Retaliation

[Texas Solo]

A couple of weeks ago, a homeowner was forced to shoot two home invaders at 0500 in the morning. He heard them breaking in and confronted them both with a 12 gauge as they entered the kitchen area of his home. One of the intruders was armed with an AR15, and the home owner took a round to the chin while dropping one of the bad guys and severely wounding the other. Homeowner will survive, the second bad guy is iffy on survival. The homeowner is not a gangster. He is a decent guy with a good job, and neighbors say they all like him.

Flash forward to the other day. A caravan of 4 cars was spotted slowly cruising by his home, when one of them opened up and shot his house full of holes. Neighbors vehicles were also hit. Homeowner was still in the hospital at the time. Police have no suspects at this time.

So while we all applaud the homeowners actions, it seems like the bad guys are trying to send a message: don't resist.
Or, it's just another bad guy that's pissed off at losing one (or two) of his scumbag buddies. I'm concerned that if this type of thing continues, homeowners will be too afraid to take action. Sort of like being afraid to testify in a trial.

Your thoughts??

 

[Bratastic007]

Can you provide a link to a newspaper article?

 

[oldman45]

Stuff like this happens. Is it better to give up what you work for or stand up to those that do wrong? I feel that rolling over playing dead only worsens the situation and is the actions of a coward.

Police officers often face retalliation for doing their job. What would happen if they failed to do their job? While they are paid to do the work, so are the homeowners that stand up to wrongful actions of others. They do not have to buy things to replace the stolen items, They do not have to pay deductibles to theie insurance companies.

The reason bank robbery does not pay is the robbers are not allowed to remain in business long enough. If enough homeowners fight back, the bad guys will soon learn that they need a new occupation.

 

[24spenser]

Regardless of what the neighbors said / think, professionally speaking, home invasions as described are typically more than they seem. More often than not, the 'victim' turns out to be a drug dealer and the home invasion was actually a rip-off. Keep us posted as the dust settles.

 

[J. W.]

Scary stuff. That homeowner better be on his toes and packing 24/7. Sounds like the two BG's he took out were gang members and their hommies were looking for a little relatiation.

Sadly, this is they way our country is going. Liberal lawmakers have empowered and emboldend the criminal elements to behave as they do and neutered LE and the hardworking, law abiding citizenry. Criminals no longer have much to fear this day and age. They are not detered by laws, the threat of prison and no longer have a reason to fear being caught by LE and there aren't enough armed citizens to even be on their radar.

 

[tacreload]

Plus 1 on what Oldman said.I think a lot of the problem stems from the "Ann Landers"mentality fostered by the media for a very long time.Just give them what they want and don't resist.We have conditioned the bad guys over the years to believe we are easy pickins.Now people are starting to fight back and the low lifes don't like it cause we have let them run rampant like an untrained dog.With more states approving Castle Doctrine laws the process will be reversed,but will take quite a long time to reformulate their thinking.A perfect world would dictate that we run out of bad guys long before we run out of bullets.It is unfortunate that a lack of parental involvement and guidance,not to mention judicial leniency have led to the current state of society.

 

[Hill_Country]

There's something wormy about this deal. A "burglar" with an assault rifle going in to an occupied home is a bit unusual.

Here's the newspaper article:
Retaliation cited in shooting at Northeast Side home - San Antonio Express-News

While the newspaper didn't mention it, local TV coverage (we know how accurate they are) thought it was some sort of gang deal.

Seems like about once a month the bad guys get lit up in San Antonio. They're slow learners, but at least they won't reproduce.

 

[oldman45]

Consider this:

The Police asks that people do not resist. Yet the items and possible injury in robberies do not get replaced by the police. I can take you to one home that has been hit eight times in two years. The family has little left for one to take. They are not druggies or trouble makers. They are both hard working people that are unfortunate enough to live in the wrong area.

I am not politicially correct. I will resist and call it retalliation if you want but I am going after those trying to take what I have.

The lack of resistence is the same as being an accomplice. Since some churches encourage ladies to submit to rape, submitting is not rape. The same with invasion. If you do nothing to resist, then you are a willing accomplice that is asking to be hit again.

