Top Nav

The 18-Year-Old Almost Made this Mistake

The 18-year-old almost made this mistake

The 18-year-old almost made this mistake

Unless you live on another planet, you’ve no doubt heard the story of the 18-year-old Oklahoma woman who killed a home intruder with a shotgun, protecting not only herself but her baby.

Now, the most important thing going for this woman was that she had a gun for home defense purposes. Better yet, she had a shotgun, which is by far the best gun for home protection.

However, after hearing the 911 call and watching the news about this woman, something jumped out at me. If you listen to the call you, hear the woman ask “I’ve got two guns in my hand. Is it OK to shoot him if he comes in this door?”

Thankfully, she didn’t hesitate and did end up shooting the guy…

However, if you have a gun in your home you need to know the law pertaining to deadly force. You don’t want to be on the phone having to ask if you’re allowed to shoot someone, because unlike the woman, you may hesitate and it may cost you your life if you don’t know the laws.

For example, when you were 16 and got your driver’s license they didn’t just hand you the keys and say “have fun,” as much as we wished that had been the case. Instead, you had to go through driver training and learn all of the laws of the road such as speed limits, using your signals, and other laws so you didn’t get yourself or others killed.

Well, the gun is the same way.

Don’t just go to the gun shop, get a gun, and then take it home and store it in your bedroom. Before, or immediately after, you get that gun you need to know the laws regarding when you’re allowed to use it.

I do realize that deadly force law may not be the most exciting topic, but I think it’s exciting enough, because if you don’t know the law you could end up in jail like the Oklahoma pharmacist who made a huge mistake and is now spending the next 38 years behind bars.

The good news is, the law is very easy to learn and it’s mostly common sense. Of course, you can go to your state’s website or look on this site for information. However, I ended speaking with a self-defense lawyer (who used to work for the NRA) just to be 100% sure what I was and was not allowed to do. (Yes, it did cost me several hundred bucks, but for a one-time “purchase,” it’s worth it to me since not only do I have my home defense guns, but because I carry concealed too.)

So, if you happen to be one of the lucky people who got a new gun for Christmas, I’d encourage you to make sure you understand your state’s laws for when you’re allowed to use your gun if you should ever have a home intruder.

Print Friendly

, , , , ,

  • Hersfelder

    When someone purchased a gun “for protection” it would be very helpful if they also got a small brochure or paper describing that state’s deadly force laws (eg, Is it a “Castle Doctrine State?”). 

    When I conduct my concealed carry classes, I always provide an updated copy of  the state statutes pertaining to carry (both concealed and open) and employment of deadly force.

  • Ccwnwv

    As an NRA Cert instructor, BRAVO sir BRAVO, Training for this type situation is paramount to surviving it. If only the media would give us instructors and trainers the attention most criminal acts get we could make a HUGE difference.

    Be safe, be armed BE TRAINED

  • Kevin Davis

    I agree that a shotgun is the best home protection option. But you need to train and be confident with its use especially in close quarters and in the dark.

  • Billy

    “The good news is, the law is very easy to learn and it’s mostly common sense.”Maybe in YOUR state, but not everywhere!  And why would you spend a few hundred dollars to have a lawyer explain laws that are “very easy to learn?  I don’t know many people (let alone gun owners!) that would say the lack of a castle doctrine equates to “common sense”.  I agree that it is imperative that gun owners learn the laws, but those laws are very often confusing, misleading, and contradictory.  Thanks,Billy in CA

    • Mhlvol37

      Let’s not forget how often these laws change

  • Pats30263

    This young lady put herself in legal jeopardy by asking the operator if she could shoot. She opened herself up to legal charges that she did not attempt to avoid shooting the scumbag. I can see his family suing her for not running away charging that if she had time to call she had time to flee. 
    Good shot girl!!

    • usafts

      Pats – Oklahomas Castle law does not require you to avoid shooting or to flee. This shooting was justified and was strengthened by the fact that she asked if she could shoot. As to the family suing… count on it no matter what.

      • Guest

        if there is a lawsuit, I bet there will be pleanty of people on her side of the courtroom. He forced his way into her home, with a knife…. he wasn’t there to cut cheesecake. I am afraid that after all the hoopla is over this young lady will still be faced with knowing she took a life…. I am sure it will be haunting in her future, now she needs support more then ever.

        • Samuel

          Granted we don’t know what she’s thinking, but from the interview she said was very straightforward that it was either her or her baby.  Unfortunately, lots of people hate themselves for not feeling bad for taking someone’s life.  I believe this is because of the media.

  • Greg

    I disagree vehemently. Let’s not scare people into submission. On EVERY occasion, if someone is breaking into your home and your life is threatened SHOOT THE BASTARD!

    • Billy

      It is better to be judged by 12, than to be carried by 6!
      Billy

      • Terryshrout

        My sentiments exactly!

    • Anonymous

      Well and good, if the situation is that clear cut — a lot of them are not.

    • http://www.chilebomb.com Matt Kaufmann

      A firearm should never be used as a tool to scare an attacker.  However, just because we have the legal right to shoot in defense of ourselves or others, doesn’t mean we have the duty to shoot.

