Mr. President, Did You Hear About the AR-15 Used to Defend Against Pair of Home Intruders?

President Barack Obama and the rest of the liberals are doing everything they can to outlaw assault-style weapons.  They claim they have no purpose except to shoot innocent people and that they have no place in any American home.

Tell that to a teenage boy in Houston, Texas.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010, in a quiet cul-de-sac in Houston Texas the 15-year-old boy and his 13-year-old sister were home alone believing that they were safe. Suddenly a pair of strangers tried to gain entrance to the house through the front door, but found it locked. Next the strangers tried the back door and again found it locked. Then they broke in through a back window only to be greeted by the 15-year-old boy holding his father’s AR-15 assault-style rifle. Fearing for the safety of his sister and himself, the teenager opened fire on the two suspects, who fled the house as quickly as they could.

The boy immediately called his father who was a deputy constable in Harris County Precinct 1. A short time later an adult male and a juvenile showed up at Tomball hospital. The adult male was reported to have had at least three bullet wounds that were serious enough to warrant him being transported to Memorial Hermann Hospital. The juvenile was taken back to the crime scene to be identified and arrested.

It turns out that this house wasn’t the first targeted in the cul-de-sac by the burglars, but it will definitely be there last. Police believe it was the same pair of burglars who had broken into a house next-door and stolen nearly everything they could carry.

Lieutenant Jeffrey Stauber told reporters:

“We don’t try to hide things from our children in law enforcement. That young boy he was protecting his sister. He was in fear for his life and her life.”

Even though this incident took place two and half years ago, it’s an excellent example of how effective an assault style weapon can be to defend one’s home the hands of someone who knows how to use it. According to the reports the 15-year-old boy had been well-trained and knew how to use the rifle.  I’m sure the two burglars felt a lot more intimidated looking down the barrel of an AR-15 than they would have looking down the barrel of an ordinary rifle or handgun.

So Mr. President, assault-rifles do save innocent lives and protect homeowners and their families and you’ll never convince that Houston family otherwise.  So please take your anti-gun and anti-Constitution ways and try them out in your own country Kenya and leave our country alone!

105 thoughts on “Mr. President, Did You Hear About the AR-15 Used to Defend Against Pair of Home Intruders?

  1. Hard, it is, to reflect that such a story as this goes unreported, while the forces of darkness assail us with the propaganda of the Marxists, who herd the sheeple down the road to serfdom. This old physician will choose to fight and die against the armies of Satan, thus ensuring that he will never have to live under tyranny.

    My chief regrets are that my children and grandchildren, as well as yours, will not live their lives in liberty, nor will be able to keep the rewards of their hard work and God-given talents, nor in all probability be free to worship the generous, loving God, that sacrificed His only begotten Son for the forgiveness of our sins, and provided us with the now-absent opportunity to live in the bright daylight of freedom. Patrick Henry’s words echoed at the beginning, just as they do now, at the end: “give me liberty, or give me death.” Dominus vobiscum.

    1. I really needed to put my boots on because of all the BS you espoused.. You sure must have missed the last 225 years of history..

      1. Mrjitter … Have another glass of koolaid to hold you over until the DHS bus comes to take you to the FEMA camp.

        For others:

        This law review,”Of Holocausts and Gun Control,75 Wash.U.L.Q. 1237(online)” raises some interesting points such as this:
        “but it is nevertheless an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed.”
        What most gun control advocates want is a government controlled monopoly on lethal violence. Then the dangerous assumption they are positing is that the government, although it changes hands every four or two or six years will always be benign. Remember, the pendulum swings and the government you like today can be the tyrant who hates you, and your kind, tomorrow. Ask the Jewish people of WW2 Europe or the Armenians in Turkey or how about the Cambodians of the seventies if they thought their governing apparatus was going to turn on them lethally?
        Do you want that tyrant to have a monopoly on lethal violence?
        That is the very point of military style weapons in the hands of many many civilians, there will be no Holocaust of a disarmed minority if there is no monopoly. You want at least a duopoly on the use of lethal violence and yes, it is messy but there is no Utopia, and never will be.
        Also R.J. Rummel wrote a book, online called” Death by government” where he enumerates the 170 million deaths by government(he calls it Democide) in the 20th Century.

        1. And what does that have to do with my reply to mjritter? He is obviously a troll. I know the kid was in fear for his life and I applaud what he did. Mjritter is the one full of BS!!!