 

[xray97]

"Since some churches encourage ladies to submit to rape, submitting is not rape."

I agree with most of what you said but a woman who submits to a sexual assault is the victim of rape (at least in my state and every state I'm familiar with).

 

[Texas Solo]

There's something wormy about this deal. A "burglar" with an assault rifle going in to an occupied home is a bit unusual.

Here's the newspaper article:
Retaliation cited in shooting at Northeast Side home - San Antonio Express-News

While the newspaper didn't mention it, local TV coverage (we know how accurate they are) thought it was some sort of gang deal.

Seems like about once a month the bad guys get lit up in San Antonio. They're slow learners, but at least they won't reproduce.

While I agree that the use of an AR15 for a home invasion is a bit unusual, I didn't see/hear the possible gang/drug connection you describe. Rather, the report I watched on WOAI, said that the homeowner was known to be a quiet guy with a good job as a civilian contractor at FT Sam Houston.
All this happened just blocks from where I work, and I saw the police response to the original crime at 0500 that day. Regardless of what the neighbors say, it's NOT that nice of an area.

 

[oldman45]

"Since some churches encourage ladies to submit to rape, submitting is not rape."

I agree with most of what you said but a woman who submits to a sexual assault is the victim of rape (at least in my state and every state I'm familiar with).

No Sir. If a lady submits, it becomes consenual and therefore not rape. This also includes if she is passive. If someone desires to do me, a family member or friend harm, I am not opposed to fighting back.

Please read the following carefully:

The same general view has been endorsed on religious grounds by a leading representative of the Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church (which is one of several quite different Methodist denominations in the U.S.). The Board has long been the force behind the National Coalition to Ban Handguns (which has now been renamed the Coalition Against Gun Violence (CSGV) to emphasize that it seeks to ban not just handguns but any long gun designed primarily for self-defense.)

Rather than shooting rapists, it is women`s Christian duty to submit to rape, according to an article by Reverend Allen Brockway, editor of the official magazine of the Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church. He poses the rhetorical question, "Is the Robber My Brother?" and Reverend Brockway answers, "Yes."

Rev. Brockway recognizes that the woman who is accosted in the park may not think of her violator as her neighbor, or that his "safety is of immediate concern"--but, Brockway preaches, "Criminals are members of the larger community no less than are others. As such, they are our neighbors or, as Jesus put it, our brothers. . . . [Though violent criminals act wrongfully,] it is equally wrong for the victim to kill the robber or burglar, save in those extremely rare circumstances when the unambiguous alternative is one own`s death."

The above can be read at many places but view the entire statement at: NRA-ILA :: Gun Control=Gun Prohibition

Now consider if you want your mother, sister, wife, daughter or whomever to submit to a violent act.

I am not my brother's keeper but I will be the one that stops my brother's hostile actions.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

I'll give you an example of what these types do understand. Years ago a group of "bangers" moved to northern Vermont to cash in on the growing drug trade. They confronted the "locals" and made enemies. Before long one of our "locals" went to their home and, in the confrontation, knocked one of the "bangers" on the side of his head, knocking out an eye. The next day they were gone, back to Conn. I spoke to a detective in that state who dealt with this guy. He'd met with him on his return. The detective laughed, told me Vermont need not worry about them returning. The word on the street was the law in Vermont won't bother you but the locals....they dispense quick justice. None of them ever returned to our area. It's unfortunate that it has to be like this but the only language these folks understand is violence and if they impose it on others they will get it back, three fold, immediately. Until people understand this, these problems will continue and only worsen. My 2 cents for the day.

 

[xray97]

"No Sir. If a lady submits, it becomes consenual and therefore not rape. This also includes if she is passive. If someone desires to do me, a family member or friend harm, I am not opposed to fighting back."


You mean to tell me that a woman with a gun to her head who submits to a sexual assault is thereby deemed to have consented, and not a victim of rape???
Frankly I don't care what a representative of any religion says, a sexual assault is a sexual assault. And a woman (any woman) who decides to submit to a sexual assault and lives thru it has done the right thing (for her).