      Much bigger than knowing when to shoot is knowing when NOT to shoot.  As JimJamer says – Situations aren’t always that clear cut.  But, when it IS that clear cut then yes, it’s far better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

      • tarawa1943

        We have the right to make a wise decision regarding the gravity of a decision to take a life in the defense of our family and possessions!

        • sickened

          in massachusetts you cannot shoot or use deadly force of anykind to protect
          your possessions,if a homeless man walks into your house and wants to carry out your tv you cannot hurt him,only minimal force to stop him only if your in fear of your life can you use deadly force,but you better be able to convince the county prosecutor,that was your only option and if its the suffolk county DA you shuold just let the guy go or you will go to jail
          mass is full of soul sucking liberal creeps,i cant stand this state
          dream is to move to montana ……

          • Anonymous

            The laws in several states actually require that you run away, leaving your home if attacked.  That law doesn’t reduce crime or increase safety.  IT does do ONE good thing, it serves as a model of what not to have have, and it helps get Castle Doctrine laws passed in other States.
            Castle Doctrine  is often a series of amendment that specifically allow a person to stand their ground, to defend themselves anywhere they have a legal right to be, to shift burdens to the DA and to disallow civil law suits by the family [or the ] burglar, robber .

          • http://www.chilebomb.com Matt Kaufmann

            Castle Doctrine rules.  Empowering victims and keeping the burden of liability on a person who is in the commission of a crime is common sense, though.  And, common sense is like unobtanium to some state (and federal) lawmakers.

          • http://www.chilebomb.com Matt Kaufmann

            Many states don’t have a castle doctrine law.  In fact I used to live in one of those north eastern states and I decided to move.  I could not, with good conscience, support a state that puts a burden of liability on the victim of a crime.  I now do not have the duty to retreat when a person is in the commission of a forcible felony.

          • Stormtrooper1991

            Montana Law is pretty good against criminals, and pro defense, HOWEVER, there are states with a better castle doctrine. I live here

          • Snowmanspanky

            The guy breaking into her house had been stalking her and had a knife in his hands. He did not want her tv. He wanted her.

          • Snowmanspanky

            We had the same as Mass. in N.C.. If someone was in your house you had to use, ” Soft Hands’ to remove them. Now it’s a Castle Doctrine and stand your ground state and I thank God for it but like Matt K. stated, ‘I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6″.

          • kickassredneck

            In Texas if some fuckhead comes into yourhouse you can shoot the dumbass no matter the situation

        • Snowmanspanky

          I think that sometimes just because it is legal does not make it right,

          • Frankcereska

            So does that mean if something is illegal, it could be right ?
            If I believe, even momentarily, that I or my family are in danger of life or serious harm, I will exercise my RIGHT and bring the perp to an immediate confrontation in his FINAL JUDGEMENT !!

            fac1940

          • http://www.chilebomb.com Matt Kaufmann

            In regard to the right to self-defense, the idea that everybody who owns a gun is simply itching for an excuse to kill somebody is wrong. This mentality turns an attacker into a victim and a victim into a criminal.

            Castle doctrine does not subscribe to this mentality. It rightly trusts the citizenry. It’s a mindset that empowers an inherently good people with a tool that will allow them to defend themselves when an inherently evil action is being taken against them.

            I hear gun owners talk about how they would handle a violent confrontation. They might say, “My goal is to kill as many home invaders as possible in the shortest amount of time.”

            This is the wrong articulation to have. It conveys a message that can be used against us legally and supplies anti-gunners with an argument against gun ownership. Our goal if we are a victim is not to “kill” anybody. It is to ensure our own safety even if it’s through the use of our own gun.

            When we defend ourselves, we mean to stop a threat. We do not shoot to kill. We do not shoot to injure. We are not doling out justice, retribution or punishment. We are doing nothing more than stopping a threat to our own lives.

            A person who commits a violent felony, putting the life of another in jeopardy, has implicitly accepted the possibility of being met with deadly force. It is entirely possible that the actions of the victim may end the life of the assailant, however that is not the victim’s intent.

      • RTBA2nd

        Matt I agree.  It is more important to know when not to shoot.  I had a drunk teenager one time almost break into my house.  If I hadn’t taken the time to assess the situation I would have shot and killed an “intruder” who thought he was entering the correct house.  Would I have been justified?  Under state law yes, because I thought my home was being broken into.  However I would have shot a stupid teenager who didn’t know what he was doing.

    • Madhzrx

      I agree!  What mistake did she almost make?  Protecting the life of yourself and loved ones comes first over any law!  What is the deal with x law men thinking they know everything and writing stupid articles like this?  Jason Hanson must be living in a fairy tale. What a tard!

      • Psturtevan

        As the article clearly states: “You don’t want to be on the phone having to ask if you’re allowed to shoot someone …”  The mistake she appears to have made was not being prepared and the result could have been a failure to act in a timely and legal manner.  (death possibly resulting OR, years in jail if she failed to act withing the law).  (Please don’t waste time & space responding with “better tried by 12 Vs carried by 6.  I get that point and agree, but it is a different issue)

        On point, she asked (if that is an accurate assessment of her ‘question’) and I quote the article: “I’ve got
        two guns in my hand. Is it OK to shoot him if he comes in this door?”. 

