It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

80-Year-Old Chicago Man Kills Armed Home Invader

page: 6
45
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
The intruder needed money or food is not a reasonable argument. If he needed that, why doesn't he sell the gun? Obviously he has money for weapons and ammunition.

I'm sure the old man doesn't feel good about having to kill someone but I'm sure he is happy it wasn't him or his wife that were killed instead.




posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by leisuredrummer
The intruder needed money or food is not a reasonable argument. If he needed that, why doesn't he sell the gun? Obviously he has money for weapons and ammunition.

I'm sure the old man doesn't feel good about having to kill someone but I'm sure he is happy it wasn't him or his wife that were killed instead.


I've needed money or food before and I didn't break into someone's home with a gun. Some people just want to steal and harm others.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:18 PM
link   
I don't understand how someone could NOT want a handgun in Chicago


All jokes aside, I'm extremely tired and don't want to give my personal statement on this one--but I'm interested to see how it plays out.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Mayor Daly are you there?

Mayor Daly are you listening?

If the 80 y.o. wouldn't have taken personal responsibility for himself and killed the bad guy it wouldn't have even made the news.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destiny Of Souls
Hey stereovoyaged, our country has almost 700 times the amount of citizens you have in your little area of Canada. You have no idea what real life here is like. Hell, the city I was born in has twice as many people as your whole province.

I hate to say it, but I'm sure you wouldn't last a year if you were over here. If you think life is all sunshine and rainbows, then you don't know anything. Guns are needed for self defense here, plain and simple. I laugh if you're 27 and have never seen a gun, that's not something to be proud of, that's being naive. That type of crap might fly in your country that nobody cares about, but when you're ready to join the big dogs of the world, pick up a gun and realize what really constitutes power in this world.

If you can't defend your life, why live at all?

[edit on 27-5-2010 by Destiny Of Souls]


God, I don't know what sickens me more, your absolute American ignorance or the fact that 3 pages were posted after your post without it being addressed. Nobody cares about my country?? WHO THE HELL ARE YOU JUNIOR??? The big dogs? Give me a Goddamn break. I said I never seen a handgun, not a gun. We use guns here for hunting, not killing each other. Your "look at me, i've got a gun" attitude is whats wrong with this world and its why the rest of the world hates you and your country. Why not be a big boy, put your gun down and see who comes out on top. I have no words to describe the amount of disdain I have for individuals with your attitude. BTW I disagree, I think being 27 and never seeing a handgun is a great thing, hope I can make ti to 50.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
www.myfoxchicago.com...

Bit of an update:


No charges are expected for a man in his 80s who fatally shot an alleged assailant during a home invasion Wednesday morning in the West Side Garfield Park neighborhood, police said.


Okay, so they are not expected to file charges. Can gun rights advocates view this as a case of the gun grabbers backing down?

Just hope it doesn't cause people to let their guard down. This case is exactly one of the scenarios gun rights advocates use as a reason to still have the right to bear arms.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   
This "Old Man" was a Korean War Veteran --- HooRah !


Sad that a Vet who survived the war has to fight at home for survival.

Especially at 80 years of age.

The deceased was another casualty of the plague of narcotics ...

Sorry for him but the Lords Prayer says it well....

"Lead us Not into Temptation , But Deliver us from Evil.."

which he failed to acknowledge.

So he is now...

------------K------I------A------------



Good Riddance Scumbag !



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by impaired
 


There's a problem with your theory. If the intruder only wanted to break in to steal, then why bring a gun of his own? The news headlines today are full of stories where families were murdred by intruders. Better to defend yourself than become a statistic, I say.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Here in North Dakota we can legally shoot anyone who breaks into our houses.

I don't care if any of you guys try to justify that the old man is wrong. "Well guys, all he wanted to do was steal something"

Give me a ****ing break.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
Well good on him, if someone breaks into your home where you and your family are then the only choice in my opinion is to kill them. If not they may kill your loved ones or come back again.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
reply to post by Jessicamsa
 


The guy was probably breaking in to steal something. He wasn't going to kill the old man, come on.

Unless the old-timer is a significant man, I doubt the home-invader would have done anything more than steal.



Awww, you're right, we should give these thieves a big hug shouldn't we? After all, they're only breaking into someones house to steal things and shouldn't be harmed, yep, your logic is sound.

