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.

 

Home Invasion Attempt Stopped By Woman With A Shotgun

page: 4
39
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 





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


That hurt me just by reading that.

Most definitely one way to stop someone.




posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   

RickyD
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.


Yes, IIRC, AR stands for ARmalite.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Home invasions are no joke - if it had to go down for her, positive side is she handled it and came out alive. Win.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Bless the lady with the 12 gauge and brass ones bigger than most men!

Any of you oldsters remember when we transitioned from the M-14 .308 to the Matty Mattel .22 er, the M-16? We went from dealing death and destruction to "did I hit anything?" You know, thinking back, we have won no wars since we went to the .223 round as our main battle implement round. Makes you wonder...



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Great story. Everyone should own a firearm. Thanks Wrabbit!



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Just be comfortable with whatever your firearm of choice is, or your self-defense weapon; doesn't necessarily have to be a gun. We could all be like Michon from The Walking Dead, but me, I prefer a simple 357 Magnum revolver for it's sheer simplicity. It is my gun of choice, like we all have a "drug" of choice lol...whatever you choose, be good at it. No, be Great at it and you will prevail. I can shoot that baby blindfold and let there be no mistake, I will shoot to protect my loved one.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by sn0rch
 


I prefer the old reliable. a wrist rocket sling shot and a paint ball rounds injected with hydrochloric acid and gasoline ! Yes, it DEFINITELY leaves a mark!



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by sn0rch
 


If she tried hard enough im sure she could have fended them off with a gun or a bat. Knives can get pretty big and a bat with a few barn nails hammered trhough the end are no joke. Weapons are weapons, they are also tools.

A few years ago a drunk guy wandered onto my property and came in through my sliding glass door, i could hear someone in my backyard because of the river rock shifting. I grabbed my 24" kukri (big curved knife) and waited by the door with it raised over my shoulder. You should have seen the guys face when he saw me with what must have looked like a wickedly curved and sharp blade waiting for him. He swore, pleaded and truned around and ran. I met him again out front since there is only one way out of our yard. I called the police they said he had been to 3 other houses in my neighborhood that night, and were surprised that i didnt mess him up. The guy was drunk and not together upstairs, it was pretty obvious and i didnt want to hurt him since he didnt seem violent. I own a few guns but i solved my problem with a knife. And when it gets all up close and personal i would take a knife over a gun any day, but i still love my guns. Anything can be used as a weapon.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Lets go thru this step by step, shall we?




If the perps were even armed.


Doesnt matter, armed or not, they had no reason to be in the house, they werent invited and didnt live there. If they were 'just visiting', ever hear of knocking first or ringing the doorbell? Hell, I dont even just walk into a relatives house, I knock or ring, announcing my presence!



that a good alarm or beware of dog sign would of thwarted any burglary attempt.


It takes about 3-5 mins at a MINIMUM for police to arrive when an alarm goes off, a competent robber can clear the house of valuables in that time. Also, show me where a 'beware of dog' sign stopped a robber



That 30% of house breakins aren't even forced.

So that makes it okay? If the door is unlocked, just come right in and help yourself?



In the incidence that someone happens to be home, 65% of the time, the burgler is known.

Got proof of that or are you talking out the side of your face again?



A gun is far more likely to be used in a suicide or a homicide than ever for home invasion.

Again, show me statistics



So yea gun nuts, whoop it up.

And yeah I think we will

HOOAH!!!



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by kdyam
 





And when it gets all up close and personal i would take a knife over a gun any day

You a ninja and can deflect the bullet coming at you with your knife?



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 11:57 PM
link   
When I had such things, my favorite home invasion deterrents were a Colt Python .357 mag running half jacket hollow points and a hand and half bastard sword. 31" inches of cold hard steel and 2" inches at the cross guard of pure terror. If the .357 didn't stop you, the blade would. Actually if and intruder is within 10 feet and even has a gun, it will not save him as he would be dead before he could use it. Swords are far more deadly than a bullet in the hands of someone who knows how to use it.