        Not to
        throw a wrinkle in the classification of her ‘question,’ but is it possible she
        knew the legal answer? Is it possible she was just dealing the the real life
        stress of knowing she might have to really kill someone? Really pull the trigger?  Could she have been
        reaching out for emotional and moral support?? Or just trying to set the legal
        stage for the aftermath of a legitimate shoot?

        Being uncertain can lead to hesitation and other “sins” of self defense.
        One’s life can end if one hesitates in a life or death self defense
        situation.

        Just like taking time to remember the proper response to a skid in an
        automobile. It will likely be all over before you have time to “think” about it.
        Best to get it done beforehand if at all possible and in great detail with the
        commensurate ‘muscle memory.”

        I know a “Hanson” and Eagle Scout who might sum it up as “Be Prepared.”
        Having the gun and no ammunition, or no training on how to use it … or no
        understanding of the legal issues … is not being fully prepared. It doesn’t
        mean someone definitely would fail. It just means that the risks go up with each
        missing step of preparing for a given situation.

      • Ima

        Go back to school and take classes in English Comprehension. The author pointed out that she “ALMOST” made a mistake by asking permission to shoot the intruder.

  • Kmerser

    Very good article. Im a Cpl instructor since2002 and a sergeant at our sheriff department. When I teach the law section it opens a lot of eyes. I have had many students say they were not aware of the dos and dont’s or the laws. I urge everyone who does not have a Cpl to read the laws for your state and understand them.
    Be safe, be aware and practice.

    Keith Merser
    Lapeer County Cpl.

  • http://twitter.com/NhPatriot11 USA Patriot

    I would like to say, that due to the last 20 years of gun control laws in place, nearly 1/2 the states now have very complex gun laws and they are absolutly NOT easy to understand or comprehend. Just like your driver training classes took hours and hours to finish and pass, so too should your firearms training, and make sure to study up every year on the changes in your local, state and federal laws.

    The best gun control is your finger. Train hard, live free, be safe.

    • high country

      In Colorado it’s the “make my day law” if he enters your house unlawfully “shootem”

  • Harley

    One other piece of knowledge – IF a person get a Utah or FL CCW – they had better Learn what states they can carry in AND ALL their laws pertaining to guns -  Recently there have been people in the news that carried in another state and got arrested becasue they did NOT learn that states laws.

  • Iron15

    Yes, know the Laws people…we have way too many Lawyers, and live in a Country that locks up too many innocent people for profit….infowars.com 

  • Anonymous

    Be sure to ask very specific questions of the attorney, or of yourself if you are poring over the law on your own. Does the castle doctrine apply to your property as well as inside your home? Does the law make a distinction between forcible burglary and armed burglary? Is there a difference between a night and day break-in? If your car is considered pat of your “castle” does that mean when faced by a threat you have to remain in the car while shooting, and if you open the door and step outside are you no longer justified in shooting?

    Give your attorney every conceivable scenario, and make sure he points you to the applicable law for each scenario. And if your attorney is not cooperative in this rigor, maybe another one will be.

  • Azguy76

    “…a shotgun, which is by far the best gun for home protection”…as long as you don’t care about hitting anyone else in the process.

    • Jima

      Huh?

  • TomP30

    Did she legally own that pistol?

    • Fisherman

      What does that have to do with anything? If I’m in danger and see a loaded pistol, I don’t care who it belongs to, I’ll grab it and use it if I have to. Doesn’t matter one whit who it belongs to. Same as picking up a shovel or a pickax and defending yourself.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-DeLallo/1766373079 John DeLallo

    Nearly every state has a Castle Doctrine that’s easy to figure. IF the bad guy gains entry, you fire repeatedly until the threat is stopped. DON’T shoot him through the door. DO call 911. Home security, just like charity, begins in the home. Fortunately here in Pennsylvania, our ability to stand our ground extends to porch, patio, driveway, car, and anywhere you many lawfully be. Lethal force is of course still the final and unequivocal option. Putting a man in your sights is difficult enough,  let alone taking his life.

    • Golfcartbetty

      In Lexington, KY an elderly man shot an intruder through his front door after repeatedly telling him that he had a gun and was going to shoot if he didn’t leave. It was ruled justified. Every situation is unique; calling 911 and dropping the phone so that they can hear you say “I’m going to shoot if you don’t stop trying to break my door down.” is all you need. 

  • Vanshd

    I’m a retired LEO and have been an NRA and force on force instructor for 35 years. While a handgun is a poor defensive weapon it IS the best defensive weapon in the home for a host of reasons. Your statement that a shotgun is the best home defense weapon serves no one well and simply perpetuates a myth that can get folks in trouble.

