Detroit

Heat-Packing Detroit Mom Shoots At, Scatters Home Invaders: Video

|

Via the Twitter feed of Reason Foundation's Adrian Moore comes this news story from Detroit's WXYZ. After three people try to break into her house, a mother of two breaks out a gun, starts shooting, and scatters the home invaders. Well worth watchng (hat tip: Independent Review Journal).

Watch Reason TV's epic #Anarchy in Detroit series, which highlights how Motown residents are doing for themselves in a city gone bankrupt:

Advertisement

NEXT: Nation's Biggest Cities Have Highest Income Inequality

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. How did the police not shoot the woman with a rifle?

    1. Why must you be so cynical. Detroit has a very limited ammo budget.

      1. Actually wasn’t it the black (yet blue eyed) police chief there that said everyone should have a gun?

  2. That woman needs a medal and some free marksmanship training.

    1. If I understand the situation correctly, she wasn’t trying to hit them, just “scare them off.” While I think such action is ill-advised, it does have a kind of moronic nobility to it.

      1. It seems to have worked. And actually shooting someone is harder than it looks on TV. So I can’t really blame her.

        That said, I wish she had plugged them.

        1. And actually shooting someone is harder than it looks on TV.

          TV makes it look really really hard to hit someone if they’re a good guy.

          1. Unless time slows to slo-mo. When that happens, the good guy is almost guaranteed to take an artful gunshot in the torso.

      2. Never begrudge a person practicing mercy.

        1. Except the thugs were armed so not shooting them could have led to the death of her or her family. Mercy is fine when it cost you nothing.

          1. Mercy is fine, even when it costs you something. Without people practicing mercy, civilization is not possible.

            1. Without people practicing mercy, civilization is not possible.

              WTF is this? Mercy is given something undeserved. Mercy is evil.

            2. I’m not willing to risk my or my family’s life’s so a sub-human may live. If this is uncivilized then I don’t want to be civil.

              1. The altruist DEMANDS you sacrifice yours for others. This demand is also seen in foreign policy in the form of ‘Just War Theory’.

                1. Just War theory doesn’t allow self-defense? I’m confused.

              2. I’m not willing to risk my or my family’s life’s so a sub-human may live.

                That’s fine. But my guess is you have at some point in your life faced a situation where someone wronged you and you decided to let it go, because fighting further would have been pointless. That is mercy.

                Whether we extend it to predators like those robbers or solely to people in our family circle, it still is a critical component dividing civilization from savagery.

                1. That is mercy.

                  No that sounds like a practical decision.

                  it still is a critical component dividing civilization from savagery.

                  No it isn’t. Pacifism enables savagery. Kill the savage!

                  Just War theory doesn’t allow self-defense?

                  JWT states that you have an obligation to minimize harm to the enemy. This idea has hobbled the war effort in Afghanistan with ludicrous and immoral combat restrictions which are the reason why America did not victor. See also, Vietnam.

                  1. “JWT states that you have an obligation to minimize harm to the enemy.”

                    No it doesn’t, unless you define “enemy” as anyone who lives in a country or lives near an organization with which you are at war.

                    “This idea has hobbled the war effort in Afghanistan with ludicrous and immoral combat restrictions which are the reason why America did not victor.”

                    Yeah, if we just dropped a few more bombs, Afghanistan would be paradise.

                    “See also, Vietnam.”

                    South Vietnam lost the Vietnam War, not the US

                    1. if we just dropped a few more bombs, Afghanistan would be paradise.

                      Worked in Vietnam. American forces were hobbled and couldn’t defeat the Vietcong until those restriction were lifted and the North was bombed. America started winning when America started fighting no holds barred.

                      No it doesn’t, unless you define “enemy” as anyone who lives in a country or lives near an organization with which you are at war.

                      You should. It was appropriate in Japan and Germany and led to total victory.

                    2. You’re right Cyto. The US should just nuke the rest of the world. I’m sure there’s somebody in every country who will at some point kill or otherwise aggress against Americans or the US in some way. And yes, Canada’s included. Sorry. Karma for Justin Bieber.

                    3. Have you ever read Slaughterhouse Five, Cyto?

                  2. That is mercy.

                    No that sounds like a practical decision.

                    The point is that mercy can be practical. That is what tarran was saying. People acting mercifully makes life better for everyone. You people sound like the cops who shoot first because officer safety is the most important thing.