      2. I have to accept some of the blame for you sir, seeing that you have been brain washed by our liberal school teachings. If we had been alert for many years, we would not have let this Liberal/ Socialist crap into our schools.

        1. How do you know this guy did. Ot go to a private school..”.of course you have no idea but y are kinda like your God…you know all. Good for yiu.

        2. We know enought to recognize a commie/socialist/progressive (democrat) when we see one! God does not need to inform us of that. And since you are sort of defending him, I’d say it’s a pretty good bet you are also a commie/progressive/kool-aid drinkin/Obama supporting/democrat POS also!

        3. That’s why my wife and I home school our children. We don’t have to concern ourselves with the “drivel” they claim is “education.” It is not “education,” it is “indoctrination.”

      3. Tell us about it, fella. Start by telling us which countries are free today because the “natives” gave any guns they possessed to their rulers. That will be a long enough list to keep you busy for a while, ingrate.

        1. I don’t think it will keep him busy at all. The countries that are free today, because the natives gave their weapons to their rulers, is an EXTREMELY SHORT LIST, …. as in ZERO, on that list! So, that won’t keep him occupied for anything more than a few seconds!

      4. “MJ”, you surely have large “gonads”, to make such a statement without the courtesy and details to justify your position. Read my previous post about the 4-fold increase in crime in countries where guns have been conficated. Maybe, you will be the only one who will take responsibility for such an increase here. I surely would not want you on my staff, military or civilian, as your sense of logic, reason and plain common sense appears to be significantly less than that of the average concerned citizen. I seldom respond in such a strong manner, but your post on this life and death issue, is considerably less than precise.

        1. “Phillip, were you referring to me or to “MJ”? If it was for me, please present your argument—Although, I am 80 years young, I still mange to learn something new almost everyday. Please, elucidate. Subject: [godfatherpolitics] Re: Mr. President, Did You Hear About the AR-15 Used to Defend Against Pair of Home Intruders?

        2. Sorry, that is directed at “MJ!” I will edit my post to reflect that. I was agreeing with you.

      5. Agree. They’re attempting to stretch the idea of any gun control into complete firearm prohibition. That is not what is being proposed, and I would say a large majority of Americans would not support a comprehensive prohibition of firearms. What these loonies don’t understand, however, is that if the “government conspiracy” meant to serious control firearms, they would turn their backs on the millions of guns and go after controls on ammunition.

        1. One of two things: Either you DID NOT watch the video or you are suffering from “Cranial Rectal Inversion.”

          I am sure the people who were SLAUGHTERED by their own Government and their families would tell you all about the “fuss” as you put it.

        2. Great example of a knee-jerk propaganda film. The main problem is that no one is proposing to completely “disarm” Americans. And no one will. It’s what we Americans call a “political impossibility.”

          And while you rootin’ tootin’ gunslingers want to throw around words like “socialist” and “Marxist”–and even “Communist”–in reference to our legally-elected President, we are nowhere close to the abolition of private property that Marxism would require as a precondition. That, too, is another “political impossibility” in out country. So clearly, you people don’t know what the &^%$ you’re talking about.

        3. Really? When the SHTF, being a “grasshopper” isn’t going to do you any good. Apparently, you do not live in the U.S. or on planet earth.

        4. You guessed it! Okay… I admit that I am from the Planet Páprika, sent here to observe the silly habits of non-thinking homo sapiens.

          Now, perhaps you could give us the Bill Number of the the proposal you think is before Congress to repeal the Second Amendment and completely disarm all Americans. You know, just for the edification of thinking humans…

        5. No, the planet “Braindeadium” is more like it. If you don’t keep up with what is going on, I can’t help you. At present, they are doing a “defacto” gun control ploy by buying up ammunition.

          Then, you have what Feinstein and her crowd are doing. Plus, throw in a few State Governments.

          Now, be a “good little troll” and go back under the bridge.

        6. By the time you finish high school, hopefully you’ll learn that name-calling isn’t going to get you very far in the real world. Out here, we make structured arguments supported by evidence. Name-calling is juvenile and has no currency here.

          Now, let us return to my request: give us the Bill Number of the proposal you think is before Congress to repeal the Second Amendment and completely disarm all Americans. If you can’t, then just say you can’t.