    In my classes I show my students exactly why a shotgun is not the preferred choice and why, in close quarters, like a home, a handgun is a much better choice. Anecdotal incidents will always be around but they are the exception, not the rule. You would do well to take a very deep breath before posting some of what people will take as “gospel”.

    • CzarChasm

      While I respect and accept your bonafides as an expert home defense instructor, I would still take your opinion more seriously if you said, “In my classes I show my students exactly why a shotgun is not MY preferred choice…” Point being, there are many experts who disagree with you, including the trainers I’ve paid good money to train me and my wife, and the word “the” seems to attempt to convey a more universally-accepted opinion than I believe you have a right to claim. Otherwise, shotgun vs. handgun as a preference sounds like a good discussion to engage in, but it really isn’t what this post is about. I agree with the premise that anyone who contemplates shooting someone, whether at home like in the case of the young Oklahoma mother, or out in the big, wide world, one should train and educate themselves constantly. The more, the better. And those of us who have had lots of training because it was either part of our jobs, or we could simply afford to acquire it, should impart as much of our education and experience to as many of those who will listen and benefit from it as possible.

    • Esvanr

      Yes!  Someone who realizes the advantage of a proper handgun over a shotgun for interior home defense.  I have long advocated the handgun to those who will train with it for several reasons: 1.) When wielding a shotgun, it requires the use of both hands. You may need that other hand to hold the phone or a flashlight. 2.) Common engagement distances inside a home are less than 15 feet.  Have you ever patterned a shotgun at 15 feet or less? Pretty small hole, huh? 3.) Weapon retention in close quarters is more difficult with a shotgun, especially with a pistol-grip type stock. 4.) Generally, the noise/blast of a shotgun will have a greater adverse effect on the shooter than a proper handgun.  By proper handgun, I am referring to a common service-type gun, such as a 4″ .38 Spl revolver or standard 9mmP/.40 S&W semi-auto pistol with average defensive/LE ammo.

    • pastor T

      I agree with “Vanshd” on the hand gun opinion.  The number one factor for me is maneuverability.  It just makes more sense to me when you consider the possibility of having to be in a close quarters situation or needing to move quickly and possibly needing a free hand.  I do see the benefit of a shotgun as well, so my suggestion would be like the 18 yr. old lady, have 2 guns!  A shot gun and a hand gun.  Be prepared for whatever the situation calls for.  I carry concealed so my practice and familiarity is with my Glock.  But I like the shotgun sitting in the corner of my bed room as well.  A wise man is prepared for whatever circumstance may present it’s self.  So, shotgun or handgun…I say both!  I’ve also found having a 115 lb. trained German shepherd sleeping in my living room is nice too.  Be prepared everyone and be careful!

    • Snowmanspanky

      You say you are a retired instructor. I am amazed how wrong you are. A short barreled shotgun, 18 1/2 with the right shells are the perfect home defence. A handgun would be to difficult for some people to aim with that pressure on. Plus the sound of a shotgun round being loaded is enough to scare the shit out of most people. I know a # of retired LEO and just because they are does not make them right.Look at what Clint Smith says on the subject.

  • Anonymous

    The best news is, no one else will have to make that decision about that intruder ever again.

  • http://www.chilebomb.com Matt Kaufmann

    Bingo.  And TRAIN!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1294323180 Joe Sobotka

    When I bought my first firearm, I was lucky enough to have a great training course available to me. It was a 24 hour course. It was classroom and also hands on at the range. They went over all of the laws etc first. That was in IL. I have since moved to WI, the first thing I did was go to NRA’s web site, and read about WI law & firearms. They have since implimented concealed carry, and also passed the Castle Doctrine bill. So I know where I stand as far as the laws. Knowing the laws, and getting expert training is the first thing you should do when you purchase a firearm.

  • airsmith006

    I seriously don’t agree that a shotgun is by far the best home defense…ever try to hold a shotgun on target on someone and make a phone call at the same time?  Especially for a woman?  It’s well known that 911 won’t hang up if you call them, I teach my classes to call 911 and drop the phone, that way you have help on the way and a recording of the events.

  • Anonymous

    Shotguns are good also if you are 18 yrs old and state law requires a person to be 21 yrs to have a handgun.

  • Princesa

    First off, the 2nd amendment is CLEAR….shall not be infringed means exactly that thus, all the “laws” pertaining to when you can use deadly force are moot. ALL unconsitutional laws are null and void and do not have to be followed or enforced. I do NOT follow unconstitutional laws. I do not ask permission of when and how I carry my weapons and I do not ask permission of when I can use them. The 2nd amendment ensures my rights, thus I don’t follow tyrannical ILLEGAL laws.

    • pastor T

      I follow what you are saying, but our courts are more full of constitution ignoring liberal judges than those who judge according to it.  Not saying I would consider that if it came down to me protecting me or my family, because I wouldn’t!

    • Anonymous

      The Second Amendment is a wonderful amendment, it is unique in the entire world.. It says; “… ,the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
      It does not say that the people have a right to shoot anyone, under any circumstance  or reason.  A bank robber has a right to keep and bear arms BUT does not have a right to shoot or kill employees or customers of a bank just because he/she wants money.
      Laws that cover use of force, AKA- self-defense, have always existed, going back thousands of years include jawbone or sword.  If you shoot someone and your only claim to justification is “I have a right” or “He needed to be shot” you’re very likely to spend a lot of time on the wrong side of the bars.

