72yr Old Businessman Shoots 4 Robbers

This is another good one. A 72 year old businessman sees one of his employees being pistol whipped by the 4 armed robbers that were in his store. He opens fire with a 12 gauge pistol grip shotgun and hits all 4 of the bad guys. Sadly, it looks like two of them might survive.

Here's a frustrating pair of quotes from the story:

Augusto told cops he bought his shotgun after a robbery nearly 30 years ago. Browne said it was unclear Thursday night if Augusto has a license for the weapon.

A police source said that if Augusto is hit with a charge, it will be a minor one. "It doesn't look too bad for him," the source said.

The guy stops an armed robbery, saves an employee from a life threatening beating and reduces the criminal population by two, yet they have to end the story with thoughts of him possibly facing some sort of criminal charge. This guy should get a marksmanship award from the NRA and a good citizenship medal from the mayor. If they decide to charge him with something, I hope the neighborhood drums the district attorney out of office.

(As always, clicking on the title link will take you to the full story.)

UPDATE:
Here's a link to the NY Times version of the story with a few more details.

Woman Beats Armed Home Invaders with Can of Peas

The title link is to a story about a Toledo woman who used some common sense survival instincts, ordinary household items and good preparation to triumph over home invaders. Per the article and the associated video interview, the woman heard a knock on her at 5:30AM. She thought it may have been her brother, so she opened the door and was attacked by two masked men, at least one which had a gun. One of the men pointed a gun at her and started pulling the trigger and for some reason the gun didn't fire. He then started beating her head and face with the gun. Fortunately for her, she had answered the door while holding her improvised home defense weapon, a long heavy sock with a can of peas at the bottom of it. She fought back and beat one of the attackers so badly that he was taken to the hospital in critical condition. Let's hope he doesn't pull through.

Let this story be a lesson to everyone. With a bit of thought, many common household objects can easily be transformed into effective and potentially deadly self defense tools. This woman said she stashed several of these sock and can flails around her house in case of emergency. When you use the sock to swing around a heavy object, the speed of the swing adds tremendous momentum and can deliver enough power to break bones. Even a large handful of change in a sock can be dangerous. For those afraid, unwilling or legally unable to keep a firearm for self defense, remember that you can still arm yourself in other ways. If someone starts pounding on your door at odd hours, having a weapon at hand when you answer the door could save your life.

Although I found it quite uplifting that this woman had the foresight and courage to fight back, there was one sad spot in the article. Here's a quote from a neighbor who witnessed the attack:

"Very scared. So scared that I thought I was going to die because I thought they were going to come to my place and kill me because I had my head out peaking [sic] out"

I find it disheartening that someone could witness this sort of brutal attack and do nothing more than "peek out". If people were quick to protect each other and fought back against crime more often there would be a lot less of it. Grab a chair, a wine bottle or a hammer and bash the attacker's head in while he is occupied with beating his victim. Stab them a dozen times with a kitchen knife. Come up behind them and kick them in the groin or knee as hard as you possibly can. Don't just "peek". Fear is never a valid excuse for not doing the right thing. I can somewhat understand not getting involved in a fair fight between two strangers when there is no obvious "bad guy" and "victim", but when you see two guys with ski masks bashing their way into your neighbor's home there is no doubt about who needs to be stopped. If a witness does nothing to help a victim they are partly responsible for whatever happens to the victim.

Stop AB 962, The Bill That Could Kill

In the never ending war against liberty, California is considering passing a bill that would likely result in accidental shooting deaths and injuries. The bill would prevent handgun owners from practicing sufficiently to maintain their skills. If a gun owner is forced to use a firearm in self defense, society at large will be much safer if that person has recently been target shooting and is not fumbling around incompetently. Regular practice can mean the difference between the bad guy getting shot and a stray round striking property or an innocent bystander.