        7. There is no “specific” bill to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

          Feinstein has introduced a bill on so called “Assault Weapons.” The bill’s formal name is “The Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.” It is the 1994 law, resurrected and on “steroids.”

          Now, you can read about how the Nazi’s went about “gun control” and how we are following the same path.

          While they are not coming out to end the 2nd Amendment directly, each step they are taking, brings us closer to it being eliminated.

        8. Those links are not reputable sources of information.

          The gun control laws being called “Nazi,” in fact, date to the Weimar Republic. The Nazis did amend them in 1938, however, loosening the restrictions on German citizens, and strengthening firearms prohibitions on Jews and other non-citizens.

          So you’re basing your thinking entirely on false premises.

          The 1938 Nazi Waffengesetz loosened firearms restrictions from the Weimar Republic standard in several ways.

          First, the Nazi law applied only to handguns, not to long rifles or ammo. The 1938 revision completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles, shotguns, and ammunition.

          Second, the legal age from gun ownership was lowered from 20 to 18.

          Third, gun ownership permits were extended from 1-year to 3-year terms.

          Fourth, the revision expanded the groups of people who were exempt from the firearm acquisition permit requirement. Holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions of any kind. (Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central government, the states, and employees of the Reichsbahn were exempted.)

          The only “tightening” of restriction was levied against Jews, who were explicitly verboten from the manufacturing or dealing of firearms and/or ammo. (A later law in that year strictly prohibited Jews from possessing firearms of any kind.)

          But you don’t have to believe me. All of this information I have given is independently verifiable. The authors you are reading are sloppy propagandists, and they’re banking on your inability to find original sources and read them for yourself, as I have done.

          I would feel deeply insulted, if I were you.

        9. So, only “your” sources are credible? What are your sources?

          Why should I “feel” insulted? The big problem today is people “feel this or that.” I “believe” in things. I believe I have no reason to be “insulted” deeply or otherwise. What you are telling me, after getting bent out of shape at being called a “troll,” is you cannot accept or handle a debate.

          I have nothing to be insulted about, history is on my side.

        10. Yes; you’re right. I detest all the “feelings” and unfounded beliefs as well. That’s why I go straight for independently verifiable facts. Whether or not you’re insulted when someone feeds you false information… well, I guess that’s your deal.

          What you call “my” sources are not mine at all, but you, too, can find them and see that you’ve been fed a bunch of nonsense: start with 1938 Waffengesetz (Deutschland) and Entwaffnung der deutschen Juden. And if you can’t read German, there are plenty of translations available.

          As for “history”… history is just history; it’s not on anyone’s side.

    2. Right On,

      We have too many like Feinstein, Schumer, Boxer, Wexler, Lautenberg, Wexler, Kohl, Levin, Waxman and their ilk are doing all they can to take the life we have known from our children and grandchildren.

    3. Does anyone really believe that obummer really gives a damn about us, our children or our grandchildren when his kids live in a safe and sound environment? He probably doesn’t even know of the above story. He tunes out all of these incidents, as he doesn’t care. His whole idea is if we save just one child, gun control will be worth it. We have some gun control already and it hasn’t saved anyone. And with all his save one child, he allows and contributes our tax dollars to murder unborn babies and he thinks nothing about doing it. All obummer wants is for his safety and the safety of his family and to H with you and I. Notice how he now has put his trusty little executive order pen into use and sign himself and family for protection once he is out of power. He only wants all of us under his thumb and him as our dictator and just take a look at where other countries with this set up has gotten them. Wise up Americans, this is the start of gun confisication. Dream on if you are on obummer’s side.

