Guns Are Self-Defense Tools; 72-Year-Old Grandmother Fends Off Intruder
A bat's just not the same


A gun is a tool of personal self-defense without equal (and a great equalizer). Earlier this week, a 62-year-old California man was reported to have died after being attacked with his own baseball bat while trying to defend his wife. From CBS San Francisco:
Sandy Harlow, 61, was housesitting for a friend in Orangevale. When she came to feed the dogs, she says a former resident of the home was in the garage and wouldn't leave.
She dialed 911, but the cops didn't show up right away.
"I called my husband and I said, 'James, please come. Please come I'm so frightened,'" Sandy said.
James Harlow, 62, did come, with a baseball bat. That's when Sacramento Sheriff's Deputies say Brandon Biagioni attacked the husband who was twice his age with his own bat.
Meanwhile, in Southern California a 72-year-old woman was able to defend herself and her wheelchair-bound husband from an intruder, who even apologized after she shot at him. From the AP:
Jan Cooper, of Anaheim, fired one shot from her .357-magnum Smith & Wesson revolver around 12:30 a.m. Sunday as a man attempted to break into her home. During a 911 call of the incident, Cooper can be heard begging with the dispatcher to send deputies and warns that she has a gun at the ready as her Rottweiler barks furiously in the background.
Minutes later, a breathless Cooper says the man has come to the back porch and is trying to get in the house through a sliding door. Through the vertical blinds, Cooper saw his silhouette just inches away through the glass as he began to slide open the door.
"I'm firing!" Cooper shouts to the dispatcher as a loud band goes off…
The stunned intruder apologized to Cooper after she fired, she recalled, telling her, "I'm sorry, ma'am. I'm leaving. Please don't shoot."
The Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that police don't have a constitutional duty to defend anyone in particular. Americans do, though, theoretically have a constitutional right to self-defense via the Second Amendment, making attempts to curtail it in the wake of sensational violence particularly disturbing.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
She has a Rottweiler and the dude still tried to break in?
This guy broke the first rule of burglary.
Unpossible! I've been assured by derpgressives that big dogs are every bit as effective as guns for self-defense.
Also, she should have just let the guy in to rob/rape/murder/do whatever the fuck he pleased. /Derpgressive.
She should have pissed herself, and vomited all over him. I hear this great defense for proper lady.
Well if a rottweiler is just as effective as a gun, then either ban rotts or leave the guns alone. And it's true that if you make granny scared, you make rotty angry.
two posts in one day for stuff I put in MLs...
You are not beloved...simple as that.
You know who else was not beloved?
me
i've lost all credibility...
on this issue.
I see what you did there, Bandito.
I used to be beloved, but then I took their guzzoline.
I mus say "I'm shooting" is 100 times more than he would have gotten from me.
More like BLAMBLAM "I shot"...kinda how road crews determine the location of "Dip" signs.
Yeah. Don't shoot at someone unless you mean the kill them. Warning them of the shot kind of hurts your chances.
I read somewhere that a homeowner is more likely to be injured if they warn the burglar. While the polite homeowner is saying, "Stop or I'll shoot" the thug burglar is pulling the trigger. Better to shoot first and leave any niceties for later.
It's much easier to be nice to someone when they are lying in a pool of their own blood than when they are raping your daughter.
The article says she was saying it to the dispatcher, and of course that seems hard to determine, but likely. Many of these stories, I've noticed, consist in large part of the 911-caller telling the dispatcher what they're doing with respect to guns and self-defense.
If I feel that I am in danger I'm not wasting time calling 911 until after the situation is handled. Someone comes into my house in the middle of the night I assume they realize the risk involved and I am happy to oblige. On the bright side, all of the break ins and robberies in my town in the last several years have ended with the thief being shot so it is extremely rare that anyone tries any foolishness around here.
I would still call 911 while arming up. Just in case you are wounded in the fight and unable to call after the shoot out.
Is anyone else seeing the ad for "High quality, combat ready light sabers?" A more civilized weapon...
Typical Jedi move.... bringing a melee weapon to range weapon fight....
Meh, Castle Rock is basically Deshaney, and both were well decided.
Castle Rock is a scary place. But not as scary as (Jeru)salem's Lot.
Dude...it is just an outlet mall on I-25...what is the big deal.
Jerusalem's Lot Mechanics - we'll drain your fluids!
She has a dog and she called the cops? She's lucky they didn't show up -- with her packing and the dog barking, they're both lucky to still be alive.
Sorry if I'm being humor impaired today, but occasionally someone should mention that most of the time, police manage not to shoot every dog they encounter.
Finally! Some stories about gun rights and not about the fucking NSA. Bout time we got a respite...