                2. Of course I let slights and rudeness go because it benefits me. I’ll be more angry getting even rather than letting it slide. Again I may be justified getting in a shouting match but it cost me nothing to walk away.

            3. We do not train to be merciful here. Mercy is for the weak. Here, in the streets, in competition: A man confronts you, he is the enemy. An enemy deserves no mercy. /sweep the leg

          2. The intruders were probably scared shitless that someone actually fought back. Also, just because they were armed doesn’t mean they were good shots; they’re probably used to people just caving when they see a gun.

            Having said all that it was very risky on her part to use warning shots.

            1. Unless she was firing blanks those rounds went somewhere, so not only is she not killing the intruders who deserve it, she could be putting innocent people at risk that don’t deserve to get shot.

            2. In my case, if I didn’t have a good shot but had a safe backstop, I would have fired a couple of warning shots as well; because I am no Duke of Sung.

              1. because I am no Duke of Sung

                You’re a Joe Biden?

                1. Nope…

                  The Duke of Sung famously waited for an attacking army to completely cross a river before he attacked it. Unfortunately for him, his army was destroyed and he lost the battle and the war.

                  Waiting until you have a clear shot can mean that you’re waiting until the guy is in the same room as you, meaning that you are less safe than if you fired a shot over his head and he took off running.

                  Warning shots are unwise in that
                  1) the warning bullet is going somewhere and you can hurt an innocent person or damage their property

                  2) You have used up some of the ammunition that you might need later to kill a person, which could be the difference between life and death.

                  3) Many jursidictions have statutes that could be violated by firing a warning shot.

                  On the other hand, the benefit is
                  1) Dead bodies are much more of a legal hassle than live ones that ran away

                  2) The fight ends at a longer distance and the assailant has a less foolhardy impression of his chances at success and a path to retreat that is wide open

                  So warning shots shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand.

                2. Nope…

                  The Duke of Sung famously waited for an attacking army to completely cross a river before he attacked it. Unfortunately for him, his army was destroyed and he lost the battle and the war.

                  Waiting until you have a clear shot can mean that you’re waiting until the guy is in the same room as you, meaning that you are less safe than if you fired a shot over his head and he took off running.

                  Warning shots are unwise in that
                  1) the warning bullet is going somewhere and you can hurt an innocent person or damage their property

                  2) You have used up some of the ammunition that you might need later to kill a person, which could be the difference between life and death.

                  3) Many jursidictions have statutes that could be violated by firing a warning shot.

                  On the other hand, the benefit is
                  1) Dead bodies are much more of a legal hassle than live ones that ran away

                  2) The fight ends at a longer distance and the assailant has a less foolhardy impression of his chances at success and a path to retreat that is wide open

                  So warning shots shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand.

                  1. I only click submit once and am instantly rewarded with a double post? The squirrels must love me!

            3. [The intruders were probably scared shitless that someone actually fought back. ]

              Rewind the video. The pud with the pistoli goes back in the door, at which time, mercy or not, he should have been dumped in position with no regard.

      3. While I think such action is ill-advised, it does have a kind of moronic nobility to it.

        Yeah cuz the morality of “thou shall not kill” is moronic.

  3. I hope she takes better care of that rifle in the future.

  4. What do you know, some people are just unwilling to be victims. Awesome.

    1. She’s earned a nice, long prison sentence for the 20 or 30 gun violations resulting from her cowgirl mentality.

      1. Where do you see that?

        1. Did you really need the “;-)”?

          1. Wait, the winky-face is used for reasons other than indicating via text that you’re open to a sexual encounter?

            That’s going to absolutely ruin some of my lady-friends’ game.

            1. I am so fucking old 😉

            2. Wait, that’s what the winky face is supposed to mean? No wonder my mom stopped texting me back.

              1. That’s odd, Hugh. She didn’t stop texting me.

                I keed!

                Winky

            3. Tell them to switch to “u r teh hotness.”

    2. Don’t forget, had this been the UK, that woman, not the people who broke into her home, would be going to prison right now. And the liberals here want such a result with every fiber of their being. If the left had its way, the woman would be going to prison for illegal possession of a gun and for attempted murder. And they would see such a result as just and good.

      1. Not to mention, let’s say they fought back – it would take probably 3 – 5 rounds to drop each one. That’s 9 – 15 rounds.