  • Shanghai Kid

    The state of Texas has in my opinion very good and understandable gun laws. I can even carry my concealed handgun into the state capitol in Austin. Walk up to a scanner, scan you license and a green light turns on. The state trooper says Welcome to your capital.

    • RPMROCKER

      That’s how it should be everywhere. 

  • M. Dobson

    In Ohio, the “Castle” law is pretty clear.  If you’re protecting yourself/others in your property…shoot.

  • Snowmanspanky

    I don’t tink she was asking the person on the phone if it was ok. If you say that then you are saying if the women said no you can’t shoot she wouldn’t? Hell no. She was protecting herself and even more so her child. I think she was scared and just wanted to hear another persons voice. Even if the law said no you can’t shoot she would never be arrested or found guilty of murder it was self defence the perp had a knife.

  • 2A supporter

    Agreed that the 18 yrd did the right thing, but 911 can be a good thing in that if you do goto court it could be in your favor.. With the laws different accross the country, and few with anti-2a laws, the fundemental of self preavestion must be heard. NYC,Chicago,Cali need to step up and look at what really going on.
    “If guns keep people then the spoon made rosie O’donald FAT”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5XROH3NOF3HUWTYLZFZO5I6TTI Super Duper

    “Better yet, she had a shotgun, which is by far the best gun for home protection.”

    Really? I just watched this vid or this site and they said a pistol was the best:
    “Protecting yourself from a home invasion with Michael Bane 01-12-2012″

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-G-Barnhart/1430357151 James G. Barnhart

    One of the biggest myths of self defense is the ability to make clear and conscience decisions in a situation of extreme duress. This is why such a high percentage of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty show no signs of an attempt at self defense. I believe Lt.Col. Grossman, in his “On Combat” and “On Killing” books puts the stat at somewhere near 60%. A part of your brain called the Amygdala is responsible for the fight or flight “flinch” response and it gets it’s input from learned tactics and in the absense of any learned tactic we have the tendency to orient toward the attack and freeze. If you have training, but the training is flawed, your Amygdala doesn’t care, it pulls ot the most relevant response it has stored and uses it, thus the introduction of training scars. A thorough knowledge of State law is absolutely necessary, but if that is not then used to develope a response tactic based on proper technique done through repetitive training, you will freeze and try to rationalize “what is the right thing to do”. This is time consuming relative to the time it takes an aggressor to pull a trigger and kill you.  This psychological conditioning was at the root of the training we gave to law enforcement and contractors at Blackwater.  You can read about all this stuff all you want, but if you don’t incorporate the knowledge into some sort of practiced tactic, you may have been just as well to read a cheat sheet for a shooters game on XBox.

    • Just Saying

      Whatever gun is chosen for home defense, become familiar with it,know your state gun laws. Make it a
      point to practice at reasonable intervals. A handgun, shotgun or a Gatling gun  can potentially save
      your life and the lives of your family. But it isn’t the weapon per-se that gets
      the job done, it is the person behind it. Skill and determination, reinforced by
      regular practice, will carry the day. Remember that, when the smoke clears, make sure the last man standing,is you. (Quote from a very wise man)

  • Samuel

    You have to remember that this young woman was inexperienced in life in general, and was under a great amount of stress.  From my understanding her from previous news reports, her husband died of cancer approximately a week before from cancer.  With the above, and being a life-or-death situation where you’re protecting your newborn child I could definitely seeing the possibility of asking such a question.  Regardless of the above, for all we know she could have been told to ask the dispatch operator by an instructor a while back.  You also have to give the this young woman props considering she went above and beyond mindset and tactically speaking, to include positioning a couch on the door, especially in this situation.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-G-Barnhart/1430357151 James G. Barnhart

      I agree 100%. She did a great job and there will be armchair tacticians picking this apart on forums with their 2 cents for a while. I’ve just got issues with the statements in the above article. Weapons choice; she used what she had…A+, Waiting until you feel you have no choice; she tried to do the less-lethal thing first because time allowed…A+. I wouldn’t fault her at all. She and her baby survived because she took action, and any action is often the difference between life and death.

      • Samuel

        I agree with you.  Everybody can quarterback this and say they know better or could do better.  Being 18-years-old, mentally distraught beforehand from your husbands death a week before, a new mother, and then having two people trying to break and kill you and your child should allow you to be given a free pass on this.  We don’t know what she legally knows – this could just be a tactic to get implied consent from the police.  Either way, it doesn’t matter as she does now know the law, and the people who don’t want to know the law wont.

    • Walker

      @Samuel: Not only what you mentioned, but the weapons could have been her husbands. As an 18 year old, she more than likely didn’t have any of the training he might have had and therefore, she did just what she thought she needed to do. I do hope that now that this situation is somewhat over with that she gets the required training and knowledge base concerning her local laws.

