Woman Who Shot Stranger During Break-In: “Any Mother is Going to Protect Her Kid”

“Any mother is going to protect her kid any way she can. And that’s what I did,” said Ashley Jones, a South Carolina woman whose three kids were sleeping in her house while she got into a gunfight with a stranger.

As shown in her security camera footage (which you can watch below), a strange man, accompanied by a woman, began banging on Jones’ door around 6:00 a.m. on November 1. Immediately, Jones knew something was wrong and was quick to call the police.

“He was like, ‘this is my house, let me in. I’m not going to hurt you’ kind of thing, and I was like ‘What do you want?'” said Jones. “After I called the police, I grabbed a gun and went to the top of the steps and was like, ‘I have a gun. I will shoot you. Do not come in my house.'”

When Jones didn’t unlock the front door, the man attempted to go around the back and try the back door, which was also locked. He then came back to where he started, on the front patio, and forced entry.

“Finally, he kicked the door in and tried walking towards the inside, and that’s when I shot him,” she said.

The surveillance footage captured the whole thing (1:35 in that video). You can see the man react as the round hits his shoulder. At that point, the man attempted to run off, but police were already there. He was taken into custody and treated at a hospital for non-life-threatening injuries.

Jones says both the man and the woman were complete strangers to her. She’s also very grateful that she had a gun, which her family had decided to purchase only a few months prior to this event.

No word yet on whether any charges will be filed in this case.

comments

  1. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

    No word whether charges will be filed????🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔. I think he should be charged with attempted burglary…

    1. avatar Kahlil says:

      there’s always that tag line, I believe they are referencing the homeowner protecting her family.

      1. avatar ORCON says:

        Sad but true.

    2. avatar Latemarch says:

      Breaking and entering, assault, trespassing, and misdemeanor littering for leaving blood on her sidewalk.

      1. avatar Jon in CO says:

        Littering blood? If that dude is infected at all, it’s definitely terrorism for using bio weapons. Might be improper disposal of bioweapons, transporting, (ITAR is getting serious!) and carrying a concealed weapon without a permit.

        Toss the book at em.

  2. avatar Craig in IA says:

    “Any Mother is Going to Protect Her Kid” After they’re born, I assume… Even then that’s not always the truth. On the other hand, good for her!

  3. avatar Kahlil says:

    but wait, guns don’t save good people…they only serve the bad guys. How does this fit that narrative?

    They were only asking for directions, not to get shot.
    I thought this was my house.
    There was supposed to be a party here.
    I was returning a lost puppy.

    Can’t wait to see the excuses the criminals have for trying to break into her house. Glad the mom is safe and able to protect her kids.

    1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      Yep, the bad guy should have re-read the script. A – Break in to house. B – Take gun away from defender. C – Shoot good person with gun.

      Hard to find competent help these days, guess the Bloomberg bunch will need to keep looking.

  4. avatar jwm says:

    A lot of mothers will not have a gun in the house. Their kids lives are not as important as a political stance.

    Sucks to be their kids.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      JWM,

      I came to post the exact same sentiment.

      For many people, it is somehow morally superior for a victim to be unarmed and die at the hands of a ruthless murderer.

      1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        +1

  5. avatar Wayne says:

    Fox news is reporting she will not be charged and he will be charged with burglary. You will not see this on MSNBC or CNN or any of the other lib channels.

  6. avatar CTstooge says:

    Warm. Fuzzy.

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    “Any mother is going to protect her kid.”

    Yeah, except Mothers Against. And Mothers Who Live in Slave States. Etc. ad infinitum.

  8. avatar SouthernShooter says:

    Good shoot, Mom!

  9. avatar VicRattlehead says:

    “Any mother is going to protect her kid any way she can. And that’s what I did,”

    Not all of them…
    Some will murder them before they ever see the light of day and if they ‘choose’ to let them live, they fill their little heads with idiotic ‘relative morals’ and outright lies, while ensuring that they remain as defenseless as possible throughout their school years and beyond.
    No, only real ‘Moms’ will do ANYTHING it takes to protect their kids.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      little bundles of cells that don’t think and have no memory or consciousness are not kids. Tying this crap up with gun rights is of no good to them.

      1. avatar John in AK says:

        Big bunches of cells that don’t think and have no morals or conscience aren’t adults, either. They do, however, have the ability to troll on the InterWebs.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          So true, LOL!

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Hannibal,

        Your comment begs a response to the following three points:
        (1) When you are under anesthesia, you are unconscious — you have no thoughts and no memories. Under your standard, it is okay for someone to kill you when you are in that condition.
        (2) Exactly how many cells must a human being have before it is no longer okay to kill them?
        (3) A baby at about three months development is a tiny human with arms, legs, fingers, toes, heart, etc. How is that simply a “bundle of cells”? How is it okay to kill that tiny human?