The bill would reduce safe practice by:

• Forbidding the sale or transfer of more than 50 rounds of handgun ammo per month to anyone who is not a licensed dealer
• Require ammo only be bought in person (i.e. banning mail order sales)
• Requiring vendors to keep a record of every ammo sale and report all sales to the state
• Require vendors to keep all ammo out of reach from customers so that buyers must seek assistance from staff before purchasing
• Require vendors to pay a licensing fee to the state (even if they already have a license to sell firearms)

Anti-gun people will probably think I’m crazy for opposing these restrictions, but take a moment to think it through before you decide. A leisurely one hour practice session with a hand gun for most people consumes about 200 rounds of ammunition, even when most of that hour is spent loading magazines, setting up targets, inspecting targets, collecting spent brass and other non-shooting tasks. A semi-automatic hand gun fires a round as quickly as the user can pull the trigger. In a regular slow fire practice session, a person will fire a shot every few seconds. Thus, a standard 10 round magazine will be emptied in about 30 seconds. 50 rounds of ammo during an unhurried practice session can be consumed in about 2.5 minutes of firing. If the shooter is practicing double taps, defensive shooting and quick reloads they might go through 50 rounds of ammo in less than half of that time (1min 15sec). Do you really think it a good idea for people with potentially lethal defense tools to be forbidden to practice with them for more than 1-2 minutes per month? What will happen when an unpracticed gun owner tries to defend themselves? Where will the bullets go if they they pull the trigger and miss the bad guy?

To make matters worse, the law doesn’t seem to distinguish between different types of hand guns. A typical concealed carry permit holder might be allowed to legally carry two or three different kinds of guns. For example, they might be permitted to carry a tiny gun that can be easily hidden under summer clothing, and a regular gun that can be concealed under normal clothing. Chances are good that those two guns will use different kinds of ammunition. If you are only allowed 50 rounds of ammo per month and need to practice with two different guns, you can practice with each gun half as much. That brings us down to maybe one minute of practice per month per gun, less time than you spend brushing your teeth before you go to bed each night.

As if this wasn’t bad enough, gun owners commonly own both a rifle and a handgun that fires the exact same type of ammunition. This simplifies ammunition purchases and lets them carry a single type of ammo when shooting. .22 rimfire, 9mm, .38 special, .357 magnum, .44 magnum and .44 special are a few examples of ammunition commonly used by both rifles and handguns. How can you prove to an ammo vendor what kind of gun you plan to fire their ammo through?

A single round of .45ACP ammunition costs about $0.30 if purchased in bulk (1000 rounds) over the internet. If purchased in a typical 50 round box at a local gun store, a single round will cost about $0.40, 25% more than by bulk. If we ban bulk purchases and tack on licensing fees and compliance costs, the price of ammo could go up by 50%. The cost of ammunition for a typical one hour 200 round practice session with a common .45ACP pistol would go from $60 to $90 (assuming they remembered to save up 4 months worth of ammo to allow for a one hour practice session). Such a large increase would significantly discourage practice.

Note that a similar Federal law was repealed in 1986 after the BATF testified that it was useless at preventing crime. The City of Pasadena passed a similar law, and repealed it two years later after realizing that they were generating a huge and costly database wasn't actually helping the police.

Please contact your state assemblyperson and the senators on the California appropriations committee to demand that they oppose this bill. Even if you hate guns you should oppose this bill because it will only serve to reduce the competency of law abiding gun owners without reducing gun ownership. No matter how you feel about guns, it is in your best interest that whoever squeezes a trigger on a firearm be well practiced, accurate and safe when they do it.

Emergency Preparedness and Survival

Every time our country is hit by a major disaster, be it a flood, hurricane, fire or something else, the news is filled with sad stories about woefully unprepared people being left with nothing but the clothes on their backs. Too many people falsely believe that our government and emergency services will take care of them and keep them safe. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) suggests that people keep at least a three day supply of food, water and other essentials on hand at all times for each member of their household. They strongly encourage people to expand this to a two week supply if they can afford to do so. It can easily take several days for the government to get help to disaster victims. If the disaster is not limited to a small geographic area, it could take much longer. For example, if a tsunami wipes out the eastern seaboard or if terrorists detonate suitcase nukes in several major cities, there simply may not be enough emergency workers and supplies to go around.

Imagine for a moment that a disaster hits your home or office. It could be a dam failure, fire, tornado, hurricane, flood, earthquake or even a terrorist attack. 3,000 gallons of raw sewage could erupt from your drains and toilets when city maintenance goes awry. A small plane might crash into your home without warning. Your building may be destroyed or authorities might simply deem it unsafe and force you to leave. Streets could be blocked, flooded or collapsed making it impossible for you to drive to safety. How would you fare if you have only moments to quickly grab a couple of items before you are forced to flee on foot?