Home defense is best served by a 12 gauge, double ought and no choke for the average person. It's extremely effective at close range and doesn't travel far with much power, less chance of someone down range being injured. First round, double ought followed by a slug, the intruder will not be coming back for seconds. Back in the day, we also used to add rock salt.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 12:55 AM
link   
the burglars were lucky, i collect knives and swords, there is a samurai sword by every door in my house and almost in every corner of every room and a few under my bed, of course if i chopped a few burglars up i would be looked at as a psycho -_-

i don't know why, but i always preferred a good blade to a firearm

not saying guns are bad, i am pro-gun actually

i remember when we were kids, we would raid the neighbors cherry trees and he would shoot us with rock salt... good times



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by stormcell
 


Your post had a bit of fear mongering IMO. You said all home invaders are "duped" up on meth which simply isn't true.

Not saying that no burglars are on meth but you can easily shoot someone more than 5 times and they can survive without the need for drugs. Your probably doing something wrong if you can't take someone down with a gun in such close range.

Good for this lady though we need more stories like this in the news it's an excellent crime deterrent makes criminals think twice when they hear about fellow criminals getting gunned down in their area.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 08:22 AM
link   


A Remington 870 pump is a real crowd pleaser and just racking a round will cause intruders to soil themselves.


I hear ya and and second it. Feed it a diet of buckshot.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


No, a gun wont deflect a bullet either.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Just because someone chooses to dial 911 and wait for the police to arrive doesn't mean that they have been brainwashed into believing that the police can respond quicker than they could have, had they owned a gun. That's a false argument and one that I believe to be totally without merit.

Some people, (actually most people) don't feel comfortable being around guns and they have every right to make the conscious choice not to have them present in their homes. It's not the result of brainwashing but rather, it's the result of them exercising their rights.

You ask why I believe that some guns should be prohibited and/or highly restricted?

It is my belief that military assault style weapons, which I define as any gun that is capable of utilizing high capacity magazines "and" has "fully-automatic" versions, or "multi round bursts" versions under manufacture, should be kept out of the public realm. Even though many of these weapons are sold as semi-automatic versions, if the other versions are available, conversion is just a side note.

IMO, the potential for public harm outweighs the argument that this type of weapon is necessary for personal defense. Furthermore, the particular case mentioned in the OP supports my argument.

On another note, this may come as a surprise but everyone who supports reasonable gun control measures does not necessarily support a police state as you seem to believe. That's just a figment of your imagination.

With respect to the second amendment, it is my belief that you and most gun advocates seem to be overlooking some of the most important language in the amendment which is; "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state...."

These opening words are the foundation of the amendment and IMO, it should be duly noted that at the time this was written, there were No States! We had colonies! Therefore, one must assume that the "free state" they were talking about was the "state" of liberty and freedom, especially from foreign influence.

The only unified army in existence at the time that could defend the colonies was the Continental Army, which was nothing more than a collective of the Militias provided by the colonies. In other words, there was no U.S. Army, USMC, USN, USAF, USCG or any other national defense mechanism, (other than the Continental Army) that could defend liberty and a "state" of freedom across our land.

Well I don't have to tell you that this is no longer the case. We now have the most powerful defense apparatus the world has ever known and "well regulated Militias" are no longer "necessary to the security of a free state." Unless of course, you're planning another Civil War.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 





Just because someone chooses to dial 911 and wait for the police to arrive doesn't mean that they have been brainwashed into believing that the police can respond quicker than they could have, had they owned a gun. That's a false argument and one that I believe to be totally without merit.


The false 'argument' here are those trying to justify 'gun control'.




Some people, (actually most people) don't feel comfortable being around guns and they have every right to make the conscious choice not to have them present in their homes. It's not the result of brainwashing but rather, it's the result of them exercising their rights.


And the point is?

Some PEOPLE feel comfortable around guns, and EXERCISING their GOD given rights.