    4. WE do not have to resign Ourselves and the future of OUR children and grandchildren to this fate!! We can take this country back although at this point WE will have to unite together and talk as one and the day is close at hand that force may be OUR only option as I believe that the traitor illegally occupying the office he disgraces will try to declare some type of emergency and will order the use of force against American citizens and force is the only thing that will stop him and his America hating, traitorous, and Godless agenda at that point!!! A wise and prudent man would be preparing as such at this point in time and be ready for when that line is crossed and take solace that if they sacrifice their life in the fight against such a future for their children, grandchildren, Freedom, Liberty, the Constitution and all rights contained within, and the TRUE American way of life it will not be in vain!!! For me to die defending these God given rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution is a much better fate than living in depression, despair, and destitute, and the oppression that they will impose upon US!!! WE have gotten to this point by the direct actions of less than 1000 elected officials that have forgotten that they work for US and are elected to represent OUR will and voices, not theirs, their parties, or that worthless traitors, and they need to have a very healthy fear of US re-instilled in them and if they disarm US that will never happen and is the real reason they are trying to restrict and remove OUR right to bear arms!! They cannot win if WE are armed and they know it as there are 300 million of US and if WE march on Washington and remove those that wish to take these rights WE will prevail ultimately and return to and fully restore OUR Constitutional Republic and stop this disease called liberalism and all of its ideals and never allow OUR country to come this close to destruction again!!! Freedom is not free and WE must stand up as TRUE Americans and stop those that would take these rights from US that millions have defended, fought, and died defending for US to live in this once great country as free men and women!!!

  2. Hey… did you hear/read the story in CO where a wife had an argument with her husband, he left to cool down, came home to find that his wife had shot the 3 kids, killing 2, and then herself? I can name more..

    1. Did you hear the one about the lady who backed up over her kid with an SUV. Let’s ban those too!

      In all seriousness though, maybe we should focus on the leading death of children in the US, abortion!

        1. Look up how many deaths tobacco is responsible for. It’s far more then guns yet I’ve never heard of cigarette stopping a home invasion or robbery.

        2. I wonder if someone doing a “home invasion” could sue for exposure to second hand smoke? ; )

      1. Children are not fetuses. When he fetus is viable…able to live outside the womb, then you can call it a child. abortion, thank God, is legal and has been legal for 40 years. Obama will appoint the next Supreme and ensure abortion is legal another 240 years. Jokes on you.

        1. Your a nut job. There was a court ruling in ’73 to allow murder. Loooong before that there was a 2nd amendment written to guarantee me the right to any and all firearms. 9 judges or 2/3’rds ratification. You seem to support taking away what I was guaranteed by the constitution and want to uphold what was pushed down our throats by 9 bench warmers. Don’t try to thank God for something that goes against His word. Thank allah or some other being but leave God out of your sick thinking.
          “If we are declared dead when our heart stops beating then why are we not declared alive when it starts”?

        2. Sometime ago, I read an article where just 100 women were surveyed who had a prior abortion and later had children. While, as I recall, 20-percent did not reply, the 80-percent said, in effect, “God, what have I done!”. We need a new survey of meaningful size, and I will wager, the great majority will have similiar feelings. I am 80 years young and can recall that abortion was frowned upon later than the first trimester, then over the years abortion was extended up to the full gestation priod—-now we have “partial birth” abortions and I have heard of post-birth abortions. What is next, when the child first “talks back” to a parent, or borrows the family car without permission? A fetus at the very moment of conception, the 26 necessary chromosomes to survive, thirteen from each parent. And, I do suppose you know, a great many children are born “premature” and lived normal lives—some as early as 13 weeks. I suspect they all object to abortions.

    2. Crazy people will always do crazy things. She could of used a hammer, knife, or any type of instruments to do this crazy thing.

    3. No, actually I haven’t heard of that story. And it may be true, but the number of legitimate uses of firearms in self defense far outweighs the number of cases like that. An estimated 2.4 million cases of self defense per year, according to Gary Kleck, with his research accepted as legitimate by such as the CDC. Can you name 2.4 thousand cases such as the one you mentioned? No, I thought not.

    4. Obviously a sick woman! Lacking a gun, I suspect she would have carried out her insane act with a knife, a hammer, a whatever and get the same results!! Sadly “guns don’t kill people, people kill people!

    5. Yeah, just yesterday a hitch hicker saved a woman from being killed. He used a hatchet (assault weapon) on the assailant to save the womans life.
      We have to include hatchets in the assault weapon list, it does have a kind of a pistol grip. Right ??? It’s also a scary looking thing if some else is holding it. … Right ???
      If you had something a little stronger than kool-aid you just might see the light.

    6. “MJ”, So? What is your point? Again, read my post of the 4-fold increase in violent crime in countries where guns have been confiscated. In addition to having a “gonadial” problem, you are also a slow learner. PS, I have lived in Colorado for many years, and I do not recall your stated incident—hearsay perhaps or an “Alinsky-101” effort?

    7. And, we can name a lot more times that “guns” were used to PREVENT crimes from happening, without a shot being fired. What about the women who “drowned” her kids? Going to “ban” bathtubs?