Are you ready to survive in an overcrowded gymnasium or stadium for several days with nothing more than what you can carry? Will you be passably comfortable in a room packed with people when you have nothing more than a few square feet of space on the floor? Will you be like the hurricane Katrina victims that were stuck in rescue shelters and rooftops without food or water if the government is slow to deliver supplies?

All of the gear in the world is of little use if you don't have it packed into a portable and quickly accessible package when you need it. You might not have two hours to dig through piles of camping gear to find what you need when your house is about to slide down a cliff. Unless you are a die-hard backpacker, chances are good that most of your recreational outdoor equipment will be too bulky and heavy for you to carry very far if roads are blocked and vehicles can't be used.

For around $150 and an hour or two of effort you can easily put together a good emergency kit that will help you and a loved one survive for a few days without running water, electricity or help from others. Hunger, thirst, cold, wet, minor injuries and boredom need not overly trouble you if you are adequately prepared.

The ability to create fire, construct shelters, patch up injuries and plan for a variety of adversities helps distinguish humans from less intelligent animals. Please take a moment to look over your emergency kit and make sure that it is complete, accessible and in good condition. If you don't have a kit, get one. Here are a couple of links that may help:

The Disaster Preparedness and Survival Gear section of my Amazon store

The FEMA "Are You Ready?" page (tips, checklists and guides from the US government)

Once you get the basic survival gear together, consider adding these additional items to your pack:

• Underwear and Socks in a zip-lock bag: Dry socks are especially important as they help keep your feet healthy so that blisters, infections, fungus and other things don't prevent you from trekking to safety
  
  
• Paperback novel and a deck of cards in a zip-lock bag: Survival can be surprisingly boring. These can keep you sane if you get stuck in a shelter for days and can even be used as kindling.
  
  
• Batteries for radios, cell phones, flash lights, GPS devices, etc.
  
  
• Prescription medications for yourself, family and pets
  
  
• Feminine hygiene products (tampons, pads, etc.)
  
  
• Powder: It can prevent heat rashes, dry wet feet to prevent blisters, help sweaty hands grip slippery objects and partially deodorize clothing.
  

Student Uses Gun to Stop Robbery and Rapes

Another great self defense story. Click on the title link and see the full story, complete with a video clip of the news story. Here's an excerpt:

Bailey said he thought it was the end of his life and the lives of the 10 people inside his apartment for a birthday party after two masked men with guns burst in through a patio door.“They just came in and separated the men from the women and said, ‘Give me your wallets and cell phones,’”

If you read further and watch the video, you will learn that the student pulled out a gun, shot and killed one of the attackers and then kicked down the door to the room where the women were being held and opened fire on another attacker who was trying to rape his girlfriend.

Although one student was admittedly shot in the exchange of gunfire, they are expected to fully recover. Even with this mishap, this is a great outcome as it prevented one or more of the women from being raped or worse. It's great that this student had both a gun and the courage to use it in defense of others.

CA Band Girl Beats Off Two Muggers

I love stories with quotes like this one:

one got a punch in the nose and the other a kick to the groin. Rust says the girl then beat both of them with her band baton

It sounds like this young lady knew exactly what she was doing, and may have had some training. Going after vulnerable spots, delivering a few extra hits to make sure her attackers aren't able to pursue and then running to safety is exactly what is called for in this type of situation. It just goes to show that with the right mindset, the smaller/younger/"weaker"/out numbered person need not be a victim. I hope this young woman left a lasting impression on her attackers and inspires others to react to crime in the same manner.

Click on the title link for the full story.

Krav Maga

Given the current legal and social climate, carrying a firearm isn’t a viable option for most people much of the time. Many employers have so called “anti-violence” policies that include bans against possessing a weapon in the workplace or even in your vehicle if it is parked on company property. Some countries/states/counties/cities make it virtually impossible to legally carry a gun for personal protection. If you are like me, and are plagued with such restrictions, consider signing up for Krav Maga lessons.

Krav Maga is the fighting system of the Israeli military and has recently been making its way into numerous U.S. law enforcement agencies. It was designed from the ground up to be something that everyone can use, including people of greatly varying size and strength. Military service in Israel is compulsory for both men and women, and Krav Maga is designed to simultaneously teach people of both sexes how to fight for their lives and survive dangerous situations.

