Story of an attempted home invasion....

Discussion in 'General Handgun Discussion' started by Bob Wright, Oct 26, 2012.

  1. Bob Wright

    Bob Wright Member

    871
    0
    16
    About eight or ten years ago, a lady told me this story. She was about eighty years of age at the time, and was swapping a Ruger Super Blackhawk in for a Smith & Wesson, don't know which model she ended up buying.

    She told us, Mrs. Faulk, the proprietortress of East Park Sporting Hardware, and me, that she had recently been widowed. Her husband had left her that Super Blackhawk, showed her how to use it, and placed it in a drawer in a hall table at the entrance.

    One night she heard someone at her front door, and peering out saw a hulking figure of a man at her front door. She went to the entry and got the .44. As she did so, the man kicked in her front door, frame and all. He stood there momentarily and bellowed, as she put it. She pointed the Ruger at him and he came further toward her. She eared back the hammer and fired one shot, the muzzle flash lighting up the room. He fell back through the door opening onto the front porch, got up and rolled and fell into her yard. She told me she was glad she didn't have to fire a second shot as the gun had reared up over her head. Her attacker was dead when police arrived.

    She was looking for something a little more controlable.

    She told me she never heard the shot, just the brilliant flash in the entry hall.

    Bob Wright
     
  2. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    15
    38
    i think she did just fine!!

    with a 44 and a superb markswoman like her you only need one!!
     

  3. Old_Crow

    Old_Crow New Member

    990
    0
    0
    Why I don't like the notion of double tapping. Even though you are familiar with your surroundings all it takes is one item out of place and your double tap turns into a marginal single hit. With a 357 and up the attacker is still going down. You can get back on your feet and ready to fire by the time the attacker knows which way is up.
     
  4. HockaLouis

    HockaLouis New Member

    3,617
    0
    0
    Lotta bloodthirsty people 'round these parts but I love a story with a happy ending!
     
  5. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    3,852
    0
    0
    No need for a double tap...:eek:
     
  6. jyo

    jyo New Member

    233
    0
    0
    Well, that's an entertaining story, we can only hope it's true, if so then happy ending. There was a story running around the gunstore a couple of decades back about a reasonably young girl who had been given an old H&R 9 shot 22 revolver by her grandpa---fully loaded---this revolver sat in a part of the house for something like 15+ years when a bad man broke into her house in the middle of the day---he advanced upon her and she double-actioned all 9 rounds into his chest area at about 10 feet---he ran out of the house and made it about two houses down before he collapsed and left our mortal earth---just before he died, he said these words to the guy living next door; "The bitch shot me!" Don't you just love happy endings?
     
  7. HockaLouis

    HockaLouis New Member

    3,617
    0
    0
    That's awful.

    That was just overkill. She was young. It was daytime. He just broke in; didn't take down the door with its frame and there's no indication there was any bellowing. If she even had to shoot I can understand a doubletap, maybe, but not all nine rounds. At point blank range? Uncalled for. Bloodlust. From which round should we consider it manslaughter? From which do we admit it was murder, outright!?

    He was right: beyotch!

    PS: take note and learn all you folk who argue the .22 LR is the perfect survival round.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2012
  8. Colby

    Colby New Member

    461
    0
    0
    You mean one shot or two shoots is self defense and OK - but more than that goes to manslaughter - and then more than that makes it murder.?!

    I don't get the reasoning here. If it was self defense to begin with, how does it change? The perpetrator's actions didn't change. The reason for defense didn't change.

    If the victim is too traumatized to "hold back", why should she? Isn't dead with one or two bullets just the same dead with nine bullets? Isn't dead ... dead? Isn't the perpetrator's crime the same? Didn't he do something bad to cause this self defense? That he would push someone into shooting him - it makes a difference how many times?? Only a couple are OK? But you better start counting ...?

    She is supposed to maintain her cool under this crime against her and think "No - HockaLouis believes I should conserve my bullets. ... Now try to control my panic here"
     
  9. Old_Crow

    Old_Crow New Member

    990
    0
    0
    It's common knowledge that if you shoot someone in the chest more than 3 times with any firearm you will be tried for manslaughter. I have made this point before and people have told me I am an idiot but that's the way it works. Self defense is stopping the attack. Once you shoot someone 3 times they usually stop, drugged or not. It's not a law it's just a rule of thumb used by law enforcement and DAs in every jurisdiction across the land.

    I agree it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. The fact of the matter is your fate will be decided by 12 without extenuating circumstances.
     