        While this is not directly related to firearms, it illustrates the mental gymnastics that people employ to circumvent natural law much less man-made law. As such, it is an important insight into the lengths that people will go to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

        1. avatar 16V says:

          1) Brains don’t “shut off” during anesthesia.
          https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180703105631.html

          2) At what point are you willing to open up your wallet and start paying for it? All it’s medical bills? All the education money that will be squandered on it? All it’s interaction with the justice system? You’re just fine with the $100K per year jail?

          3) Women have been “aborting” unwanted pregnancies since they’ve figured out how. This is neither a modern, nor Western, thing. The “modern” part is that the women face less risk of dying themselves. The mental gymnastics are yours – making this about some sort of grand “sin”, and not just an unfortunate aspect to the ability to reproduce sexually.

          With the exception of a small percentage of those who use it as a regular means of birth control, these are women who have decided for whatever reason that they can’t raise a child right at this time. Rightly so, and thankfully they reached this conclusion. Despite whatever Hallmark fantasy you like to imagine, in the real world, having a kid can/will ruin you financially. And continue to drain the social welfare system. Not to mention that kid has much worse odds of succeeding.

          Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one. Except those who are most concerned with this nonsense are, umm, men.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          16V,

          Financial justification as authorization to summarily execute a human being is obscene. Why not use the same justification to kill the baby after it is born? Why not use the same justification to kill adults who are somehow “expensive” to support? How “expensive” does someone have to be to meet the threshold to execute them?

          And why should the baby’s parents not be responsible for caring for their child? If I fail to care for my children after they are born, the state will prosecute me (rightly) for child abuse/neglect. If you are a male or female who does not want to care for children, don’t have sex. If you do have sex and conceive a child, then you are responsible — financially, emotionally, and physically — to care for that child. Fail that responsibility and you will go to prison for hard labor until your children are 18 years-old; and another family will adopt your children.

          Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one. Except those who are most concerned with this nonsense are, umm, men.

          The ratio of men-to-women who are “concerned” about abortion is irrelevant. If most men are not concerned about rape, does that mean rape is okay? And how do we know that most men are “concerned”? I know more women than men who are “concerned”.

          And we have not even touched on the devastating emotional impact that many/most women experience after they have killed their baby.

        3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          16V,

          Gun-control is wrong because it denies human beings their chance at life. And abortion is wrong for the same exact reason: it denies human beings (in the womb) their chance at life.

          Financial and “freedom” justifications to infringe on our right to life are always wrong, whether they apply to the tools that we need to defend/save our lives or whether they apply to a baby in the womb.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          U_S, all of your examples and suggestions are demonstrably wrong in the U.S. today. If you want to change that, amend the Constitution. Pretty simple, what is the 45 year holdup?

    2. avatar Dev says:

      “they fill their little heads with idiotic ‘relative morals’ and outright lies”
      Obviously it worked on you.

  10. avatar Hoodlum says:

    Next time adjust six inches to the left and three inches low

  11. avatar possum says:

    Why did this hit the news? Locally I can see it, we never hear of the DGU’s in Toad Suck Arkansas but we hear of the DGU’s in Charleston SC. Whaaaaaaatsssss the deal?

  12. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    “Finally, he kicked the door in and tried walking towards the inside, and that’s when I shot him,” she said.

    According to Jackie Shelley, the volunteer leader of the South Carolina Chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Senses in America they do not approve of this course of action.

  13. avatar GS650G says:

    New Jersey would charge her. She failed to escape out the back door. And if she didn’t do all the paperwork for the gun she’s looking at jail, probably more than the burglar.

  14. avatar Geoff says:

    No charges will be filed. This is South Carolina, my State. Clear case of self defense, IMO.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Wait! This is a clear case of person of one race shoots person of a different race, I thought we were all to scream “racist” and hang her from the yardarm! Sup?

  15. avatar SpeedBump says:

    Damn it girl, shots to the shoulder can’t be relied on to stop someone.

    Sending practice ammo now…

  16. avatar Wildcat says:

    Too bad she didn’t hit with a 6.5 Creedmore. Then he would have disintegrated and we wouldn’t have to pay to keep him in jail.

  17. avatar Docduracoat says:

    We have the ideal situation here.
    First off it is a minority woman stopping a white male home invader.
    Secondly, it’s a one shot stop with a wound, not a kill.
    She had a one shot stop with a shoulder hit.
    While we taxpayers would prefer him to take room temperature, mom here does not have to deal with killing a person.
    I would like to know the caliber and model of gun.

  18. avatar 22winmag says:

    Shoulder?

    People miss high far more often than they miss low.

    Keep it down a bit unless the head is your target.

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