Krav Maga is all about self defense. It is not a ritualized art and it most definitely is not a sport. It emphasizes brutally effective moves that some would consider “dirty” or “dishonorable”. Groin kicks are a staple of this system, as is attacking throats, eyes, knees and anything else that can quickly neutralize an attacker. It is all is about doing whatever it takes to give you the best chance of making it home safe and sound after an attack.

I recently became a student of Krav Maga, and have been extremely impressed with this fighting system. I like how they always try to prepare students for the worst. It is always assumed that that an attacker will have an advantage, such as superior size, superior numbers, weapons, the element of surprise and possibly all of the above. In my very first day of class I was taught to throw a basic punch and kick, and then told to close my eyes and stand in a relaxed casual position. A training partner would then run at me from a random direction and slam into me with a pad, partially knocking me off balance. I then had to immediately open my eyes, face the pad and throw a series of punches and/or kicks at it. Since then, I have often been required to stand in a casual position (i.e. not in a fighting stance) when learning to defend and counterattack against various moves. The idea is to change the shock reflex so that rather than freezing up during a startling attack students immediately launch an overwhelming counterattack.

Much of the training is done full force against one or more pad wielding partners. This conditions the striker to hit hard and use the proper technique. It also teaches the person with the pad to recognize what it looks like when someone is attacking them and to not be intimidated by it. Tell tale indicators such as a slight twist of the hips or shoulders, tensing of muscles, etc., can all be safely studied so that the pad holder learns exactly what an attack looks like when it is first initiated. Holding the pad against strong attacks also strengthens core muscle groups as they tense to absorb the blows.

Krav Maga also gives you a really good workout. When I first started the class, the intensive warm up routines had my heart hammering and my lungs heaving and was nearly more than I could handle. This cardio workout is then followed by stretching and then vigorous combative training. The intense beginning serves both to get students in better physical condition and to tire them out so that when they are practicing they will get used to fighting while tired. After all, muggers and other attackers aren’t likely to give you a pass just because you happen to feel fatigued on the day that you encounter them.

If you’d like to get in better shape, lose some extra weight and/or would like to learn how to protect yourself, seriously consider taking up Krav Maga. My physical condition has improved noticeably in just half a dozen weeks, and I am told that after only a few months of training I likely will be better trained for hand to hand combat than most ordinary police officers. Given how much I have improved already, I’m inclined to believe it.

S.C.O.T.U.S. Affirms 2nd Amendment (sort of)

By now, nearly everyone has heard of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned the Washington D.C. ban on handguns. For the most part, it affirmed the 2nd Amendment, which is fantastic news for anyone who believes in the right to bear arms for self defense, checking government power, or both. It also affirmed that the 2nd Amendment bestows an individual right, and not merely a right for militias to bear arms.

For the most part, this ruling made me happy, but I'd like to caution firearms advocates not to celebrate too hard. There are several things that really should be considered about this ruling, lest complacency lead firearms owners to think that they can rest on their laurels.


Problem #1:
The fact that this issue was credible enough to make it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court is a bad sign. The 2nd Amendment is very clear, and should not require a prolonged process of legal escalation for a gun ban to be thrown out. The very first judge who looked at this case should have thrown out the ban without much more than a few minutes consideration. What part of "shall not be infringed" did the lower courts not understand when this was first challenged?



Problem #2:
This was a 5 to 4 decision. That means that a single swing vote is all that stood between the highest legal authority in our nation declaring that the 2nd Amendment was null and void. It means that 4 justices, people that are considered the most experienced and powerful legal experts in the country, disagreed with the the decision to uphold the 2nd Amendment. Think about that for a moment. Our country is still dangerously close to invalidating a cornerstone of the U.S. constitution. What happens when this issue comes up again (it will), and on that day we have one additional anti-gun justice on the bench?


Problem #3:
This decision included enough wiggle room for other kinds of gun bans to successfully be passed. Here are some quotes from Justice Scalia:

"Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

Note that the 2nd Amendment's "shall not be infringed" wording says nothing about conditional limitations on the right to bear arms. Scalia's comments undermine this simple clarity by saying that it is indeed possible to establish quite a few limitations on firearms ownership, and if enough of these limitation are passed into law, owning, selling and transporting firearms could become so onerous as to create a de facto ban of them.



