Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Arthritis / April 2005
OTP: Don't mess with granny
|
|
Thread rating:  |
firechief - 31 Mar 2005 18:23 GMT 83-Year-Old Tenn. Woman Wrestles, Shoots at Intruder in Her Home March 30, 2005 15:34
KINGSPORT, Tenn. -- An 83-year-old woman fought with an intruder in her home and fired two shots at him before he fled with her gun and purse.
Mark Foulk, 44, of Fall Branch, was pulled over by a Sullivan County Sheriff's deputy about 20 minutes later and charged with DUI and speeding.
Authorities at the jail found glass in his pockets and cuts on his hands and a gun and purse in his car. He was then charged with robbery and aggravated burglary.
An intruder broke into the house of Clara Groseclose early Tuesday. She heard a noise downstairs, retrieved a handgun and went to check on it.
Groseclose encountered a man near a broken window, and he demanded money, police said.
She struggled with the man and fired two rounds at him. Police said Foulk had an abrasion on his face that could have come from the muzzle of the gun when it was fired.
The man took Groseclose's gun and purse and fled.
She had a minor cut on her knee from the struggle but was not seriously injured. ___
Harvey R. Stone - 31 Mar 2005 19:02 GMT > 83-Year-Old Tenn. Woman Wrestles, Shoots at Intruder in Her Home > March 30, 2005 15:34 [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > She had a minor cut on her knee from the struggle but was not seriously > injured Ooooh, I do not like this story. Why in the world should an old person struggle with someone that is braking into their house. One warning,,,,, shoot to kill.
Harv
firechief - 31 Mar 2005 21:13 GMT Harv wrote:
> One warning,,,,, shoot to kill. > > Harv That is what every firearms class teaches. I learned it in the military and I learned it in the police academy.
You NEVER shoot to warn or disarm.
... If things get worse, I'll have to ask you to stop helping me.
Jo Firey - 31 Mar 2005 22:26 GMT > Harv wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > ... If things get worse, I'll have to ask you to stop helping me. This is why we don't have guns in the house, though we both know how to use them. When you add a gun to a situation it becomes more dangerous for you as well as for them.
Jo
Harvey R. Stone - 01 Apr 2005 00:39 GMT > This is why we don't have guns in the house, though we both know how to > use them. When you add a gun to a situation it becomes more dangerous for > you as well as for them. > > Jo The thing is,,, a person should never draw or get out a gun unless it is to protect themselves or the family. I am glad that life has not put you in this kind of situation. I am glad that you do not have to have the responsibility of protecting your family from anyone. Dangerous for you as well for them,,,, does not apply in my case and I do not believe in threats and I do not believe in killing people unless it is to protect my home. Sorry, I did not mean to go on and on. Harv
firechief - 01 Apr 2005 06:52 GMT Harv wrote:
> I do not believe in killing people unless it is to protect my > home. From California, a few paragraphs for civilians:
Homicide is justifiable when comitted in defense of habitation, property or person.
Homicide is justifiable when committed bt any person in the defense of such person, or of a life or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such person.
... Experiencing synaptical difficulties. Please stand by.
Norman Lampert - 01 Apr 2005 07:10 GMT Just a few comments... Many people get overconfident when they have a weapon of any type and forget to look for other ways out of a situation.
I had combat experience in the service and I qualified with many types and sizes of firearms. I don't own a gun because of the "false bravery factor" and because of a study done in New York a number of years ago in which they determined that about half of the shots fired by police in street situations at ranges beyond five feet missed their intended target.
Taking your time in a well lit target range when you're well rested is very different from finding yourself in a chancy situation in a dark rain when you're short of sleep.
I've known a number of police officers and some ER nurses who have had quite a few horror stories about weapons "mishaps".
I do carry a cell phone and will call authorities when I think that they may be needed. It is always better to call once too often than to not call when I should have.
Harvey R. Stone - 01 Apr 2005 18:51 GMT > Just a few comments... > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > may be needed. It is always better to call once too often than to not > call when I should have. All true bones and part of life. I can give you more stories of people forced to watch while their home was plundered and/or family members abused but it is over kill to leave people with these mental pictures. I have a right to protect my home and to own a gun to do it or use anything else I need to,,,, bat, knife, ect. Just like you have the choice not to defend what's yours.