      If someone wants someone “dead,” they will find a way to do it. QUIT blaming the “object,” and place the blame where it belongs, on the PERSON who committed the CRIME!

    1. That is the problem. People have accepted the liberal words for these types of fire arms. Any and all “weapons” can be classified as assault weapons. If a person is attacked with a hammer, would not the hammer need to be classified as an “assault weapon? Same goes for a steak knife, metal pipe, wooden pole, etc. Anything can have the classification of assault weapon if it is used to attack and assault someone or something.

      1. Just yesterday, a friend referred to defensive weapons as “violent weapons”. I had to explain that a weapon cannot be “violent” its self. It’s the human operating the weapon. The VAST majority of weapons are used to PREVENT violence.

      2. I think you guys are brilliant to change names. Your Rep operatives have been preaching g this for years….remember death tax…not anymore.. Moochers….not an accidental word. Get with the plan, guys. Invent some positive names. That will convince the majority of the A ericans that defensive weapons are very cool.

    2. The Bushmaster AR-15 and similar civilian weapons that Feinstein et al are demonizing and want to ban are NOT assault rifles at all. Don’t give the gun banners any leeway on these lies and distortions. Their intent is to confuse and misinform those who don’t know any better. In other words, they’re lying.
      Tell people the truth … tell them that the AR-15 is not really functionally different than other rifles except that it outwardly RESEMBLES the M-16/M4 machine gun that our troops use. (For reasons of economy in manufacturing, the inherent reliability and maintainability of the underlying design, and other factors, there are a lot of common parts, but the important ones that determine function are designed to preclude illegal conversion to fully-automatic operation like the military weapons with which the gun-banners want you to confuse them.)
      The guns they want to ban are NOT machine guns, as the gun grabbers and media try to convince you. They do NOT “spray bullets” as military weapons do. However their outward appearance, combined with deliberate untruths and the use of incorrect terminology, makes it easier for the deceivers to demonize these guns as they try to build support for banning them. (Which is, of course, just a step towards further bans in the future.)
      Also impress up on people that the AR-15 and functionally similar guns are NOT “only suitable for a war zone” as the ban’s proponents and media personalities keep saying, but that they are, in fact, NOT really suitable for combat use at all because of their limitations. (Our troops would be SERIOUSLY out-gunned if they went into battle with AR-15s.)
      Further, they are not “heavy weapons” as some of the media people keep saying. Inform people of the factual reality that these weapons are actually considerably LESS powerful than most of their grandpa’s deer rifles – to the point that in many states it’s illegal to hunt game larger than groundhogs and coyotes with the .223/5.56mm round that the AR-15 fires.
      The public has to be informed so that they understand that they are deliberately being misled and misinformed by the media to advance the citizen disarmament agenda of leftist tyrant wannabes in our government. (These same people through DHS and other alphabet agencies have recently purchased over 1.5 BILLION rounds of ammo – enough to shoot every man, woman, and child in the country 3-4 times – ammo that’s illegal for military use under international law). Considering that you and I and all of the other US taxpayers are paying for all of this ammo, it’s frighteningly reminiscent of the story of political prisoners’ families being forced to pay for the bullets used to execute them … isn’t it?
      If we allow these leftist control freaks to ignore and ultimately gut the 2nd Amendment, history will inevitably repeat itself. These “gun control” proposals have NOTHING to do with preventing crime, but EVERYTHING to do with CONTROL.

  3. Here’s the story the leftist puppets in the lame steam media propaganda machine never tell the gullibles in their audinces:
    According to the statistics gathered, but hidden, by their beloved government, guns are used by law-abiding citizens in justifiable self-defense (to stop or prevent a crime) about 2.5 million times per year in the US.
    In the vast majority of cases, no shots are fired. The mere display of the means of self-defense prompts the criminal to turn tail and run.
    In the minority of cases where shots are fired, those citizens kill several times more criminals per year than the police.
    Despite the fact that citizens shoot and kill significantly more criminals than the police, you are approximately 5.5 times MORE likely to be accidentally/mistakenly shot by the police than by a citizen defending himself (unless, of course, you are actually the criminal).
    Lawful use of guns saves FAR more lives each year than the unlawful use of guns by criminals and psychopaths. (At least 65x more!)
    Every state that has enacted “shall issue” concealed carry laws, which allow citizens to carry after passing a background check, has seen crime in general, and violent crime in particular, drop dramatically.
    Places with the most prohibitions on self-defense (Chicago, LA, DC, etc.) have FAR more violent crime than areas where it’s known that citizens have the right to self-defense and the means to enforce that right.
    Those are the IRREFUTABLE FACTS that the government and its media propaganda machine don’t want the public to know.