Don't get me wrong; I think today's ruling came out about as well as we could have expected, and gun owners are entitled to a little celebration. Nevertheless, I think it is important to keep this ruling in perspective and continue to actively support pro-gun organizations and vote against any politician who expresses a desire to further restrict the private ownership of firearms.

Peeping Tom Beaten and Arrested

According to a Fox8 news story, a Greensboro N.C. man heard noises from under the bed he and his girlfriend were laying on:

"(When) I looked underneath there, I saw these eyes staring back at me. I was like 'what the crap! This ain't normal,'" said Lynn. "So I start(ed) slinging him around. I was upper cutting him, beating him left and right."

...

"I talked to the cop. He told me if I wouldn't have caught him, he planned on spending the night."

Police are in the process of notifying the victims of the other cases and anticipate more charges will be filed.

Click the title link for the full story, a photo of the peeper and a video interview with the man who found him and give him a well deserved beating.

Female Blackbelt Marathon Runner Foils Burglary

This from the sun-sentinel.com:

A would-be burglar met his match when he tried to elude Margo Foster, a marathon runner with a black belt in karate who also knows kickboxing and kung fu, police said.
...
Without thinking twice, she said in an interview, she bolted through the living and dining rooms and followed the startled man out to the backyard. Police said he had one of Foster's backpacks strapped on his shoulders, filled with her property. She wanted it back.
A seven-block-long chase had just begun.

...

As related by Foster, the intruder began to climb the 6-foot-high wooden fence in the yard, when she "grabbed him by the neck, ripped him off the fence.. threw him to the ground, and put my knee to his chest."

...

"Go ahead and run," the former yacht detailer said she yelled. "You're not going to get away from me. I've been running for 40 years."

This is great! If everyone fought back like this, crime would go down. Yes, it's dangerous and obviously some victims will end up hurt, but if most people were willing to fight back like this crime would be much less attractive to thieves. In the long run, we would have a better, safer and more mentally healthy society.

14yr Old Boy Beats Burglar With Bat

Regular readers of this blog may have noticed that I haven't posted in quite some time. This is because I got tired of following the mostly disappointing and frustrating news feeds in order to find the occasional good tidbit worth commenting on. Yesterday, however, a friend sent me a great story that I just had to share with you all.

From MSNBC.com:

“I only hit him twice,” Michael said almost apologetically of the incident that played out Tuesday morning in the Phoenix suburb.
He demonstrated for Vieira how he whacked the burglar, later identified as Thomas Garza, a 30-year-old career criminal who was on parole at the time, twice across the back and shoulders.
On the 911 tape of the incident, Garza can be heard yelling “Please! Please! Please!” after being hit.

…

When Garza left the building, Michael climbed out his window behind him, saw the police arriving, and showed them where to go to find the suspect.

Nice work, Michael! Too bad you didn’t get him in the head before the police got him.

11yr Old Girl Kills 2 Armed Illegal Alien Home Invaders

Here's an excerpt from the Libertypost.org story apparently borrowed from the NRA Files:

Two illegal aliens, Ralphel Resindez 23 and Enrico Garza 26, probably believed they would easily overpower a home alone 11 year old Patricia Harrington...
It seems the two crooks never learned two things, they were in Montana and Patricia had been a clay shooting champion since she was nine.

You've got to read this full story. You'll enjoy where this little girl shot the first of her attackers :)

Unfortunately, I couldn't find main stream news sites discussing this story in more detail. From what I can tell, it may have appeared in a November 2006 printed copy of an NRA publication, as this is how have I seen it posted as on various gun friendly discussion boards and forums.

Dangerous Ruling for the Bad Guys

Recently a U.S. Court of Appeals overturned portions of a 1976 law that bans Washington D.C. city residents from possessing handguns in their homes. It also removed the requirement that long barreled firearms be stored with trigger locks or in a disassembled state. According to the judges, the Second Amendment protections

"are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."

This fantastic news for several reasons:

• Residents of crime ridden Washington D.C. can now more easily own the means to defend themselves, and can store these vital safety tools in a more accessible manner
  
  
• If D.C. residents start using guns to defend themselves in their homes, we should see the usual drop in violent crime and home invasions that accompany gun friendly cities, and these improved crime statistics will make excellent fodder for pro-gun and pro-liberty activists.
  