[Sarcasm off] I'm so glad the old fella shot this thief, that's one less scumbag off the streets, may it happen to all of them.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Jessicamsa
 


No charges for the man is a good thing. I'd say in Chicago that's a "win" even though there shouldnt have to be any "wins" like this due to the whole "shall not be infringed" thing.

The update also says "a gun was recovered from the scene."

There were two guns. One was the suspects and one was the old mans. Does the old man still have his gun? I thought in Chicago that was illegal? Are Chicago cops looking the other way and letting the guy break the law?

So there is a chance the old man actually owns the gun "legally" as per Chicago law:


Chicago does not allow the registration of handguns, which has the effect of outlawing their possession, unless they were grandfathered in by being registered before April 16, 1982.


[edit on 28-5-2010 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by stereovoyaged
 


Maybe you should drop some of your ignorance. Fact... people kill. Fact guns don't kill people, people kill people. Your brethren with their rifles could also kill people with those "hunting rifles", just as you can kill people with Bow's and Arrows and knives. So stop bashing the U.S., stop being scared of legal owners of guns who have them to protect themselves. Criminals by DEFINITION do not follow law.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I hope they don't arrest this guy. He was protecting his home and family. This guy should be given a medal. I know we need to know more specifics of what actually happened like did he fire at the guy or just said to put his weapon down and feared for his life to make this claim more valid but that guy shouldn't have been there thats what i believe.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Jessicamsa
 


SnF to u Jessica and once again many thanks for sharing your find with ATS. I am always pleased to hear a couple made it to their ripe old age together. Tragically most of these stories involve unbelievable sorrow and grief as in this story. This couple will never be the same again and it will be suggested that they should go into a "retirement" home which usually separates the couple. The last story I heard was here a couple had to loose their home over a banker error that could not be corrected. So glad that the gentleman was armed as this story could be more horrifying than it is. With so much government control over our lives I fail to understand how "home invaders" (yes Silo that is a horrible term almost as if it is now acceptable to read about these kinds of people in everyday news) can equate that the risk of getting caught in this kind of act is worth the what they will get which all due respect cannot be a lot. Most of what pensioners have of value is in their bricks, mortal and land. It saddens me to think that the punishment that the home invaders receive is so much less than what the victim pays in lost of secure feelings, confidence and in many cases of the elderly their independence, however in this case their peace of mind as there now is blood on innocent hands.


edited to add:

OfHumandecent My deepest respect for your posts, thoughts and attitude.

I have always said that the people who allowed someone convicted of a crime free back into the community owes the next victim or their survivors a huge debt and should bear responsibility for the next criminal actions of the individual they allowed free. After all they were caught then released. This goes for judge, jury and/or prosecutor. The world is full of victim who has been victimized by someone who have been brought to justice as it were. This makes me sad that the legal system seems to be on the criminal side and not the law abider.

[edit on 5/28/2010 by IceHappy]



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
This is why I envy America. You guys have the 2nd Amendment on your side. You can carry guns legally. You can even the odds with the cockroaches of the underworld, when they try to push you around.

My opinion? I have zero sympathy for the little bastard. Zilch. Nada. None. That little sack of # burglar got exactly what he deserved. He made his bed the moment he grabbed that gun and broke into the old man's house. Don't whine about it just 'cuz it doesn't go your way. That goes for the deady's family as well.


As for the old man? If I could, I'd congratulate him for succeeding in protecting himself, his wife and his home. You survived the night, old man. That makes you the winner. Regardless of what those retarded politicians that might try and prosecute you, think.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by bigshow
 


I understand your position, but it isn't that simple. Yes, people do kill it's human nature to be selfish and criminals are the most selfish of all. And yes, guns in the hands of responsible people rarely cause homicide, but fighting fire with fire is a double edged sword. According to the ATF:


An estimated 500,000 guns are also stolen each year, allowing them to get into the hands of prohibited users. During the ATF's Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative (YCGII), which involved expanded tracing of firearms recovered by law enforcement agencies, only 18% of guns used criminally that were recovered in 1998 were in possession of the original owner.[92]


So close to 20% of all gun crime is directly related to stolen guns. Gun control advocates state that if the access to guns was limited and the number of guns physically in the countrty reduced this particular statistic would lessen, preventing further gun-related crime.

stereovoyaged was simply giving his opinion, he was then pounced on by someone who proceeded to belittle our country simply because we advocate gun control and restriction. He was fighting fire with fire, which is what you propose to do with gun laws. Is responding in kind truly ignorance?


