Fatal Home Invasion Video Released

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: mikell

A reason prisons are full?

Yes, but it is not because the sort of criminalistic filth you describe are being arrested hand over fist. Jails are so full of harmless addicts who have never hurt a soul, that the sentences given to serious can seem laughable in some states, who favour keeping harmless junkies locked up, over putting away serious criminals for acceptably long periods.

There truly is no denying this. Statistically the numbers don't lie.

originally posted by: infolurker
This is a perfect example of home & self defense in a remarkably clear surveillance video.

3 Armed men stopped cold by one female gun owner. This is clearly one of the better self defense videos of the year. If you are in the Atlanta area, the police are still looking for the two of the three home invaders still on the loose.

www.gwinnettdailypost.com...

GOOD FOR HER!

I am English but I sure wish I could have American standards when it comes to self defence. This kind of retaliation is amazing and should be applauded. If I ever hear that your gun laws are taken down or removed, I think that would be time to put the candles out and say a prayer.

Seriously good to see she did this and I hope for all that is holy she gets not problems from this. She defended herself and hopefully caught one of them because what a disgusting thing to break into someones home armed.

Still say there's something fishy here.

Burglars don't exactly break into a place hot, then walk directly through a storeroom. They were after something specific, or someone. (and weren't burglars)

This was a hit squad.

They didn't even register any surprise at seeing a storeroom vs. a living room.

Something's weird.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Orionx2

My logic keeps people out of jail.

And in the streets causing more crimes.

a reply to: Orionx2

How do you figure?

As a concealed carrier it is my job to obey the law. Engaging a fleeing suspect is not legal grounds for use of deadly force. Neither is breaking into a car, or shooting to stop a shoplifter.

These are common sense things. CCW doesn't mean you get to be an executioner.

a reply to: Gazrok

That was no hit squad.

If it had of been, then one of them would not have been shot dead, and the others flee in shock from the onslaught of the defender. Hit squads are paid an awful lot of money to kill or die trying. It's in the job description. They ran, ergo they are not hardened, professional assassins.

Edit to add:
Also, no attempt to hide their faces what so ever, which one would ordinarily want to be certain of doing, if one was about to assassinate someone. Again, not the mark of a professional job. Also, their stance on entry was sloppy, as was their footwork. They also entered mostly stood up straight, which is a no no. As tactical entries go, it was a sloppy job, not a professional one. Not hitters.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Orionx2

How do you figure?

As a concealed carrier it is my job to obey the law. Engaging a fleeing suspect is not legal grounds for use of deadly force. Neither is breaking into a car, or shooting to stop a shoplifter.

These are common sense things. CCW doesn't mean you get to be an executioner.

Not sure where CCW came into play here... I also have one but it is not required on my property. If someone comes into my house armed (especially if my daughter is home) with negative intentions then either they will be dead or myself. Even if they start to flee that does not mean they are still not a threat to me or anyone around me. They can run and then come back. Eliminate the threat period.

a reply to: Orionx2

Tactically I agree with you.

Legally once they are gone shooting them in the back will mean you go to prison.

Good for her.

Tactically what she did was brilliant. She fired from cover using the door jam and rushed her assailants when they turned to run.

Closing and banging away at them, cell phone in her left hand, automatic in her right. They're probably still running...

You go girl!

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Orionx2

Tactically I agree with you.

Legally once they are gone shooting them in the back will mean you go to prison.

Imo, when the jury sees the video, they'll understand.

originally posted by: tikbalang
There was a case in Sweden a man was threatened by two brothers, they came into the house, with weapons.
First kill was ruled as self- defence the second was ruled as murder.. Weapon hunting rifle..

Its a thin line between self defence and murder, when they ran and she was still shooting.. The intention was to kill not defend.

In parts of the US if they are still in the house and armed (and it does not have to be a firearm)you can legally keep shooting till they hit the floor dead.
Its called the castle law.
www.thesurvivalistblog.net...

Many of us ex-military know that charging a shooter can give you a great advantage because the mind does not work well trying to do 4 things at once.
Trying to run backwards, shoot, keep from being shot and S**Ting your pants all at the same time.
This is why the military is trained to charge a ambush.

Someone needs to teach this lady how to use a pump or semiauto shotgun.
They would have likely needed 2 more body bags.
www.offthegridnews.com...

I hope Georgia has a law that if one criminal dies during a home invasion shooting the other two criminals get charged with murder.

Calif does and there are a number of criminals doing life because there crime partner died from a homeowner shooting them.

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: sirlancelot
Damn she is braver then I. Comes out blasting and even running at the jokers! Crime don't pay!

No doubt, the "charge into the breach" she performed was quite impressive.

Dang...I would not have charged in like that lol no way in hell. Most likely would do the standard hide behind something procedure. Or merge with the background rambo sneaky style. But this...

yea um, never piss off a woman. Especially one that owns a gun. Theyre emotions are quite different than males, so its unpredictable how they will act.

Talk about running in and guns blazing ....wow...

I have new found respect for my fellow female Gunslingers of the west.

Anyone posted this yet?

originally posted by: ANNED

originally posted by: tikbalang
There was a case in Sweden a man was threatened by two brothers, they came into the house, with weapons.
First kill was ruled as self- defence the second was ruled as murder.. Weapon hunting rifle..