It is my belief that military assault style weapons, which I define as any gun that is capable of utilizing high capacity magazines "and" has "fully-automatic" versions, or "multi round bursts" versions under manufacture, should be kept out of the public realm. Even though many of these weapons are sold as semi-automatic versions, if the other versions are available, conversion is just a side note.


That's a crock of snip considering those people who do know what they are talking about unlike some.

Know what passes for civilian arms are built to different tolerances.

There is a massive differences between civilian and milspec weapons.

Besides gun 'modification' is illegal.

Care to point out any shooting within the last 6 years that have been a 'modified' weapon.




IMO, the potential for public harm outweighs the argument that this type of weapon is necessary for personal defense. Furthermore, the particular case mentioned in the OP supports my argument.


From who ?

Sure the hell not 99% of the US population.




On another note, this may come as a surprise but everyone who supports reasonable gun control measures does not necessarily support a police state as you seem to believe. That's just a figment of your imagination.


Yeah they do.

Them bad guns only in the hands of the police, and military.

THAT is the Epitome of a police state.




With respect to the second amendment, it is my belief that you and most gun advocates seem to be overlooking some of the most important language in the amendment which is; "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state...


With Respect to the constitution is what I am doing.

That so called 'well regulated' has left the American gun owner out gunned between the police,the military, and the criminal.

And sorry the militia is made up from PEOPLE.

And it clearly says with a separation



the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Here is the definition of the word because it looks like some people have no idea of what it means.

www.merriam-webster.com...

Does not say what 'kinds'.



These opening words are the foundation of the amendment and IMO, it should be duly noted that at the time this was written, there were No States! We had colonies! Therefore, one must assume that the "free state" they were talking about was the "state" of liberty and freedom, especially from foreign influence.


Really have no idea of what this says ?



Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.



A free state



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Do you think the neighbors will invest in alarms, shotguns, and sleep lightly now??
edit on 11-2-2014 by sean because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 





It is my belief that military assault style weapons, which I define as any gun that is capable of utilizing high capacity magazines "and" has "fully-automatic" versions, or "multi round bursts" versions under manufacture, should be kept out of the public realm. Even though many of these weapons are sold as semi-automatic versions, if the other versions are available, conversion is just a side note.


Hi. Let me introduce my qualifications in weaponry before I tell you what is wrong with everything you just said here:

1. I have 22 years of experience in the handling of firearms.

2. I've fired MILLIONS of rounds out of thousands of weapons over this time.

3. I am a unit armorer in an assault helicopter battalion in the US Army.

4. I am qualified in the use and maintenance of machine guns, select fire weapons, pistols, grenade launchers, and the various accoutrements that accompany such weapons.

It is hard for someone like me to ignore the jump in conclusions you made in this paragraph about how weapons are manufactured, how they function, and the off hand remark about modification of semi-automatic weapons being "side note". It is not.

In order to convert a semi-automatic weapon to handle automatic fire you must have knowledge of machining, the correct and very expensive tools to do so, the materials necessary, and the understanding of how the constant pressures and heat of a weapon designed for semi-auto fire will react when asked to perform automatic fire. The notion of conversion being a simple matter is a myth. One perpetrated by people who have a very clear agenda, but no real understanding of how these things work.

If you would like some education on the matter of firearms I would be more than happy to help. It would serve you well to base your arguments on facts than from a position of ignorance. You and others in this thread have displayed a profound lack of understanding of firearms. You scream "BAN IT!" and you have NO CLUE what you purport to ban.

Help yourself not look like an idiot.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


While I may not have the gun experience that you do, I can tell you this from personal experience. I have a friend who owns a Mac10, (or something like that) that was sold to him as a semi-automatic 9mm by a reputable gun shop, (one that I myself shop in) and the only thing he had to do was to put a penny inside, (in the right place) and the gun would empty the 30 round clip with a single pull of the trigger.

I fired the gun myself, in both semi-auto as well as the full auto mode, so please don't try to convince me that it's not possible or that it didn't happen. I would guess that it emptied the clip in under 2 seconds. Couldn't hardly hold it on target, but it sure as hell spit those rounds out there in full auto.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join