 

[venomballistics]

The letter of the law has us boxed into holding defensive positions.
The problem with that, and any other defensive position is that the position being defended is easily located and may be hit over and over again until it crumbles.
while illegal as all get out If we gathered up all our people, and bring the fight to where the thugs sleep ... I dont think we'd have many social problems left.

 

[Chuck1217]

It's good to see folks who stand up for the defense of self and home. I'm sure you've all seen comments in your local paper after something like this happened. There are always at least a few who say "those gangbangers wouldn't have come back if the victim had just allowed them to steal their stuff. He got his house attacked because he had a gun, and used it."
I can't tell you how many times I've spoken out about that, trying not to call them stupid- weak- all kinds of other names.
I agree with most here, you can't worry about them seeking revenge later. You defend your family and home with whatever you have, and then be prepared in case they come back. As for these follks in the article, one might suggest putting up a camera outside- maybe they'll catch these idiot-thugs on camera so the cops can end it.

 

[oldman45]

"No Sir. If a lady submits, it becomes consenual and therefore not rape. This also includes if she is passive. If someone desires to do me, a family member or friend harm, I am not opposed to fighting back."


You mean to tell me that a woman with a gun to her head who submits to a sexual assault is thereby deemed to have consented, and not a victim of rape???
Frankly I don't care what a representative of any religion says, a sexual assault is a sexual assault. And a woman (any woman) who decides to submit to a sexual assault and lives thru it has done the right thing (for her).

I mean to say that if there are no marks on the victim and they did not resist, it is consensual. Is it still rape? Yes. Is she still a victim? Yes. OTOH, all a defense attorney has to do is bring out she did not resist, she was not injured and therefore it was consensual. A local case going on this week has a rape victim, attacked three times in a couple of hours and the rapist claims consensual sex. A video shows her willingly entering a building with her attacker. I feel the case will go to the jury today. I hope the guy is found guilty.

 

[xray97]

"I mean to say that if there are no marks on the victim and they did not resist, it is consensual. Is it still rape? Yes. Is she still a victim? Yes. "


I guess we just have a difference in our understanding of words then. My understanding (and Wa. State law) is if there is "consent" there is no sexual assault.
Anyway, it's of little consequence given the original topic and we are in agreement that any victim should be free to resist victimization if they are able.

 

[jtpur]

there is a good chance the homeowner was a bad guy too...we dont have enough information to actually know....but Id defend my home and keep my ar handy in case I defended against some thugs who want revenge....

 

[chud333]

There's something wormy about this deal. A "burglar" with an assault rifle going in to an occupied home is a bit unusual.

Here's the newspaper article:
Retaliation cited in shooting at Northeast Side home - San Antonio Express-News

While the newspaper didn't mention it, local TV coverage (we know how accurate they are) thought it was some sort of gang deal.

Seems like about once a month the bad guys get lit up in San Antonio. They're slow learners, but at least they won't reproduce.

I'd guess this is correct. How many home invasions have the bad guy with an ar-15? Sounds either gang or drug related. And just because the neighbors say he was an Ok dude don't make it so. They might have been fearful of saying the wrong thing and getting their houses shot up.

 

[Sebago Son]

I'll give you an example of what these types do understand. Years ago a group of "bangers" moved to northern Vermont to cash in on the growing drug trade. They confronted the "locals" and made enemies. Before long one of our "locals" went to their home and, in the confrontation, knocked one of the "bangers" on the side of his head, knocking out an eye. The next day they were gone, back to Conn. I spoke to a detective in that state who dealt with this guy. He'd met with him on his return. The detective laughed, told me Vermont need not worry about them returning. The word on the street was the law in Vermont won't bother you but the locals....they dispense quick justice. None of them ever returned to our area. It's unfortunate that it has to be like this but the only language these folks understand is violence and if they impose it on others they will get it back, three fold, immediately. Until people understand this, these problems will continue and only worsen. My 2 cents for the day.

I like Vermont. It's very much like Maine. Here the "bangers" are pretty easy to spot... they stand out pretty well against the snow...