Burglar With Crowbar And Flashlight Looking Into A House Windows
Bigstock

By Edgar Lee

A failed attempt to steal a vehicle wasn’t enough to keep a would-be thief from returning to a Green, Ohio residence and ignoring the armed homeowner’s warnings. That earned him a gunshot wound to the leg before police eventually arrived on the scene.

According to a Summit County Sheriff’s Office press release, a man who was attempting to steal an all-terrain vehicle was discovered and confronted by the homeowner. The would-be thief threatened the property owner before fleeing the scene.

A short time later, the suspect returned to the property and attempted to gain entry into the residence. The suspect was again confronted by the homeowner. The homeowner retrieved a firearm and gave several verbal warnings to the suspect. The homeowner advised the suspect that the Sheriff’s Office had been notified and was in route to the residence. The suspect approached the homeowner and the homeowner subsequently shot the suspect in the leg. The Green Fire Department responded and transported the suspect to Summa Akron City Hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

Maybe the thief didn’t think the homeowner — who was holding a gun on him — would defend himself. He chose…poorly.

The CDC estimates that guns are used in defensive situations between 500,000 and 3 million times a year. Those represent crimes prevented; robberies, burglaries, assaults rapes, murders. Remember that the next time an anti-gun politician spouts off about an alleged “gun violence epidemic” in America, and uses it to justify more limits on civilian gun ownership.

 

This article originally appeared at concealednation.com and is reprinted here with permission. 

33 COMMENTS

  1. The only mistake the homeowner made was to shoot him in the leg,
    Now he’s opened himself up to be sued.
    This is just me , but I would have shot him in the head.
    Much easier to defend your self if the perps NOT breathing.
    I have NO sympathy for criminal’s , once you’ve been a victim & almost croak (more than twice in my case) it’s a survival thing…

    • Depends on if the homeowner says he deliberately shot him in the leg, or if he aimed center-mass and missed.

      Legally, it’s easier for a defense attorney to defend a bad shot who aimed center-mass and missed.

      • You shoot to stop the threat. If the threat is stopped, it doesn’t matter where you hit the perp or where you aimed. The legal standard is the same regardless: were you in fear of an imminent serious bodily injury or death?

        • The threat is not stopped. This guy will get out of jail, faster these days than in the past. You think he’s smart enough not to come back again? Mozambique drill. Anyone worth shooting is worth shooting more.

        • Mark is correct about the legal definition and reason for discharging your gun. The focus of any zealous D.A. will be to see if he/she can prove you acted to kill, instead of stopping the threat.

          Shooting an attacker in the leg is not ideal, but if the perp turned and ran because that was the only shot you could pop off in the heat of the moment, then the primary goal of ending the threat was accomplished. From a legal standpoint, anyway.

          Otherwise, I agree with others that the ideal manner of stopping the threat is two shots to center mass.

    • Yep! If you shoot them it’s generally cleaner to finish them off although I knew a guy, now deceased of other causes, who ran into a Prosecutor trying to make a name for himself.

  2. The home owner defended himself? Not sure that would be the correct determination, maybe just prolonged the inevitable when the criminal post bail & returns. I would of stopped the threat…….My home & what’s inside is my last defense, if you feel the need to want to hurt or take something from what’s inside when I’m home, that’s your last worthless decision!

  3. Loved the Indiana Jones reference. I have to wonder if the statements the owner made could come back to bite him. Definitely shoot for center mass.

  4. Well, at least if this guy comes back yet again he’ll probably come back with a limp. Makes him easier to hit on Round 3.

    Ammo being so expensive these days, if the homeowner has to shoot the idiot again, I wouldn’t want the homeowner to miss.

  5. Gonna assume that leg shot was intentional but for legality sake I would call that ‘missing center mass’.

    Nothing bugs me more than half-measures. Center punch that punk. Preferably with a long gun. Stop showing mercy and compassion to those who don’t deserve it.

  6. “Remember that the next time an anti-gun politician spouts off about an alleged “gun violence epidemic” in America, and uses it to justify more limits on civilian gun ownership.”

    The anti-gun politicians are on the side of the criminals, not the innocent homeowner. They consider this case a bad outcome…the criminal got hurt instead of the law-abiding citizen and thus a case of unwarranted gun-violence. We need to quit giving these activists and totalitarian politicians the benefit of the doubt since they have long since shown their true colors.

  7. Yeah…. this old man is in for the fight of his life now…. the courts are gonna have a field day with him….
    The crooked “educated idiot” class will clown his world like he’s never known….. poor old dude….

  8. The homeowner was obviously a Biden voter. As such, they were following their president’s instructions;
    shotgun: check
    leg shot, check.

      • Armadillo is 100% correct.

        You would have had to know Biden really said that, unless, of course:

        1) You were living under a bridge in Botswana.
        2) You were just released from an asylum.
        3) Your wife won’t let you out of the house.
        4) Your fingers are still in your ears while saying nanananananana.
        5) or worse of all, you’re a democrat and your religious experiences
        consist of MSNBC and CNN.

  9. I will assume he meant to shoot the criminal in the leg–I think we should be pleased that the homeowner defended himself, instead of simply producing a gun in hopes that it would scare off the criminal. Too many people have been killed with their own weapons, and this person should be congratulated for protecting himself.

    If he could not shoot to kill, he did as much he could bring himself to do. Not every person can take a life, but this one sure could defend his.

    • To be fair, leg wounds are nasty. Depending on caliber it’s possible that amputation may be required. Lots of areas that don’t like being punctured by fast moving projectiles. Then, if your lucky you find a surgeon that can make things functional again….That is if you don’t bleed out in 4 minutes or so from an artery being hit in the first place.
      Don’t know what the home owner meant to do, wasn’t there, but having to retrieve a firearm is playing catch-up IMO. Not good.

  10. Article from News5Cleveland has a final quote from the Sheriff’s office…”The sheriff’s office said criminal charges are pending the outcome of the investigation.”

    Maybe it’s just the cynic in me, but that statement could be taken to be mean either the home invader or homeowner.

    Note: Summit County, OH has a new Sheriff as of this past January. She is apparently a Democrat. That probably answers my cynical observation…

  11. I guess some just have to learn the hardway, he’s lucky he’s not 6 ft under pushing up daisies, must of been a good hearted victim, most would put some lead center mass, to end threat. This guy got real lucky that’s all.

  12. Now the turd can come back and do vengeance on the law abiding! One to the chest two to the head, the problem is solved when their dead!!!%

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here