    1. Can you give the source for “guns are used by law-abiding citizens in justifiable self-defense (to stop or prevent a crime) about 2.5 million times per year in the US.”?
      I would love to be able to use the statistic.

    1. And you know this because you monitor all LSM media 24/7. It was actually covered in Houston, local news as it most likely should. But hey….you know for sure

      1. No one monitors 24/7 max. This may have been on local liberal houston TV but it was NOT on nation wide. Stories of this type go against MSM montra.

      1. Are you saying that anyone who comes into our homes uninvited and unwelcome are INVADERS? What if they empty our fridge, take our First Aid supplies? Are they INVADERS? Holy Cow, and we’ve been calling them Illegals, Illegal Immigrants, Aliens. NO WONDER OUR POLLYTICIANS aren’t doing anything to stop them or chase them away. The Pollys Oaths have nada to do mit der terms Immigration… they DO swear Oaths to protect us from INVASION, INVADERS. Could it be that our Pollys just are confused about what we are ORDERING them to do? Words have meanings, don’t they.

    1. Hey brave marine and defender of the Constitution. Boycott a capitalistic profitable company who offers food to Americans who are not Christians. They surely can be Americans citizens since that’s part of our constitution, who y so bravely defend. But hey. Our Christian nation, must be because religious right says its Chrsitians, so hate companies who serve food favored by a specific relgion. Go find those delis that specialize in kosher food. How UN American. What hypocrites you god loving, gun toTing, Constitution loving patriots are. Go eat more chicken, instead.

    2. Now tell us about the kosher tax we pay to some grubby filthy stinking mousy bearded sniveling rabbi child molester for “blessing” the crap food they call kosher.

  4. Assault is a state of mind, not a gun. Here’s my best example…. Senator Feinstein is “assaulting” our rights to own any type of gun we want. HELLO Congress!

  5. I guess the other key point is that the guy survived, despite having “at least three” bullets in him. Not quite the assault weapon now, is it? I suspect that is why the shooter in Sandy Hook put so many bullets into his victims. a 223 round is not nearly as deadly as the press would make it out to be. That is why that weapon is useless without large magazines. These intruders are lucky the kid didn’t have a shotgun.

  6. Of course let us look at reason. First off when we use to have someone that society as a whole would not consider to be all there we would tell them they are never never to lay a hand on a fire arm or even come near them. For the most part they never did and we did not have this problem. Also we trained our young to respect and how to use the tools(in this case a AR-15) to defend themselves and society as a whole(you use to see people coming to the aid of their neighbors). In that we are now taken to court for child abuse if we try to teach our children anything so they do not treat the weapons as a tool but, rather as a toy. Then we have the schools mixing in marxist doctrine and giving them large amounts of drugs that change their whole perspective of reality. 90% of all these shooting can be traced back to this. Given both these things it is no wonder we have the problem and it can be traced back directly to liberals that think they know better.

  7. There needs to be more stories about these guns that are being used by law abiding people to protect themselves everyday. If it takes brain washing to make people understand the importance to protect themselves Maybe, just maybe this country might turn around.
    You have the right to use equal or greater force to defend youself.The gov. wants to take your guns so as to have full power over you, just look at the people over seas how there trying to defend themselves. Our consitition has a cheek and balance to stop just this kind of takeover.To the non belivers, please think more then twice before you decide on gun control.