  
• If anyone appeals this ruling at the U.S. Supreme court, there's a fair chance that we could reestablish a federal mandate that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, which would in turn help people throughout the nation roll back the various gun bans they have been oppressed by.

Not surprisingly, a Washington Post editorialist did not share my enthusiasm for this turn of events. Here's the opening sentence of their opinion piece (emphasis added by me):

a federal appeals court turned its back on nearly 70 years of Supreme Court precedent to give a new and dangerous meaning to the Second Amendment. If allowed to stand, this radical ruling will inevitably mean more people killed and wounded as keeping guns out of the city becomes harder. Moreover, if the legal principles used in the decision are applied nationally, every gun control law on the books would be imperiled.

It's really a shame how so many members of the media misinterpret the right to bear arms. The only danger in this ruling is to the criminals who used to be able to invade private homes at will without fear of being shot by homeowners. The criminals are the "more people [who will be] killed and wounded", and that's good news for the rest of us. The right to self defense is far more important than the government's right to govern, and every time a ban is lifted to empower self defense the media should celebrate rather than bellyache. When guns are banned violent crime goes up, as seen in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, Washington D.C. and New York. As gun bans are lifted and things like concealed carry are allowed, violent crime goes down, as seen in numerous states and cities.

I'm beginning to wonder if the reason media people favor gun control is because gun bans lead to juicy violent crime stories and eye-grabbing headlines that help to sell more copy and attract more viewers. If the world actually became safer, these people might have to actually look for something newsworthy rather than continue to inundate us with depressing crime stories.

TFS Magnum, The Freeholder, Musings of a Geek With a .45, QandO, Michelle Malkin, Stop the ACLU, Hot Air, and The Volokh Conspiracy have also covered this story.

Senior Citizen Kills Armed Mugger With Bare Hands

From foxnews.com:

A retired member of the U.S. military aged about 70 put suspect Warner Segura in a head lock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus, Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose, said Thursday. Segura was later declared dead, apparently from asphyxiation.

The two other men fled when the 12 senior citizens started defending themselves during the Wednesday attack.

More proof that a good defense can work. I bet that these criminals never expected to face resistance from a group of aging tourists. By fighting back, these brave tourists accomplished all of the following:

• Seized control of the situation and put momentum and surprise in their favor
  
  
• Took away the muggers ability to harm them (the muggers might have decided to hurt a few of the tourists in the process of robbing them had the tourists meekly complied)
  
  
• Sent a message to criminals everywhere that crime can be a hazardous and undesirable occupation
  
  
• Sent a message to criminals and good folks alike that seniors are not necessarily easy prey
  
  
• Removed one thug from the gene pool and presumably saved a number of other people from future victimization.

Update:
I just noticed that TFS Magnum also covered this story a couple of days ago.

Petite Beautician Foils Robbery

The title link is to a story in a which a 4' 9" female hair stylist thwarts a robbery attempt from a 6' tall masked man. Below are some quotes from the Telegraph.co.uk story:

the robber, carrying an imitation gun, burst in and demanded cash from the terrified owner Joanna Holmes.Miss Lowell, then 26, wrestled with him until concerned staff dragged her away

Think about this quote for a minute. A robber attacks and the only person with the guts to fight back is "dragged away" by "concerned staff". What was the "concerned staff" thinking?!? Why didn't they help Miss Lowell beat the hell out of the robber rather than start fighting the one woman with the guts to do the right thing? They should have immediately started hurling things at him, stabbed him with scissors and otherwise made this intruder flee for his life. If I was Miss Lowell, I would find a different job rather than continue to work with such pathetic and cowardly colleagues.

But as the raider ran out she took off her stiletto heels and chased him 300 yards down the street brandishing one of the shoes before he eventually got into a waiting car.She managed to note the registration number...

This woman really has guts! It's too bad that the police couldn't or wouldn't prosecute the case.

Miss Lowell said: "I looked in the mirror at his gun to see if it was real and I was convinced it wasn't. That's when I turned round and went for him.

