Classic defensive gun use incident in Tallahassee

Wabah Trail homeowner opens fire on intruder in kitchen, two arrested

Again, these happen every day. This one is especially good for several reasons, least of which is the homeowner appears to have emerged unharmed. There were apparently FOUR assailants, and it took the homeowner 25 rounds to drive them off, as they returned fire.

When police located the home of one of the suspects:

A stolen car was recovered later that morning near Tillman’s home. Inside officers found blood and spent shell casings that matched ones found at the Wabash Trail house.

Inside Tillman’s house, investigators found property stolen in other burglaries, ammunition and two handguns, one of which was stolen.

Apparently this wasn't the first rodeo for these scum. They had an ongoing operation. Also:

A third man, Jaylin Baldwin, was charged with possession of a firearm by a felon during the search.

Sounds like one of the "non-violent offenders" Obama released, ignoring numerous illegal gun charges while pretending pushing for gun control is about public safety.

The number of gun control tropes busted in this case is staggering. You've got the multiple assailants (when does that happen right? That's just a gun-nut fantasy isn't it?), the over two dozen rounds fired in defense, one of the assholes had a stolen gun (why didn't he just get it at a gun show, right?).

These kinds of things happen daily in America, armed good guys stop lowlifes all the time, it just doesn't get reported on CNN or MSNBC.

a reply to: face23785

I have noticed a trend in the press on home invasion stories. It seems that multiple assailants is becoming quite common now.

a reply to: infolurker

It's been common.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: face23785

I have noticed a trend in the press on home invasion stories. It seems that multiple assailants is becoming quite common now.

Because they are starting to report it more....so what has been common is just getting more press to make it appear to be increasing. Especially suppressed during the previous administration....that would have made to many waves politically.

a reply to: infolurker

The "trend" is there is an effort now to report instances. Multiple assailants have been common throughout history. Criminals have always liked to gang up on others.

a reply to: face23785

Damn, fellow is really lucky...frightening, 3:40am, couldnt of been easy keeping it together.

I think Ill refer to this story as one of my points when being asked by countless liberals why I "need" a semi auto firearm.

They never seemed to buy my wild boar hunting defense

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: face23785

Damn, fellow is really lucky...frightening, 3:40am, couldnt of been easy keeping it together.

I think Ill refer to this story as one of my points when being asked by countless liberals why I "need" a semi auto firearm.

They never seemed to buy my wild boar hunting defense

Oh they'll just say you shouldn't need 25 shots to hit 4 guys. 4 rounds should have been enough. Ya know, because the right to defend yourself should only apply to world-class marksmen.

Sheltered anti-gun extremists will never get how things happen in the real world until it happens to them.

a reply to: face23785

Couldnt agree more. Oregon had a gun bill this year wjere they were going to make all semi autos and any revolver or rfle capable of more than five rounds a felony.

Apparently these liberal heroes can readily dispatch a charging bear, a pack of wolves and 30 foot leaping Mountain lions handily with a 5 rd. .38 (only handgun I own less than 6 rds)

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: face23785

Couldnt agree more. Oregon had a gun bill this year wjere they were going to make all semi autos and any revolver or rfle capable of more than five rounds a felony.

Apparently these liberal heroes can readily dispatch a charging bear, a pack of wolves and 30 foot leaping Mountain lions handily with a 5 rd. .38 (only handgun I own less than 6 rds)

Oh yeah, just do some fancy kung fu or something like you see in the movies. Only wussies need guns, right?

Like I said, it's sheltered know-nothings with no grasp of real life. The most intense confrontation most of them have had is being the victim of "microaggression" on college campuses.

a reply to: face23785

Sounds like one of the "non-violent offenders" Obama released, ignoring numerous illegal gun charges while pretending pushing for gun control is about public safety.

Yeah, but thought illegal gun possession was no big deal over there in the land of the free... kind of like a DUI charge, right?

a reply to: infolurker

Multiple assailants have always been robbing houses.

Here's multiple assailants from 2009.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: face23785

Sounds like one of the "non-violent offenders" Obama released, ignoring numerous illegal gun charges while pretending pushing for gun control is about public safety.