Its a thin line between self defence and murder, when they ran and she was still shooting.. The intention was to kill not defend.

In parts of the US if they are still in the house and armed (and it does not have to be a firearm)you can legally keep shooting till they hit the floor dead.
Its called the castle law.
www.thesurvivalistblog.net...

Many of us ex-military know that charging a shooter can give you a great advantage because the mind does not work well trying to do 4 things at once.
Trying to run backwards, shoot, keep from being shot and S**Ting your pants all at the same time.
This is why the military is trained to charge a ambush.

Someone needs to teach this lady how to use a pump or semiauto shotgun.
They would have likely needed 2 more body bags.
www.offthegridnews.com...

Well this post explains alot. But i wonder if the woman in the video knew this.

still she has more balls than most of us males.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Orionx2

Tactically I agree with you.

Legally once they are gone shooting them in the back will mean you go to prison.

So be it. I will take that chance with the jury.

originally posted by: Orionx2

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Orionx2

Tactically I agree with you.

Legally once they are gone shooting them in the back will mean you go to prison.

So be it. I will take that chance with the jury.

If i was on the jury you would not have to worry.
I for one believe that one less criminal is a good thing.
Plus in this case the state may have the other two to charge with murder because if two or more criminals commit a crime and one gets shot dead the other criminals acting with him many be charged with his death.
legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Many states are just fine with charging the other criminals with murder and not the homeowner.
and its easier to charge and get a conviction of his partners in crime then convicting the homeowner.

that`s the ONLY way to deal with savages who have no respect for the laws of a civilized society,they only respect the law of the jungle,kill or be killed. the funniest part of the video is, when the shooting started they ran and scattered like roaches when the light is turned on.

a reply to: infolurker
Daaaaaamn!

That woman is BADASS! I'm sure it was, and is still terribly traumatic for her, but wow! Charged right in like the most hardened of soldiers, cover be damned!

It's only a shame that in some countries, this will net you a worse penalty than those perpetrating the crime would ever get. Except for the dead guy, I guess. Here in Canada, we would most likely be going to jail for defending our home as such.

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
a reply to: tikbalang

Its a thin line between self defence and murder, when they ran and she was still shooting.. The intention was to kill not defend.

Wrong, under GA law she was still defending herself. Unless they drop their guns and surrender, she has the right to defend herself and her property. (If the cops wanted to be @holes & sometimes Atlanta ones can, they would have arrested her for firing out the door.) All in all, good shoot.

(sarcasm) Where is BLM on this one? They come down on cops for shooting criminals, they not going to come down on this store owner for doing the same?

Oh, and it has been shown that a scared woman is more accurate with a pistol than most marksmen. Good on her!

I agree. Just because they are running doesn't mean the threat no longer exists. For all we know they might be just trying to find some cover to stay in the fight. But I would say once they are out of the house you can stop shooting.

However if I was the prosecutor I damn sure wouldn't be pressing any charges even if that last shot out the door hit one of those bastards in the back.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
a reply to: tikbalang

Its a thin line between self defence and murder, when they ran and she was still shooting.. The intention was to kill not defend.

Wrong, under GA law she was still defending herself. Unless they drop their guns and surrender, she has the right to defend herself and her property. (If the cops wanted to be @holes & sometimes Atlanta ones can, they would have arrested her for firing out the door.) All in all, good shoot.

(sarcasm) Where is BLM on this one? They come down on cops for shooting criminals, they not going to come down on this store owner for doing the same?

Oh, and it has been shown that a scared woman is more accurate with a pistol than most marksmen. Good on her!

I agree. Just because they are running doesn't mean the threat no longer exists. For all we know they might be just trying to find some cover to stay in the fight. But I would say once they are out of the house you can stop shooting.

However if I was the prosecutor I damn sure wouldn't be pressing any charges even if that last shot out the door hit one of those bastards in the back.

Of course the main problem here is the very real possibility of hitting another neighbors property, or worse, a neighbor.

originally posted by: nightbringr

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
a reply to: tikbalang

Its a thin line between self defence and murder, when they ran and she was still shooting.. The intention was to kill not defend.

Wrong, under GA law she was still defending herself. Unless they drop their guns and surrender, she has the right to defend herself and her property. (If the cops wanted to be @holes & sometimes Atlanta ones can, they would have arrested her for firing out the door.) All in all, good shoot.

(sarcasm) Where is BLM on this one? They come down on cops for shooting criminals, they not going to come down on this store owner for doing the same?

Oh, and it has been shown that a scared woman is more accurate with a pistol than most marksmen. Good on her!

I agree. Just because they are running doesn't mean the threat no longer exists. For all we know they might be just trying to find some cover to stay in the fight. But I would say once they are out of the house you can stop shooting.

However if I was the prosecutor I damn sure wouldn't be pressing any charges even if that last shot out the door hit one of those bastards in the back.

Of course the main problem here is the very real possibility of hitting another neighbors property, or worse, a neighbor.

I agree but as you can see in the video (the live leak one that was posted) when she was looking out the door she suddenly ducked as if dodging so they were likely still shooting at her so her firing back out the door like that is justified in my book.