      • Samuel

        @Walker I agree with you.  I also think that gun training was not the priority of this young lady because her husband died a week earlier.  I don’t think it should be the priority of anyone in this case.

  • Anonymous

    wow

  • williamjackson

    well am not going to make any phone calls

  • Honyok

    I live in Oklahoma. I live about 15 miles from the 18 year old lady who recently was involved in this story. She lives in a smaller rural town and she more than likely has had some familiarity or handling of guns. Oklahoma has a well known, “Make my Day Law”. It covers home intrusion and now covers business intrusion since the case of the Pharmacist here in Oklahoma who shot the young kid who was holding him up at gun point. Only this morning a local radio station had an attorney on the air who explained the Make My Day Law. It is very easy to understand. Basically, if some one is inside your home or making an attempt to enter the home uninvited, they are considered an intruder. The occupant can then judge the situation as to if there is a threat or not.

    My wife encounter an intruder in our home only a few weeks ago. He broke in through the back door. Broke the glass, unlocked the door and entered the home. He banged around in the kitchen for a few seconds and then headed into the living area and on into the hallway. She was in the back of the house at this time. This is were she met him face to face with only about six feet between themselves. She confronted him and he turned and exited our home. She was ready to shoot him right then. But she did not. The police advised her she had every right to put him down right where he stood. My wife has had experience with her revolver and she shoots with confidence. But, she said for some reason she did not fire on him. Today she says she is please with her action and feels for the lady who did fire on her intruder. Myself, I would have dropped him right in his tracks. It’s difficult to speak for someone else’s actions. But, I can respect my wife decision and understand her feelings. 

    • Samuel

      Have you ever “dropped” someone yourself?  It’s either said than done.

      • Samuel

        Correction “It’s either said than done” should have been “It’s easier said than done.”

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kevin-Stevens/1248366229 Kevin Stevens

      So this intruder is still running amok in your neighborhood…putting others at risk.

  • Anonymous

    In home? Possibly a short barreled shotgun, a ‘Street Sweeper’?. Article didn’t mention barrel length or shell load. My old ‘high bird’ long barreled shotgun is very difficult to maneuver, let alone swing… inside the home. Several laser pointed,  or open sight handgun rounds in the general direction of the, always unpredictable movements of main body mass, seems to work well….from what I’ve read. ;>)

  • CPS

    Some good points brought up, although I do not agree with all of them.

    I would note that the picture used for this article shows a woman who is about to get SLIDE BITE!  It cannot be that difficult to find pictures of women holding a semi-automatic handgun correctly….

  • Anonymous

     Young wife home alone, husband on public service company, short deployment. 3am she awakens to faint but ‘heavy’ sounds outside her hot summer, open bedroom window. No hesitation in the darkness, she raises the gun barrel outside the window and immediately fires. Calls police. Responding officer finds deceased male laying in yard with No visible wounds. He had tripped over a loop fence while in dead run, breaking his Own neck. Male was co-worker of husband. Had record of sexual ‘incidents’. No charges filed. As in the aforementioned case, Socially dysfunctional DNA chain abruptly ended.

  • Anonymous

    I guess the thing that strikes me is how we’ve raised a generation of people who don’t already know their right to defend themselves.  It occurred to me this is the result of constant politically correct messaging (television, slanted news, public education that is partially funded by federal dollars that we paid into to begin with).  When conditioning and programming of our children to ‘Hate Guns’ by ‘big brother’ and its sycophants goes unchallenged the results include a woman calling 911 to ask permission to defend herself…

    • pastor T

      I fully agree!  The demented liberals in our country have been brainwashing Americans against firearms and self defense for years!  Americans are being trained to be cowards!  It begins in the school system with the “no tolerance” policies that tell and train kids not to stand up for themselves.  If you stand up for yourself or fight back you receive the same punishment as the aggressor.   If someone laughs at you, you are being bullied!  When I was in school you actually had to face some threat of physical violence or intimidation to consider yourself being bullied.  My father’s way of dealing with it was like this: You start a fight you will deal with me, you run from a fight you will deal with me.   Do you remember the video of the thug that attacked a guy standing in line at a Subway sandwich shop?  The thug beat him if front of a dozen other guys who stood like a deer in the headlights and watched doing nothing!   That’s what we are being trained to do in America today.  And make no mistake it’s all part of the plan to subjugate Americans to a government that wants to control us in every way…ie..obama!

  • Walker

    @Jason:disqus
    : Like a lot of people, I disagree with your statement about the shotgun being the best home defense weapon in the house.  A shotgun to me is one of many possible weapons that can be used to used in home defense. Consider this, if you go in muzzle first carefully then an intruder just inside the door has an opportunity to grab the muzzle and grapple with you. An iffy situation. If you go in muzzle up or down, then it is no longer in a quick response position. It will take a second or two to get it there and sometimes that’s all that the intruder needs.

    I personally think a full size handgun (you don’t need a compact version as you aren’t concerned about concealment in your home) with reduced velocity rounds is the way to go. You can keep it close to your body in a ready position and an intruder has less chance to take away your ability to use it on them.

    As far as the 18yr old girl is concerned, keep in mind her mental state at the time. A week or so before her husband died of cancer, on Christmas day no less. The guns were most likely his. While he may have known the laws concerning defending yourself, your family and your home, she may not have. I think she showed sound judgement of mind. She recognized the situation, she barricaded the front door, she put her baby in the baby bed with a bottle to keep it calm, she got her weapons out and ready for possible use, and then she called 9-1-1 to alert them and to ask advice. It was 21 minutes after the call was initiated that the police showed up. By then she had been switched to a different 9-1-1 operator and had to kill the first intruder to attempt to come thru the door. When police got there they found a knife in his gloved hand. He was a druggie looking for pills. Such people are not known for their intelligence and constraint. Who knows what he would have done had he been able to gain access to the house and control of it’s occupants.

    What you should do is call her up and offer to pay for her to be trained properly in firearm usage and the local laws by an instructor close to her. Think about the great PR that act would bring.

  • http://twitter.com/tsdub66 Todd Willis

    ” because if you don’t know the law you could end up in jail like the Oklahoma pharmacist who made a huge mistake and is now spending the next 38 years behind bars.”  Jason Hanson …
        I don’t think the pharmacist knowing the law had anything to do with his conviction and spending the next 38 yrs in jail … if I’m not mistaken isn’t this the guy (pharmacist) that came back into the store and put a few more rounds into an already incapacitated (shot by him) bad guy?  Otherwise I agree with your article no your laws :)
     

  • Carneybeckley

    I carry for one reason to protect myself and my family period
    It would be nice to get laws that protect the good guys instead of the bad

  • Legion7actual

    I’m wondering why she isn’t in trouble for having a handgun at 18. It’s illegal in my state for someone under 21 to own a handgun. You’d think some overzealous douche prosecutor would go after her. Think of the heck to pay if she’d used the handgun to put him down!

    • Precious821

      21 is the age to own, not the age of defence.

    • Anonymous

      That varies by state, but federal law only prohibits purchasing a handgun from an FFL if you’re under 21. Not merely possessing it.

    • Samuel

      You don’t have to be 21-years-old to possess one just 18-years-old, which doesn’t even include outside the house.  Either her deceased husband purchased it before he died or one of her family members purchased it for her, and gift it to her.

    • Anonymous

      Clearly, you don’t live in the same state she does…Each state gets to violate your Second Amendment Rights in the manner of their choosing.

  • Dogwood2

    Hanson is correct.  The courts are just salivating at sending you to jail for protecting yourself because you didn’t know and understand the laws in your state.  Another way to learn about this subject is to buy “Self Defense Laws of the 50 States” by Mitch Vilos.  It comes with free updates as the laws change.   Without realizing it, the 18 year old woman above complied with Mitch Vilos’ Bottom Line of five rules on Pages 31-32.  Don’t let some liberal judge send you to jail because you didn’t know the law. 

    • Anonymous

      Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

  • Anonymous

    As for Mass.It’s a sad day when a person or persons cannot defend themselves from someone who does not have your best interests in mind.On top of just losing her husband,this happens.No doub’t these punks new of her situation and thought her an easy mark.I have no doub’t they would have killed her.God forbid that we,the people ever become like the English and let our rights be flushed down the drain.

    • Anonymous

      Gotta remember…The Brits are “subjects” not “citizens”
      Remember this especially well in November of this year…

  • 1eap3577

    ARIZONA, we take out the trash! No questions asked. 

  • George.

    Here in Boise Idaho the county police have a class on the legal aspects of caring concealed. A very good class and it is free and qualifies you to obtain a concealed permit if you do not have any other gun classes.

  • John Doe

    If someone busts into my home Im assuming the worst.
    Too many cops and civilians have been shot dead by hesitating and giving the bad guy the upper hand.
    My state has castle doctrine….but it wouldnt matter. Im not waiting around to see if the two thugs who just kicked in my door are there for a flower delivery or not.

  • Fibreman56201

    I  missed this story about the pharmacist who is serving 38 years Why? What did he do wrong/

    • Anonymous

      He finished the crook off with a coup de gras.  You’ve GOT TO STOP shooting when the dirtbag is no longer presenting a threat.  Even though you may be doing a public service, the District Attorney will see it as murder…

  • Dnldblr

    Has anyone else heard that the FDIC has required that banks post “No weapons allowed in Bank.” ?