  10. Doc3402

    Doc3402 New Member

    2,823
    0
    0
    Let's see. The intruder broke into a house he had no right to be in. He was advancing toward an armed female. She fired until the firearm was empty. At this point the intruder was able to run a couple houses down until he dropped. I think she did exactly the right thing.

    She fired until the gun was empty and the intruder still wasn't down. That means had he been armed he still could have shot or stabbed her. Had he been more aggressive he still could have attempted to strangle her. No, my thoughts are along the lines of what the law allows. Fire until the threat is gone, then cease fire. In my opinion the threat was still present until he either left the premises or keeled over.

    HokaLouis, I don't know if you were being sarcastic, but if you weren't, I hope your loved ones know how to defend themselves. In the meantime I will continue to teach my daughter to fire until the threat ends, reload and wait for the police from a position of safety.
     
  11. motorheadwayne

    motorheadwayne New Member

    45
    0
    0
    I really hope HockaLouis was just trying to be thought provoking... Even in the Great Socialist State of NY an intruder is likely to be dispatched to the degree and point to which the threat is removed. Even though there will be in all likelyhood an investigation with a Grand Jury. If things were as described in the original story the young woman would be exonnerated. Example: In one of our more upscale communities in the Buffalo area (Williamsville) a very inebriated school teacher visiting friends stumbled into one of the neighbors house about midnight which of course startled the homeowner who was in bed. The homeowner had the 911 operator on the phone while telling the intruder to back off get out and that he was armed. For some reason the teacher started coming up the homeowners stairs yelling incoherantly and when he reached the top of the stairs the homeowner fired his 12ga. killing the intruder. The homeowner was exonerated after a Grand Jury hearing even though the family tried to sue and there was the typical outrage that he was just a visiting teacher and all the usual tripe about what a wonderful person he was a teacher etc. etc... Moral of the story, persons need to be responsible for themselves. It was of course an unimaginable tragedy and the homeowner reportedly was devastated as you could only imagine... As any sentient being would be after killing another person. I cannot see a prosecuter trying to persecute a young woman for defending herself in her own home either. IMOHO...
     
  12. Old_Crow

    Old_Crow New Member

    990
    0
    0

    Where your thought train is breaking down is you assuming there is thought put into these prosecutions. Many areas of law enforcement no thought is put into the matter. Someone cooks up a policy and this policy is followed through without any thought. Sadly, the three shot rule is one of these areas were no thought is put into the situation.

    No thought is put into the caliber of weapon the victim was using or the size of the attacker. I have several friends that six shots to the chest with a 22LR would be fatal but I doubt it would draw blood. These guys are just that big. Add drugs or alcohol to the mix, if you tangle with one of these guys you will be before a grand jury.
     
  13. HockaLouis

    HockaLouis New Member

    3,617
    0
    0
    I did inject a touch of sarcasm in there, yes.

    By the way, isn't a .44 twice as powerful as a .22? Seems to have been alot more effective here comparing the two situations...
     
  14. jyo

    jyo New Member

    233
    0
    0
    I am just glad both of these "problems" were solved with the good guys OK and the bad guys removed from the gene-pool!
     
  15. Shannon1976

    Shannon1976 New Member

    87
    0
    0
    After 9 rounds he was able to run a few houses down and was spouting insults about the woman...and you think she went overboard?? Seriously, I would like to send her a speed loader as a thank you gift for taking care of the p.o.s. and saving tax payers thousands.
     
  16. locutus

    locutus Well-Known Member Supporter

    16,413
    300
    83
    Any instructor worth the name will teach you to continue firing until the threat is neutralized. Whether that is one shot, or 15.

    And BTW, there is no handgun that will reliabily stop a human with one shot, unless it is CNS hit, regardless of what Hollyweird portrays.

    As for charges being filed, I always taught my officers that if you end up in a courtroom as the result of a gunfight, it means you WON the gunfight.
     
  17. Eturnsdale

    Eturnsdale New Member

    1,163
    0
    0
    To all of those who argue against double taps, or firing more than three rounds. That sounds insane, and while I can not say how things are where you live, I can say that I have never, in all my searching, find someone who was convicted because of how many rounds they fired.

    Just like LEOs and military, you train yourself to fire until the threat ends. To quote a LEO friend of mine in San Fran. "If you are justified in shooting him with a .22 you are justified in shooting him with a .50. If you are justified in shooting him once, you are justified in shooting him until he ceases his attack. And thinking otherwise may get you killed."