A perfect example of how a basic knowledge of weapons can help out ordinary people. Being able to tell if a weapon is real, or being able to glance at a revolver and see if there are bullets in the cylinder can save your life and/or help you decide how/when/if to fight back.

"I think he was a bit shocked that the smallest person in the shop was having a go.

I bet the robber was shocked when she stood up for herself and didn't cower. I've long believed that robbers will often be stunned d by a person who tells them "no". Someone once tried to rob me at knife point and you should have seen the dumbfounded look on his face when I told him "no" and dropped into a fighting stance and put up my hands. He just stood there for a moment with his jaw hanging open and a stupid confused look on his face and then became scared and took a couple of hasty steps back from me. (He eventually went to prison because of this crime).

Most thieves don't expect serious resistance. They think their weapon will magically compel obedience and submission from their victims and they don't know what to do when their "victim" tells them to bugger off. That moment of shock might be all you need to disable them, disarm them or escape from them. I realize that in some cases resisting may get you hurt or killed, but I firmly believe that if most people resisted, there would be a lot less crime and the world would be a safer place.

Truck Thief, Beaten, Captured and Jailed

Crime doesn't pay when victims fight back:

As speeds reached 70 miles per hour, Lucas grabbed a trowel from a bucket of cement and started clubbing the truck thief.

"I think that scared him more than anything, so he stopped the truck at that point," Lucas said.

The frightened driver started running on foot with Lucas right on his heels.

"I ran over and I tackled him to the ground and made sure I had him subdued, while a couple other gentlemen helped me get some zip ties on him," he said.

Lucas and two witnesses zip-tied the suspect and held him until cops arrived.

65yr Old Woman Saves Husband from Cougar

According to CNN.com:

Nell Hamm said she grabbed a 4-inch-diameter log and beat the animal with it, but it would not release its hold on her husband's head.

"Jim was talking to me all through this, and he said, 'I've got a pen in my pocket and get the pen and jab him in the eye,"' she said.

"So I got the pen and tried to put it in his eye, but it didn't want to go in as easy as I thought it would."

When the pen bent and became useless, Nell Hamm went back to using the log. The lion eventually let go and, with blood on its snout, stood staring at the woman. She screamed and waved the log until the animal walked away.

Yet another example of how you should NEVER give up when attacked by anything, be it man or beast.

Students Taught To Attack Gunmen

It's been quite a while since I noticed something in the news positive enough to inspire me to write about it, but at last something truly great has happened.

According to the MSNBC.com article in the title link:

Youngsters in a suburban Fort Worth school district are being taught not to sit there like good boys and girls with their hands folded if a gunman invades the classroom, but to rush him and hit him with everything they've got — books, pencils, legs and arms.

Students are also instructed not to comply with a gunman’s orders, and to take him down.

...

Aim for head
Browne recommends students and teachers “react immediately to the sight of a gun by picking up anything and everything and throwing it at the head and body of the attacker and making as much noise as possible. Go toward him as fast as we can and bring them down.”

Response Options trains students and teachers to “lock onto the attacker’s limbs and use their body weight,” Browne said. Everyday classroom objects, such as paperbacks and pencils, can become weapons.

“We show them they can win,” he said. “The fact that someone walks into a classroom with a gun does not make them a god. Five or six seventh-grade kids and a 95-pound art teacher can basically challenge, bring down and immobilize a 200-pound man with a gun.”

I think that this a fantastic lesson for the following reasons:

1. It completely removes the payoff/reward that an attacker is looking for
2. It teaches children that sometimes it is worth to risking your own safety in order to protect others from harm
3. It teaches kids that crime and cruelty do not pay

People that attack schools typically have some very specific objectives in mind. They are angry about something and are trying to lash out in the worst possible way. They desire as much media attention and publicity as possible so that EVERYONE will see the terrible vengeance they are wreaking upon a society that they believe wronged them. They also generally want a period of total absolute power over a group of helpless and terrified people. They want to savor the power of life and death over others while they watch people cower, tremble and beg. At the pinnacle of this, they then take their own life so that nobody can ever take this moment of triumph away from them or punish them for their terrible actions.