Yeah, but thought illegal gun possession was no big deal over there in the land of the free... kind of like a DUI charge, right?

Then you've been brainwashed by media propaganda, which is no surprise to anyone here. Gun owners and actual responsible gun rights groups like the NRA have long wanted heavier punishments for these types of gun crimes, because the majority of our gun crime is driven by repeat offenders. But the soft-on-criminals approach that nets a lot of the bleeding heart vote puts these scum above the lives of victims. The only ones it's apparently "no big deal" to to have an illegal gun is the same assholes pushing gun control, which tells you what their real motives are, and it's not public safety.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: face23785

Couldnt agree more. Oregon had a gun bill this year wjere they were going to make all semi autos and any revolver or rfle capable of more than five rounds a felony.

Apparently these liberal heroes can readily dispatch a charging bear, a pack of wolves and 30 foot leaping Mountain lions handily with a 5 rd. .38 (only handgun I own less than 6 rds)

Oh yeah, just do some fancy kung fu or something like you see in the movies. Only wussies need guns, right?

Like I said, it's sheltered know-nothings with no grasp of real life. The most intense confrontation most of them have had is being the victim of "microaggression" on college campuses.

Or being frightened of the doorbell in their house.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: face23785

Sounds like one of the "non-violent offenders" Obama released, ignoring numerous illegal gun charges while pretending pushing for gun control is about public safety.

Yeah, but thought illegal gun possession was no big deal over there in the land of the free... kind of like a DUI charge, right?

It's a felony genius. But, then,. facts get in the way of your righteous disconnected island talk.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: face23785

Sounds like one of the "non-violent offenders" Obama released, ignoring numerous illegal gun charges while pretending pushing for gun control is about public safety.

Yeah, but thought illegal gun possession was no big deal over there in the land of the free... kind of like a DUI charge, right?

You thought wrong
Again

a reply to: face23785

This is actually a perfect example of the conundrum of gun rights in the US.

Gun possession in general (whether legal or illegal) is either 'no big deal'... or it is a big deal, which should only be afforded to people who have gone through a strict process to prove their worthy of the privilege.

I don't personally see a logical way their could be any middle ground on that line of thought.

I am fascinated by the whole 'gun rights' in the US topic though... I'm just honestly yet to come across an argument that came even close to convincing me that an armed society is a more enlightened society.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Your quote "Gun possession in general (whether legal or illegal) is either 'no big deal'... or it is a big deal, which should only be afforded to people who have gone through a strict process to prove their worthy of the privilege."

Wrong, it is a right not a privilege, until you lose that right. Commit a gun CRIME you lose your right, get it?

originally posted by: Im2keul
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Your quote "Gun possession in general (whether legal or illegal) is either 'no big deal'... or it is a big deal, which should only be afforded to people who have gone through a strict process to prove their worthy of the privilege."

Wrong, it is a right not a privilege, until you lose that right. Commit a gun CRIME you lose your right, get it?

Don't be surprised that an Aussie has no concept of the difference between a right and a privilege. Their govt is setup to give the people the "right" not protect a right that already exists. It's a very different concept, and sometimes more than some brains can adequately grasp.

originally posted by: Im2keul
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Your quote "Gun possession in general (whether legal or illegal) is either 'no big deal'... or it is a big deal, which should only be afforded to people who have gone through a strict process to prove their worthy of the privilege."

Wrong, it is a right not a privilege, until you lose that right. Commit a gun CRIME you lose your right, get it?

Amazing how simple it is to understand, yet they can't understand it. It's willful ignorance. It doesn't fit with their chosen narrative, so they have to force themselves to be stupid to avoid accepting such a simple concept.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: face23785

I am fascinated by the whole 'gun rights' in the US topic though... I'm just honestly yet to come across an argument that came even close to convincing me that an armed society is a more enlightened society.

That's an interesting metric you've chosen there. Of course it's entirely subjective. And none of our rights are based on enlightenment. These are just some of your problems. You make up standards that have no application in this discussion.