  8. This self defense story is prime evidence as to why guns must not be confiscated. Both ancient and relatively new history, in Australia, Great Britian, France and some other counties, clearly reveal that almost ovenight, after guns were conficscated, violent crime in those countries increased at least 4-fold, and in selected areas in each, it went as high as 10-fold. If guns are outlawed, who in Washington is going to take responsibility for the increased crime and deaths? The FBI indicates that about 80% of our crime is committed in our two dozen or so larger cities, and that rifles are used in violent crime, less than three-percent of the time. The administration is focusing on the wrong issues—it is the criminals that need the attention, not the guns. Our government, as with most in the world, have for eons being trying to get the guns out of the hands of their criminals, and they have not even made a dent in the problem. Now, let us assume government can get the criminal’s guns, where does that leave the citizens? The criminals will just use other kinds of weapons, or they will increase their “manpower”. The citizens problem has not changed, they still need a “bigger stick”, preferabaly of a size at least 9MM or .45. Use these simple straight-forward arguments and insist your congresspersons and state legislators give you answers as to who will be held responsible. The logic, deductive reason and plain common sense is so clear, it is very obvious to the citizens, that government has a ulterior motive in mind, involving this great country’s Republic, Constitutional and freedom way of life. If enough people will get involved, congress will listen, as their cherished jobs are at stake.

  9. To Obama: write any executive order or have your co-conspirators pass unlawful laws, I have taken my oath to the Constitution and to my country to protect and to fight all tyrannical governments foreign and domestic enemies.. My home, car, weapons, ammo and accessories I paid for…And No traitor(s) will confiscate, steal or unlawful take my freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.That can not be infringed on by you or your hand picked criminal czars. I bother no one and have never infringed on others beliefs nor opinions but anyone trying to take my inherent rights as a US Citizen IT will be a very costly endeavor to your stupid order following criminals The court of checks and balances will be people imposing the law not NATO.

  10. The above article doesn’t work, logically speaking. In order to fix that, the author would need to show how the boy’s possession of an AR-15 somehow protected his life better than a wide array of other weapons which are not targeted by the proposed ban. That would be the way to write a compelling argument. As the above argument stands, it’s generous to call it “very weak.”

  11. How would “it’s not my fault Obama” have heard about this? He didn’t even know about what was happening in Libya when 4 Americans got killed.

  12. The dad should be given a promotion and his son a medal and an award for protecting the community and being an outstanding protector of his family in his father’s absence.

  13. Yup; hard to beat an AR15. What it doesn’t do in looks it makes up for in protection. Stupid libtards. And with frangible ammo, it’s a wonderful home defense CQ device. Lovem’! Our military likes this style too, although we call it out different: M4, M15, M16 (all auto and/or burst capable of course).

  14. The most likely use for these style weapons in the future will be to defend ourselves during times of civil disturbances. In a civil disturbance like food shortages, it will be mobs and gangs that will terrorize and kill you for what they think you have. There will be no gov’t or troops there to protect you. When this happens they will go door to door and kill you
    and take what you have. Those that fire off a few rounds will survive because mobs are cowards and it is easier to just skip that house and go to another. This is how most people have survived this kind of action in the past. You can either be a victim or fight back and survive. Non-gun owners will not have that choice.

  15. James thanks for the post Americans, Veterans, hard working people who love this country should be waking up to what this President and Administration are doing. Tearing the fabric of this nation one secretly passed law at a time. Running up the deficit until the economy collapses. Be prepared people

  16. Once again the author goes to an extreme absolute. I’d be lying like a Rethuglicon if I said I was shocked.

    First is the implication that ONLY an AR-15 (or the equivalent) would have scared the attackers off. So i guess they would have laughed at a pistol or shotgun and simply continued? Call me skeptical but I think the results would have been pretty similar despite his claim to the contrary since thieves are generally cowards.

    He concludes his drivel with, “So Mr. President, assault-rifles do save innocent lives and protect homeowners and their families and you’ll never convince that Houston family otherwise.” Is there a case where somebody said, ” Assault rifles have never saved anyone’s life.”?

    He then concludes with three lies back-to-back-to-back with, “So please take your anti-gun (where has he said he’s anti-gun?) and anti-Constitution (I am no fan of all his (mis)interpretations of the Constitution, but he has FAR less damage to it than ANYONE with an “R” after their names have done in the last fifty years or so) ways and try them out in your own country Kenya (there is absolutely NO credible evidence that he’s from Kenya and racists whining to the contrary won’t make it so. It just makes whining racists a bunch of whining racists. GTFU.) and leave our country alone!” Pff.

  17. There are many more incidents like this where guns were appropriately used by people to protect their lives and property than incidents where guns were used inappropriately to commit crimes. Most American citizens will never hear about these incidents because of the one-sided twisted reporting by the liberal media. I wish there were at least one popular news outlet that fairly reported all sides of the stories.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *