Tags
anti liberty/gun cracktivists, AR-15, armed robbery, assault weapons, attempted murder, high capacity magazines unalienable rights, media narratives, semiautomatic rifles, social justice grievance industry, teenaged thugs, violent criminals
It’s the feel good story of the week for two primary reasons: (1) Three very bad guys will no longer be preying on good guys and girls. (2) If anyone didn’t know, they now know why semiautomatic rifles, AKA “assault weapons” are not only useful, but sometimes, essential. Hot Air reports:
A Georgia homeowner shot and killed three teens as they approached his residence with their faces covered, authorities said.
The masked teens — a 15-year-old and two 16-year-olds — approached three residents around 4 a.m. Monday at the front yard of a home just outside Conyers and tried to rob them, the Rockdale County Sheriff’s Office said.
One of the would-be robbers took out a gun and fired shots at them before one of the residents returned fire, authorities said.
‘The victims of the attempted robbery were all uninjured, but the three attempted robbery suspects were all shot during the exchange of gunfire and succumbed to their injuries, one on scene and two at a local hospital after being transported,’ the sheriff’s department said in a news release.
And what sort of gun did the victim use?
So far the exact type of weapon used in self-defense has not been identified. However, a neighbor described the sound as an ‘assault weapon,’ and WSB-TV in Atlanta confirmed itto be a long-barrel semi-automatic…
Apparently, the police found two guns at the scene, so the thugs had at least two guns, presumably handguns.
The homeowner who shot the masked intruder is a man. Neighbors say he’s a truck driver who owns a semi-automatic rifle and is highly protective of his mother.
As is usual in cases like this, the Lamestream media do their best to ignore it, though CNN actually did report on it. When the media do report on such things, they make a concerted effort to avoid mentioning that the victim saved the day with a gun. They are always, however, very careful to report on the gun a mass murderer used, particularly if it is an AR-15-like rifle, or “assault weapon,” as they love to term it. When an honest citizen uses such a gun to stop crimes, they almost always fail to report the presence or even the use of the gun. Reporting that an AR-type rifle was used for good purposes tends to effectively contradict the narrative. CNN, of course, did not report the kind of gun the honest citizen used in this case.
The media have also avoided reporting on the race of the thugs. When criminals are Black, in particular, or minorities in general, this is the rule, however, if the thugs were white and victimizing minorities, we would surely be treated to their race and outraged assertions of racism, white supremacy, etc.. Black people committing crimes, particularly violent, murderous crimes like this, also tend to contradict the narrative. In any case, we don’t, as this is written, know the race of the teenaged thugs, or anything about their criminal records, though since they were committing an armed robbery and attempted murder, one might reasonably suspect them to have criminal records.
From what is currently known, it appears the victim was entirely justified. He was, in his own front yard, approached by three masked thugs, and at least one of them opened fire on him. He responded, in what appears to be a classic case of lawful self defense, and unlike the thugs, his return fire was accurate and effective. Apparently at least one of them was able to flee for some distance before succumbing to his wounds. Also apparently, at least one of the others was able to pull a gun—two were found at the scene—but was apparently not able to fire it as one thug did, or if he did, did not hit anyone.
We are not certain the victim used an AR-type rifle, but that’s where the story is, for the moment, leading. The significance of this is that when attacked by multiple, armed felons, one very much needs the most efficient, effective arm they can manage, one that has the ability to quickly stop the attack, one that is accurate, and one that has substantial magazine capacity.
What the media and anti-liberty/gun cracktivists either don’t know or ignore is that actual gunfights are nothing like the movies. It’s common, when the police and criminals exchange fire, even at pointblank range, for everyone to miss, even though they empty their guns. In other words, these events aren’t easy or neat, and no one can know how many rounds of ammunition they might need when attacked by criminals. Obviously, this victim was far more prepared and effective than even most police officers. We can be certain of one thing: he, and his family, are surely glad he was armed with an appropriate weapon and sufficient ammunition. If not, we would likely be reading about another honest citizen murdered by unknown attackers.
Certainly, the victim and his family will have to deal with the aftermath. The thugs that tried to rob and murder them will surely be discovered to have been aspiring Rhodes scholars anxiously awaiting canonization from the Vatican. It’s likely the victim, even if never criminally charged, will have to fend off lawsuits. The possibility of revenge attacks by the thug’s families and friends is also very real.
Almost certainly, if the thugs are Black, the social justice grievance industry will scream about stand your ground laws allowing the murder of innocent black boys. Again, from media accounts, it appear SYG was not in the least implicated.
Having to shoot anyone, even if fully justified, is never something to be taken lightly. However, whose survival contributes more to a just, peaceful society? Violent criminals, or innocent, law-abiding normal Americans? But they were just teenagers! And the victim would have been no less dead if their marksmanship had been better.
It is possible, as always, since I’m relying on media accounts, I may be wrong in ways small or large. If that proves to be so, I’ll make appropriate future adjustments.
Why do we need AR-15s and “high capacity magazines”? Because we never know what kind of evil we’ll be facing, where and in what numbers. Besides, we don’t need to justify possession of the means of self-defense any more than we need to justify the lawful and life saving exercise of an unalienable, express constitutional right. Anyone that claims otherwise is aligning themselves with the three dead thugs and their like, not the honest American that, faced with evil, helped make America a better and safer place.
D. said:
2 of the perps have been identified.
https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/conyers/conyers-attempted-robbery/85-d344d527-7110-4d98-b06e-d655c76c7ab0
navyvet said:
Interesting; from the link, the TV station’s so-called “legal analyst” gets SYG completely wrong:
“11Alive Legal Analyst Latonia Hines explained how the ‘stand your ground law’ works.
“‘Basically what stand your ground allows for is that you can defend your habitation, property and others with possibly using deadly force,’ she said.”
The media never ceases to amaze.
Mike McDaniel said:
Dear navy vet:
They know nothing about such things, and their arrogance keeps them from learning. Even if they did, their Leftism keeps them from reporting anything that would harm the narrative.
Alan Reasin said:
Yes, citizens need firearms that have large mags. Ruger makes fine firearms that fire the .223 and 7.62 round that are not evil looking; they look more like my Ruger 10/22. My state had outlawed the evil looking ones but not the Ruger Ranch or Mini-30. They also did NOT outlaw the heavy (3/4 inch dia) barrel AR-15 type but did ban the standard 1/2 inch dia barreled one. Definitely the legislature is not consistent and knows little about the actual capability of the rounds fired by the different firearms, just ban them if they are evil looking with some exceptions. Anyway the .223 and even the 7.62×39 is no match for the .308 round chambered firearms that are legal and can be found in semi-auto type with large capacity mags. The evil looking M-14 is chambered in .308 too.
Dan Bongino has the wait 24 hours rule on media facts, which is a good rule.
It appears from pictured relatives that one of the teenagers was Black.
The “fact” about the kids having broken into the same house earlier in the morning/night has disappear now in the latter stories. That would have explained the homeowner having a firearm readily available since a witness stated he returned fire right after the 5 shots were fired by the criminals.
A question I have is why 15 and 16 year old teenagers were out and about at that hour. I really, really don’t want to hear any BS about how good they were and it has already started. I won’t believe anything good about them without some true evidence of that belief.
Mike McDaniel said:
Dear Alan Reasin:
Apparently at least two were black, so I strong suspect the third was as well.
Tom said:
Cases like this (home invasion robberies involving multiple intruders) prove that there is a real need for civilians to own so-called “assault weapons,” i.e., firearms that can shoot fast and that can fire more than a dozen rounds without reloading.
Similarly, riots (which the Democrats and their cheerleaders in the media encourage) prove that storekeepers need such weapons as the AR-15, Mini-14, or M1 carbine.
And “knockout game” incidents prove that private citizens may even need to carry so-called “high capacity” handguns like the Glock 17, Sig-Sauer 226, and Browning P-35.
That said, citizens should not have to prove such a need. In a free country, the burden of proof is on the government to justify restrictions, not on citizens to justify freedom.
The first ten amendments to the Constitution are not the Bill of Needs.
And, yes, the media usually ignore legitimate cases of self-defense, or else they distort them, twisting the facts to make the aggressors (e.g., Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown) look like the victims, and vice versa.
And they consistently misrepresent Stand Your Ground laws, making them sound like an unrestricted license to kill for trigger-happy racists.
In the George Zimmerman trial, for example, the PC narrative was that a wannabe Dirty Harry murdered Saint Skittles and got away with it because the Stand Your Ground law provided the killer with a legal loophole. In fact, both the prosecutor and the defense attorney in that case had said that SYG was not a factor.
Mike McDaniel said:
Dear Tom:
What you said.