Harv
Norman Lampert - 02 Apr 2005 21:04 GMT I defend what is mine (quite effectively) without firearms.
There are also too many people who think they need a gun to defend their homes against snowball throwing children or who think that they need to prove themselves to the person in the next car who has "disrespected them".
I have been in various gun shops and have seen people who rather obviously don't even know how to hold the the things which they "need to have" to be able to "protect themselves" (and how much they need to argue with the people they want to "protect" that this protection is necessary).
I might feel differently if these people also took functional anger management courses (and then passed an evaluation), properly locked their weapons whenever they were not at a target range and it could be proven that they stayed away from these weapons when they had been drinking or were very tired.
I work in City Hall and know many of the police who work in the police evidence room. They all agree that the majority of people who own guns are not mature (or even sane) enough to realistically have them.
An important rule for people who insist on owning a gun...
You can't pull show a weapon in an attempt to "convince" the other person that "they really don't want to do that". YOUR WEAPON DOES NOT CLEAR YOUR HOLSTER UNTIL THE INSTANT YOU ARE GOING TO FIRE IT. The only people who can hold a weapon in their hand without immediately using it are police or other security forces WHO ARE ACTING IN A POSITION OF AUTHORITY. Even more important is that YOU DON'T FIRE A WEAPON UNLESS THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO OTHER SANE AND RATIONAL ALTERNATIVE. A person calling you names is not sufficient reason! A person who is making verbal threats is not sufficient reason! (you should try to record these threats and give a copy of the recording to the police) IF YOU, AND THOSE IN YOUR CARE, CAN SAFELY LEAVE THE VICINITY (WITHOUT BEING INJURED) AND/OR CALL 911 FOR ASSISTANCE YOU DO NOT HAVE LEGAL REASON TO FIRE.
If you MUST defend yourself and/or others from physical harm, you are legally allowed to do what is necessary to remove the current threat AND NO MORE. Once you have rendered the person who has attacked you unable to immediately continue his/her assault, you MUST cease your actions, and should call 911 for assistance and for medical attention for your attacker. Firing a few more shots "to make sure" is not legal, though you may reasonably be expected to keep your weapon ready (but without having your finger on the trigger) in case of further trouble, either from your attacked or from someone else (keeping the pistol in your hand pointed in a direction which does not directly threaten anyone, with your finger resting on the outside of the trigger guard is sufficient).
Harvey R. Stone - 03 Apr 2005 04:13 GMT >I defend what is mine (quite effectively) without firearms. Ok, Bones,,,, You and I look at the world in a little different way. I have already told you that I am not going to flood this newsgroup with bad mind pictures to support the way I think or what I do. You seem to have to do this. My last post on this thread. Harv
firechief - 03 Apr 2005 06:29 GMT > A person calling you names is not sufficient reason! A person who is > making verbal threats is not sufficient reason! (you should try to record > these threats and give a copy of the recording to the police) That, and what was above it, I will agree with.
> IF YOU, AND THOSE IN YOUR CARE, CAN SAFELY LEAVE THE > VICINITY (WITHOUT BEING INJURED) AND/OR CALL 911 FOR > ASSISTANCE YOU DO NOT HAVE LEGAL REASON TO FIRE. FALSE.
ABSOLUTELY FALSE.
TOTALLY FALSE
> If you MUST defend yourself and/or others from physical harm, you are > legally allowed to do what is necessary to remove the current threat AND > NO MORE. I will argue this with you. You NEVER have to back down. NEVER!
... ERROR #00: CPU too *tired* to continue.
Little Bit - 01 Apr 2005 01:06 GMT I would probably shoot my foot off if i had a gun.Or they would take it away from me and shoot me.Now give me a baseball bat and i might have a chance.
Re: Don't mess with granny Group: alt.support.arthritis Date: Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 1:26pm (CST-2) From: JAfirey@NETZERO.NET (Jo Firey) "firechief" <firechief@jjfpd.gov> wrote in message news:kZY2e.35933$AN1.20441@fed1read03... Harv wrote: One warning,,,,, shoot to kill. Harv That is what every firearms class teaches. I learned it in the military and I learned it in the police academy. You NEVER shoot to warn or disarm. .. If things get worse, I'll have to ask you to stop helping me. This is why we don't have guns in the house, though we both know how to use them. When you add a gun to a situation it becomes more dangerous for you as well as for them. Jo
|
|
|