        Apparently in order to prevent another Newtown Massacre, she should kill 2 before being beaten to death by the third… for the children!

      2. People who are unwilling to be victims are often unwilling to be slaves to the collective as well. Of course the collectivists hate them and want to see them punished.

      3. Simulcast!

      4. Liberals do not see a distinction between self defense and vigilante justice.

        All they see is someone who is not an agent of the state wielding a weapon.

      5. In Britain, you have to have a silencer and HF for body disposal if you want to practice self-defense. The situation in Canada is better but you’re still better off leaving the body and telling no one.

        1. Why do I need a Hot Friend for body disposal.

          1. Wrong HF. Did I mention you’ll also need a polypropylene barrel?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUFbOAIWjJM

          2. The HF Cyto is talking about is referred to as “Holy Fuck!” because that’s what people say after they realize they’ve already lost digits to it without feeling any pain. Fluorine chemistry is for people with death wishes.

        2. Personally I prefer a cinderblock lined pit and homemade thermite for disposing of dead bodies, but everyone’s got their own preferences I suppose.

  5. Looks like some people owe Uncle Joe an apology.

    1. No, uncle joe said you don’t need a rifle but a shotgun, so joe can fuck off.

      1. Considering she missed her targets, maybe she could have benefited from a scattergun.

        1. I personally keep a Remington 870 for HD, it’s not bad advice, I just like telling joe to fuck off.

        2. Blunderbus, FTW.

        3. At 25 yards (further than the distance in the video) the maximum spread you’ll see with even terrible, cheap buckshot is about the distance between two buttons on a shirt.

          Shotguns are not an effective solution for poor marksmanship, in fact, precisely the opposite because of their significant recoil, low capacity, and slow reloads (unless you are using a detachable-mag fed weapon like the Saiga).

  6. Unpossible. Everyone knows that gun owners are all rabid sociopaths bent on killing others with their penile substitutes.

    1. That would require something better than a Hi Point carbine.

      Wait wait… Woman gun owners… Wouldn’t it be her vaginal substitute?

      1. Only if she has a really large . . .

        1. Hmm. I know they vary considerably in size, but I think one that big would scare me.

  7. It’s almost as if bad guys with guns were defeated by…a good guy (gal) with a gun!

  8. This news story seems to be from a mainstream news outlet. I don’t know if that station has a liberal bias or not, but in any case they knew a good story when they saw it.

    And the reporter used mama bear imagery about the woman “defending her young.”

    1. The station was an ABC affiliate and they were quite obviously impressed with the mother and contemptuous of the ‘thugs’ that tried to break in.

      This needs to be shared all over the web.

  9. You guys (&TIWTANLW;) who monitor Salon, Slate, Jezebel, HuffPo, et als seen any reactions to this?

    My guess is that since she’s a woman that they won’t directly condemn her, but note in sadness how she has been coopted by the evil gun culture, or something.

    1. They aren’t even going to cover it. This completely validates every argument in favor of private gun ownership and ownership of a rifle with more than 10 rounds.

      Can’t pop the bubble with dissident facts.

      1. I suspect the story will be mentioned in the context of “the right-wingers dredged up a shooting in Detroit where a woman allegedly defended herself against burglars,” and they’ll move on to some guy shooting himself in the face accidentally, which is more common because you’re more likely to be killed by a gun in the house than to kill an intruder, etc.

  10. The lesson will be learned. Next time the invaders need to shout “POLICE!” when busting through the door.

  11. And in other news, a combination of choking and horrible officiating results in Team USA women’s hockey losing to Canada.

    1. The ref in that game is a friend of many of my friends (though I never met her).

    2. The phantom slash call pretty much sealed the deal.

  12. damn Canuckistan beat us in women’s hockey for the gold.

  13. No, no, no! The proper protocol in these situations is to hide in a closet or under a bed, call the police, and hope that they get there in time to save your sorry life after the robbers have made off with all you stuff. What do think this is, Somalia? /DERP

  14. This is why I don’t get why so many women, and feminists in general, are so against guns.

    1. I used to think those looney right-wingers, who called liberalism a mental disorder, were nuts or exaggerating.

      Now I’m beginning to realize that they are probably right…

  15. That woman should have never been armed, especially with that dangerous looking assault rifle. She should have called the cops and hid in a room until they arrived to save the family.

    We need even more stringent gun laws to prevent such a crime and save lives! We need more cops on the street too!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.