If everyone instantly and mercilessly attacked such people on sight, they would be denied everything they want to achieve. There would be no cowering, begging for mercy nor a prolonged moment of power over others. There is no time for news helicopters to circle the campus or camera crews to fill the parking lot to memorialize their actions. Instead of obtaining power and attention, the attacker would find themselves on the defensive, receiving injuries or death at the hands of the intended victims, and most likely will end up captured, prosecuted and imprisoned. Instead of a few moments of supreme power, the attacker will ultimately end up in pain and spend many years as a helpless prisoner of our justice system.

During a battle some children or teachers may be killed or injured but the attacker will still be denied the specific "reward" that they came for. This is much better than the certain death they will face if they meekly cooperate with an attacker. If the news was filled with stories of attackers being beaten, captured and imprisoned, sociopaths would be less likely to attack schools because they would realize that they are unlikely to achieve their objectives. Over time, such attacks would diminish.

When students are taught to fight back, they will learn that saving the lives of their classmates is a noble goal. Zero-tolerance anti-violence policies that punish students for self defense and pacifist rhetoric have been teaching people that it is better to be a victim or allow others to be harmed than it is to fight for what is right. The news often features stories of people being raped, robbed or beaten in public places while passersby look the other way and try not to get involved. If students are taught to defend themselves and others, the world will become a better place. Keep in mind that 9/11 probably would have failed if the passengers on all of the planes had fought back.

If people learn from an early age that those who commit crimes will be opposed by everyone within sight, they will be less likely to commit crimes themselves. Consider the Columbine attackers Harris and Klebold. They were supposedly unhappy bullied kids who plotted revenge against their tormentors and the people who witnessed their victimization. If kids were taught to fight bullies and attackers, chances are good that the Columbine killers would have experienced less victimization and thus would have been less enraged against their classmates. Far more important, if the Columbine killers knew with total certainty that the moment they pulled a gun on their classmates EVERYONE would have tried to kill them, they might not have had the guts to engage their classmates in mortal combat. Remember, they wanted to inflict fear and retribution from a position of power. They may have been willing to die on their own terms, but they did not want to be defeated by their intended victims before accomplishing their objectives.

I hope that this bold idea catches on and that more schools embrace a method that will discourage attacks rather than train more people to become helpless victims and tolerate evil.

17yr Old Captive Kills Intruder

CEDAR CITY - Police in southern Utah are calling a 17-year-old boy a hero after he fatally stabbed an armed intruder who broke into his family's home early Wednesday.

...

While the stepfather fought with the intruder, the boy was able to free himself. He then pulled a 6-inch hunting knife from beneath his bed, walked into his parents' bedroom and stabbed the intruder five times in the back, Gower said.

Good for him! In today's society, many people would think it strange for a person to keep a knife, firearm or other weapon under or near their bed. Here's an example of how such things can come in handy. Who knows what this armed intruder would have done to this family once he finished strapping them all down with duct tape. Disgruntled ex-employee stories often end badly once they decide to arm themselves and get revenge, so this could have turned out to be quite a tragedy.

I am especially pleased that the police have acknowledged and praised the young defender's efforts:

CEDAR CITY - Police in southern Utah are calling a 17-year-old boy a hero after he fatally stabbed an armed intruder who broke into his family's home early Wednesday.

Iron County Sheriff Mark Gower described the boy as a level-headed kid "who, in my opinion, saved his family's lives."

"Scary Movie" With a Twist

I found the video in the title link entertaining and just had to share it. There are two minor problems with this film, though.

1. Unless she was using special ammo, bullets from that weapon very likely would have passed through the intruder and into the surrounding neighborhood, posing a threat to innocent people and property. As much fun as it would be own one of those, for urban home defense she probably would have been better off with a shotgun firing shot or a handgun firing hollowpoints or safety slugs to reduce the risk of over-penetration and background damage.
2. From a legal standpoint she should have probably waited another 3 seconds for the intruder to slightly breach her outer defenses before taking him down. The courts will go easier on her if there was some broken glass inside her home, or if the lock or door was damaged from the outside. This would have made for more creditable "reasonable" fear for her life if she had to deal with a jerk District Attorney. Since she received the harrassing phone call, and since the police will find the knife on his body and evidence of tampering with her home wiring, she still probaby won't have any legal problems, unless she lives in an anti-gun place like California. Given that she had a full auto weaon, chances are she was in a gun-friendly state as Class III firearm permits aren't exactly easy to obtain in anti-gun areas.