[edit on 28-5-2010 by dontblink]



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereovoyaged

Originally posted by Destiny Of Souls
Hey stereovoyaged, our country has almost 700 times the amount of citizens you have in your little area of Canada. You have no idea what real life here is like. Hell, the city I was born in has twice as many people as your whole province.

I hate to say it, but I'm sure you wouldn't last a year if you were over here. If you think life is all sunshine and rainbows, then you don't know anything. Guns are needed for self defense here, plain and simple. I laugh if you're 27 and have never seen a gun, that's not something to be proud of, that's being naive. That type of crap might fly in your country that nobody cares about, but when you're ready to join the big dogs of the world, pick up a gun and realize what really constitutes power in this world.

If you can't defend your life, why live at all?

[edit on 27-5-2010 by Destiny Of Souls]


God, I don't know what sickens me more, your absolute American ignorance or the fact that 3 pages were posted after your post without it being addressed. Nobody cares about my country?? WHO THE HELL ARE YOU JUNIOR??? The big dogs? Give me a Goddamn break. I said I never seen a handgun, not a gun. We use guns here for hunting, not killing each other. Your "look at me, i've got a gun" attitude is whats wrong with this world and its why the rest of the world hates you and your country. Why not be a big boy, put your gun down and see who comes out on top. I have no words to describe the amount of disdain I have for individuals with your attitude. BTW I disagree, I think being 27 and never seeing a handgun is a great thing, hope I can make ti to 50.



If the rest of the world hates our country why is it overflowing with immigrants, legal and illegal? Good call.

"Put down your gun and see who comes out on top."? If we put down our guns then we will be shot by the criminals. See, thats the problem you don't understand. If licensed guns are taken away from the citizens, the criminals still have theirs. Criminals will think twice if there may be a chance the person they are about to rape, murder or steal from may also have a gun.

The first handgun you may see might be a criminal's and you'll be staring down the barrel of it. I bet then you'll be wishing you had one then.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by leisuredrummer
 


I think gun violence in America is largely symptematic of the ease with which guns can be aquired. As I said above gun related crime is perpetrated with a stolen firearm 18% of the time. That's close to 1/5 of all gun related crime. This can be connected with the sheer volume of guns within the United States. If the number of and access to guns in the country were decreased then the logic states that gun related violence would decrease as well. The need for more guns is relative to the accesibility of guns in general. The easier it is for criminal citizens to get guns the more they will amass. The more guns the criminals have the more they will use. The more criminals use guns the more lawful folk will percieve the need to own more guns to defend themselves. It's escalation in its purest form.

But let's be clear, I'm not advocating taking guns from the hands of responsible citizens or trampling on anyone's constitutional rights, I favor following the letter of the law in all situations and the U.S. Constitution is pretty clear on the subject. In Canada, no such right to gun ownership exists and as such the ownership of a gun is a privledge one that can be easily revoked. The emphasis on guns as a part of national identity is at work here, this is where the difference in opinion is coming from.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   


"Put down your gun and see who comes out on top."? If we put down our guns then we will be shot by the criminals. See, thats the problem you don't understand. If licensed guns are taken away from the citizens, the criminals still have theirs. Criminals will think twice if there may be a chance the person they are about to rape, murder or steal from may also have a gun.

The first handgun you may see might be a criminal's and you'll be staring down the barrel of it. I bet then you'll be wishing you had one then.


You make it sound like you are the only place on Earth that has criminals. They are everywhere sorry to tell you. You're missing my point. Its the ease in which you can(illegally or legally) aquire them. Its said "guns don't kill people, people kill people", well the fact that these "people" have the guns in the first place doesn't hurt the whole killing thing. Cause you can justify it all you want, fact of the matter is a gun is a tool of death. Thier purpose is to end lives, its not meant for non leathal purpose. The less guns you have, the less people die from gun fire, thats undeniable



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join