It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Home Invasion Attempt Stopped By Woman With A Shotgun

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 12:38 PM

reply to post by neo96

It's just a fear tactic, a buzz word, to keep the unthinking masses unaware that civilian "Assault rifles" aren't as dangerous as the "gun grabbers" want them to be. Fact is the military versions are superior and if it came down to an "us vs. them" superior numbers with the best we can get our hands on, would be our only saving grace.

Fear Tactic:

Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary

70 years of gun control.

Yep most certainly.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 12:39 PM
reply to post by muse7

If I laid my Winchester model 100 next to my AR, I bet you would say the the Winchester was a legit hunting rifle, while the AR was a "Military style assualt weapon" and should be banned.

My Winchester shoots a .308 round, while the AR shoots a .223 round. One looks "scary" and the other looks mundane.

Kinda like my dogs. The German Shepard is big, black, loud and scary looking, while the Blue Healer looks like an addorable teddy bear... Difference is, the Shepard will love ya to death while the Healer bites the crap out of you. Looks can be decieving!

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 12:46 PM

You mention assault weapons..But in reality the numbers show handguns to be involved in most crimes committed with guns. Not rifles, of ANY type, let alone AR15s. So why the push to ban weapons who are a statistical misnomer when it comes to the totality of crimes committed with guns in general?

The most popular rifle in America for law abiding citizens is the AR15 semi-auto rifle. More people own this rifle than any other in the US. If that is the case, shouldn't the so called "assault rifle" show up in crimes just as often as a 1911 handgun?

And there's where their whole argument collapses, as far as I'm concerned. I'm supposed to believe that we need immediate action of 'assault rifles' when handguns are used in 80% of all homicides. They're also used less often than shotguns, which are OK, apparently, and probably hunting rifles as well. Simply put, their priorities are completely out of whack.

The real concern I have, though, is that if you can ban so-called 'assault rifles' on the basis of the great societal harm of 1-2% of all firearm related homicides, it would seem a slam dunk that you could ban the rest on the same grounds, especially handguns. No doubt, they would try, too.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 12:47 PM


reply to post by Flatfish

"Military style assualt weapons"? What does that even mean? It looks scary?

An AR15 functions the same as every other firearm. Pull the trigger and a bullet is fired. Just because it "looks" scary, you don't think people should have them?

larger round, higher round velocity, higher damage to tissue.

You get the point..

An "assault weapon" like an AR-15 has a smaller round and less velocity than a hunting rifle and does less damage. I see that you want to ban something you know nothing about.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 12:57 PM

What good have gun laws done except making an act that is already illegal 'more' illegal.

IMO, here's a better question; What good has the availability of assault weapons in the public realm done?
reply to post by Flatfish

There is no such thing as an assault rifle. The designation AR came from the fact the rifle was designed by Armalite and actually stood for Armalite Rifle. Would you consider an AR-7 to be an assault rifle too? Please take some time to educate yourself before you try to argue a topic you are obviously under educated about...Thanks!

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 12:58 PM
reply to post by NavyDoc

Please see above the term Assault Rifle is completely made up as a propaganda term.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:02 PM

Just sayin'

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:05 PM
reply to post by beezzer

Yeah any 'weapon' can be used to 'assault' someone:

Be it rocks, paper,scissors,arrows,baseball bat,chain saws, hell even automobiles.

Can be called 'assault weapons'.

Hell there is even a modern day equivalent to that now that 'pipe bombs' are now called 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'.

Fear mongering at it's best.
edit on 10-2-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:14 PM
reply to post by KawRider9

It is amazing on that, isn't it? People have a fit over a .22 on steroids (.223/5.56 of an AR or M-16) and just yawn or act bored when they see a .303 British Infield or any high power bolt action hunting rifle.

People don't even stop and think ...the hunting rifle is infinitely more dangerous in moderately skilled hands than the AR-15 or M-16 is all but expert hands.

.22 on Steroids vs. .308...which would I choose... Hmm...

Which looks worse? Yet...they are always on about the .223 rifle. Go figure, huh?

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:18 PM

reply to post by NavyDoc

Please see above the term Assault Rifle is completely made up as a propaganda term.

"Assault weapon" is an entirely made up term.

Assault rifle is a specific firearm that fires an intermediate sized cartridge and is capable of full auto or single shot semi auto by use of s selector lever. The term was coined by the Germans with the advent of their Sturmgewehr (assault rifle) which was designed to fill the gap between a SMG and battle rifle.

