

      1. avatar Brandan says:

        Despotism is right. I’d also argue that imbued within the gun control agenda is blatant classism and sexism. The elite talking heads won’t suffer under the costs of their gun control proposals because they’re rich enough to bear or circumvent them. Licensing fees, training requirements, prohibitive storage laws are a drop in the bucket for those with Scrooge McDuck money. Say nothing of the political connections which allow them to grease the skids of the burdensome regulatory state.

        Furthermore, they can afford to entirely outsource their self-protection to a private 3rd party. The same can’t be said for a small business owner who may incur greater risk due to his or her business but doesn’t generate enough income to do the same as high capital earners. Like so many of the left’s bright ideas those in the middle are hurt the hardest. They’re too invested in the system to break the law, but not rich enough to hire lawyers to circumvent the law.

        Lastly, one can see the classism in how they frame their arguments, which are eelier similar to the classist arguments made by the Progressives of yesteryear. Their screeds are saturated with allusions to small penis size, poor education, a lack of culture, manners,”common sense” and so on. Which is why the legacy media is doing its best to minimize the presence of women in the gun community and masculinize the hobby. In modern American masculinity is treated as a pathogen. Painting gun ownership as exclusively male is an effort to delegitimize the practice. Which is of course nonsense as women have had a robust relationship with guns since their invention…particularly in the U.S. with its frontier heritage.

        Statists gonna state.

        1. avatar GunnyGene says:

          I’ll be 74 soon and I’ve watched the disintegration of all that made this country great for nearly that long. I come from a line of military men and pioneers that stretches back to 1632 on these shores, and I have trouble believing how far we have fallen as a Nation. Not just in relation to firearms and related, but in every segment of society. When my father passed away about 15 years ago I told my mother and siblings that at least he won’t have to watch the country (that he and I, and our ancestors before us fought for, and some died for), destroy itself.

          I don’t know if it can be saved.

          **************************************************************************

          Lo, There do I see my Father
          Lo, There do I see my Mother and
          My Brothers and my Sisters
          Lo, There do I see the line of my people back to the begining
          Lo, They do call to me
          They bid me take my place among them in the halls of Valhalla
          Where thine enemies have been vanquished
          Where the brave shall live Forever
          Nor shall we mourn but rejoice for those that have died the glorious death.

  9. avatar jwm says:

    This was a home invasion. With possibly rape and murder as the end result.

    Home carry, people. Or risk being the next Pettit family.

    1. avatar Anner says:

      I highly doubt those two gentlemen intended to take her inside and prepare a meal for the family.

      Home carry, inside and outside the door, always.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        Actually, they were there to give her a quote on flooring. Up to three rooms for 70% off!

  10. avatar S.Crock says:

    What is the best reputable source to show people how often DGUs happen? I’ve tried looking for the CDC one that says they happen 2.5M+ times per year but links always lead to some articles taking about the study, but I haven’t found the source with the numbers. It’s easy to find sources about the 30,000 killed by suicide or homicide with a gun. Anecdotal stories like this article are great but they aren’t as helpful when when the the anti gunners present the 30,000 number.

  11. avatar little horn says:

    Mrs. Gifford, you took a bullet to the brain. why would i listen to anything coming out of said damaged brain??? i wouldn’t.

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      And the leaders of Miranda just wanted to make people “Better”. Didn’t quite work out that way.

  12. avatar Chris Mallory says:

    He was a man, not a sheepdog. Sheepdogs exist to herd the sheep to be sheared or slaughtered. Don’t be a mindless animal.

  13. avatar B Zero says:

    Prayers to the family and hope the perp dies very soon. No one should have to pay to keep him alive.

  14. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    The “Feel Good Story of the Week”!!

  15. avatar rt66paul says:

    In areas where more people have guns, the burglary rate and home invasion rates are much lower. That is saying a lot about how the threat of the victims firearms stop a crime before it happens.
    Just showing a gun keeps bad guys away, but people do not want to report it, because some DA is going to call it “brandishing”.
    I am sure that many crimes do not happen when the perps are afraid you are armed.

  16. avatar Small p-o-t-a-t-o-e-s ¤¤ says:

    The bad guy was shot in the head and didn’t expire……….hmmmm………
    Maybe the home owner should buy a bigger gun…….those .9mm are just peashooters.

  17. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    I clicked on the link to read the Houston news story on this crime. Below this story was an item about a bank robbery in Fort Worth where 3 female bank employees were wounded. Seems like the no guns allowed sign was overlooked by the bank robbers. Another gun free zone success story.

  18. avatar Duncan says:

    Giffords is a civil rights terrorist.

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