    • Anonymous

      I was in my bank just the other day and did not see any “No Weapons Allowed” signs.  I was also packing my trusty Colt 1911A2 as I always do except when going to work.  The company I work for is the country’s largest defense contractor and has an ironclad policy of not allowing weapons of any kind on company property trusting instead to armed security guards who, like the police will only be minutes away when they are needed in seconds…

      BO STINKS…Wash it away in 2012

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=734020691 Jeff Buddy

    Regarding the, “Better yet, she had a shotgun, which is by far the best gun for home
    protection” statement, I concur with others here that this wasn’t exactly a prudent statement to offer. I, too, believe that the longer the firearm is, the greater the chance that someone will take it from you in a close encounter of the criminal kind. The handgun allows for greater maneuverability and often more rounds or opportunities to fire. The handgun is less powerful, but it is much more portable, concealable (if needed), and typically easier to retain in a struggle. I will rarely answer my door with a shotgun, but I will always answer an unexpected ring of the doorbell with a handgun in my pocket or holster. I noticed in several pictures that Mrs. Kinley possessed a double-barreled, side-by-side shotgun, therefore, she had two chances to get it right before a reload was required. Let’s encourage folks to use the firearm with which they are most comfortable. They should use the weapon with which they’ve practiced more frequently. My preference is the handgun for home defense with a shotgun and AR-15 on standby, but that’s my preference and my preference only so I’m not going to foist that preference on others as though it was etched in stone. The best gun to use is the one you have with you when it’s needed. Sometimes our bias for specific weapons will encourage those less informed to make choices inappropriate for their needs. Let’s give wise, cautious counsel to those seeking what’s best for them. Their life may depend on it.

  • Docs150

    Another fine article Jason…understanding the law and helping change what needs be is exactly right. Most important is also to know and learn about what firearms you own(most time spent with what you would use in a situation or CCW. Just as a fire occurring in your house you need knowledge and a plan to help protect yourself and your family…have a good day folks.

  • Habeas17

    Jason’s advice is very good.  I am a firearms self-defense trainer, but I am also a criminal defense attorney, and an ex-cop, who has experience dealing with these cases.  Based on that experience, I wince every time I read comments like some of those I see here.  Until a person is thrust into the middle of one of these situations, the uninitiated have no idea what they are going to be going through with investigations, potential criminal prosecution or civil lawsuits.  The firearm is a tool of last resort.  You use it to save your life, or that of another, and for no other reason.  And if that situation develops, it is going to happen at the speed of white hot light, only to be evaluated and judged by others who weren’t there, given a lot of time for cold, objective analysis of what a “reasonable person” in the same situation would have perceived and done.  If you are going to employ a firearm as a home defense tool, or a personal defense tool on the streets, take the time to learn the laws, take the time to review the laws, and take the time to visualize scenarios and strategies that are shared and discussed with your family, over, and over, and over again.  If you use that gun, and survive the encounter, your battle is just beginning.  You can choose to heed that advice . . . . or not.  Its your choice.

  • White Doberman

    “Don’t just go to the gun shop, get a gun, and then take it home and
    store it in your bedroom. Before, or immediately after, you get that gun
    you need to know the laws regarding when you’re allowed to use it.”

    I agree 110% and I think it is helpful for you to write this post, but I don’t think many if any of those people will read this. They are never going to find us here. I hope your post may find some gun owners who haven’t taken a class in the last, lets say year or 10 years.

    I think this teenager did the right thing. She may not have been prosecuted for a bunch of reasons, but she did the right thing regardless of what she said on the phone.

    Further education and experience is always a good thing. If you can’t find any go to the NRA’s website they have a listing of training in every State. I have taken many of the classes and though each instructor is different, they are excellent resources.

  • Billy Bob

    The police remark made is a very big opinionated statement that holds NO legal merit.  It sounds good for the people that are armed and willing to stand up to intrusion.  But the real legality of any law will be decided by Judges, DA and PA and the all too often misinformed jury of 12 that are picked to hear the case.  The Police duties are ”To serve & protect”  NOT ADVISE.    

  • NRA Counselor

    I find it funny that most of those that comment state “better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6″. I agree to that statement in specific situations….not a blanket “breaking & entering”. In some States, you cannot shoot first just because you THINK that someone is going to harm you. VA has the “Duty to retreat” law that makes the occupants run to a room and lock the door (or run away if able to). There is not shooting, there is no if they enter your home shoot them up, it would be their duty to retreat to a safe area. Sad.

    As far as saying the shotgun is the best firearm to choose for home defense: this is definitely home by home, case by case dependent. First off, there are factors involved:

    1) Age: the elderly may not be able to chamber a shell into a shotgun, nevermind hold one up or survive the recoil enough to get off a second shot if needed.

    -Twenties: would be able to lift and fire if needed but their judgement may not be there. In other words, Hollywood has formed many young minds, the same with video games and some of the younger generation believe that it is the same as in the movies.

    -Thirties and up: May be able to make better judgement calls as long as they practice inside their home. Having to find out that the home is too narrow in some places and the shotgun cannot be maneuvered as well as thought while someone (or more than one) is running through your home trying to create havoc, would not be a great experience.

    2) Hollywood and some instructors/writers: Telling someone that a shotgun is the BEST, instead of COULD be the best dependent on the person, the home and the other occupants inside the home, would probably be a better way to approach this. Some even say that “just by the sound alone of a shell being racked into the shotgun will make the bad people run away”. really? Anyone that attempts to try and “scare” the threat away with a sound will find themselves becoming the victim….shy one shotgun!

    All I am saying is there are many options out there for home defense. Research, practice, talk with someone experienced in this field, practice more, talk to more professionals etc.