So called "assault weapons" are not assault rifles because they do not have full-auto capability.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:20 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

indeed. for man killing the 223/5.56 round is intensely ineffective i do recall a few times having to use 6-12 rounds just to stop an enemy

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:23 PM
reply to post by NavyDoc

After a bit of quick google foo I will stand corrected. However my main point remains (which I know you weren't disagreeing with). I am still sure the AR designation comes from the fact Armalite designed it. Thanks for clarifying my point a little better because I know if I have left one little inch for the anti-gun guys to argue they will twist it and stretch it until it's no longer recognizable.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:24 PM
and then there is this clown

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:28 PM
reply to post by EyesOpenMouthShut

Me and a buddy were actually doing a bit of gun shopping when the topic of the .223's inadequacies came up. He assured me they are quite inferior and recounted a time in Afghanistan where he landed 5 .223 rounds into a guy and watched him keep on running around the corner. 5 rounds point mass and the guy doesn't go down...oh but wait he couldn't have been using that "ghost gun" cause it shoots .30 cal clips and 30 mags a second and that sounds dangerous...where is my emoticon for dying of laughter!

ETA: I fear a human not a weapon and that's how it should be...humans are dangerous guns are inanimate objects.
edit on 10-2-2014 by RickyD because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2014 by RickyD because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:31 PM
reply to post by RickyD

7.62/308 is where its at. AR10. i actually believe that was the first time this politician ever held a gun in his life

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:33 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Amazing/infuriating, whatever ya want to call it.

Bust out the Marlin model 60 and everyone wants a turn at shooting it. Bust out the Mossberg "AR STYLE" 22 and people get in a panic because there's a machine gun on the loose.

That is the frustrating thing about the anti-gun crowd, they have no clue what they're seeing or talking about. All they know is it looks scary and want them out of the hands of law abiding people. Sad really! No way to have a rational conversation with people like that...

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:38 PM

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I too think it's great that this lady was able to protect herself with her shotgun and I'd bet those burglars think twice before going on to their next job.

On the other hand, I don't see what this has to do with gun control. If anything, this just proves that you don't necessarily need an "assault weapon" in order to successfully defend yourself. Hell, I think V.P. Joe Biden even advocated for getting yourself a shotgun, didn't he?

While I'll admit that there are some extremist out there, most gun control advocates are not in favor of taking away a person's right to own guns for protection. We just don't see the need for military style assault weapons in the public realm. I think that lady's gun will hold five rounds max. and from what I could tell, she didn't have to fire a damn one of them to be effective.

The problem is that home invaders are so doped up on meth and other chemicals when they commit these crimes, that they don't feel the pain of bullets. Some women have fired five shots at a burglar and he still kept moving towards her and her children:

Now there are new bullets on the market which aim to do the same damage using fragmentation.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:45 PM
reply to post by stormcell

If you put 5 rounds into someone at home defense ranges and they are still coming with purpose? You are doing something seriously wrong or you don't have a have a toy with gunpowder charges. They call them .25 and .22 caliber, in other settings.

I'll share what I've taught both my wife and sister-in-law as well was trained with them..over and over..until it is automatic to them.

Shoot for the family jewels. Always start between the legs...and then ride the recoil as you empty the gun.

Now, that is not how I shoot or how I train ..but they aren't me and had absolutely no interest in spending the time and money required to learn more effective methods to the point of being automatic.

However, in this case, my wife would have one of two guns in her hands in home defense (and my SIL when she lived with us)..a .38 or .357 revolver and both have hollow points in them. One is 5 and one is 6 rounds. By the time she clicks dry, she ought to be putting the last round into the guys face or neck. whichever one she's shooting for shot count by that method.

Just my two cents for an approach I believe strongly in with people that don't have and don't want training worth the term.

* The initial aim point has nothing to do with the 'nasty' factor or anything else about where the first round will hit ..although I pity the guy if the gun jams after that 1st round.. lol.. I taught them to start there to give the maximum distance upward and maximum space right and left for error, to avoid recoil takes each shot a few inches higher then the last with adrenaline running full tilt.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:50 PM
Home invasion...not gonna happen. Don't even come up my driveway unannounced. Call first. Just sayin.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:51 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I taught my wife the same aimpoint with my .45, with the 12 gauge i told her to "point the end at their gut and show them the error of their ways"

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in