Video of home invasion repelled by woman

She certainly wasn't afraid of taking the fight to them.

The only problem I see is I don't think she has any idea whatsoever where the last round fired out the door was aimed at all.

Impressive nonetheless.
 
Good:

1) she responded *immediately* when the door was breached

2) she had a gun. She had it *in her hand,* not in the safe or on the nightstand

3) she was prepared to, and did, use the gun *right now*. No waving it about, no questions, no negotiation

4) she took on three armed invaders *in the dark* and won

5) she had *video* to show her side of the story

Bad:

1) I don't think she was keeping track of the first guy. She might not have realized he was there. Going pitbull worked, but had the invaders had a better plan or kept their cool, things might not have worked out so well. But you play the hand you're dealt, not the one that might have been.

2) firing those last few shots out the door. I don't know about Georgia, but in my state, once they're fleeing, the situation flips from "self defense" to "aggravated assault" or worse. In a gunfight, pumped up on adrenaline, half-deafened by indoor gunfire, it can be very easy to lose track of your legal situation. I know better than to do something like that, but in all honesty, chances are I'd do the same, and continue shooting until I was out of ammo.
 
Good:

1) she responded *immediately* when the door was breached

2) she had a gun. She had it *in her hand,* not in the safe or on the nightstand
Click to expand...

Actually, she responded LONG after entry had been made and her gun very well may have been in a safe or night stand. It was a long time before she responded. The intruders had time to do a partial search of the house, go in and out of multiple rooms, turn on and turn off lights, etc.

Check out this much more complete video. Notices it includes a lot more information than what is seen on the news version. It also includes the 911 call.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tip2JYla2g

I should point out that she only believed there were 2 invaders. Also, she apparently was injured on the left side of her head in the skirmish.

Another version that highlights the guy who crashes through the door. It looks like he tried to shoot her as he ran by originally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stOcTAADa38


Bad:

1) I don't think she was keeping track of the first guy. She might not have realized he was there.
Click to expand...

Well she does lose track of him visually, if she ever realized he was there. Once he passed her, she concentrated on the more immediate threat to the front as the guy she lost track of crashed through a glass door. When your attackers split, you can't shoot two directions at once or keep track of somebody way far to your right or behind you if you are fighting with somebody in front of you. She was fortunate the unseen guy didn't go after her, sure enough, but then again, had she kept track of him, she would have lost track of the threats in front of her. You work the problem and handle your most immediate threat first. You can't work all threats equally at the same time.

2) firing those last few shots out the door. I don't know about Georgia, but in my state, once they're fleeing, the situation flips from "self defense" to "aggravated assault" or worse.
Click to expand...

Fleeing? I saw two guys attempting to get to better firing positions and who continued to fire at her repeatedly as they opened ground (see approximately 1:07 {first vid I linked or 7:24 in 2nd}. Note the numerous muzzle flashes reflected on the door from outside.

"Flight" is an interesting thing. When is flight considered to be flight versus simply repositioning to fight? If the robbers in 'flight' even once turned around or pointed a gun back at her, they are not in flight. They are fighting. So long as they posed an immediate threat to her (and having guns helps make this possible), then they may be considered a threat.

She did not shoot intruders who were in flight. She shot at active combats who were simply moving to another position.

-----------

What do you know? This local event was dramatic enough to make CNN!
http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/09/23/woman-shoots-at-burglars-during-home-invasion-dnt.wsb

-----------
 
Listened to the 911 call, the "operator" and everyone associated with that Charley Foxtrot ought to looking for new jobs immediately. She did everything she could NOT to send this woman some help in a timely manner. Made me mad just to listen!
 
What are you talking about? As soon as the operator had the address and that it was an invasion, cops would have been dispatched. That was established very quickly. The operator would have been typing in the information as she spoke with caller. That information would be going out to officer computers immediately. The continued questioning is to confirm previous information and to obtain additional information with updates that are provided to the responding officers in near real time.
 
The lady was on the line with 911 about 2 minutes before the operator even asked about the address. The officers should have been dispatched, with the correct address, soon after she called, not at least 2 minutes later. THAT'S what I'm "talking about".

A lot can happen in 2 minutes.
 
I can't believe the stuff I've read about this,,,

I can't believe the stuff I've read about this,,,
Not on just this forum but on several other forums as well.

"She did this wrong,,,"
"She should have done this,,,"
"What she should have done was,,,"
"She needs to get a higher capacity pistol."

How about saying she did exactly that one should do when attacked,,,
She fought back with everything she had at her disposal,,,
Killing one of her attackers and driving the rest away.

Sheesh people!

If any of us would have done this,,,
We would be thumping our chests for weeks.

Personally,,,
I want her to be the mother to my children.

Aarond

.
 
Well, I think it is natural for a firearms website to try and learn from other people's mistakes - and let's face it, she survived despite making several potentially fatal mistakes.

If guy #3 had decided to turn around and fight instead of running through a glass patio door, she'd have been in a bad way. She showed some good aggression though. Decisive action now trumps the best action 30 seconds later a lot of times.
 
I can't believe the stuff I've read about this,,,
Not on just this forum but on several other forums as well.

"She did this wrong,,,"
"She should have done this,,,"
"What she should have done was,,,"
"She needs to get a higher capacity pistol.

How about saying she did exactly that one should do when attacked,,,
She fought back with everything she had at her disposal,,,
Killing one of her attackers and driving the rest away.

Sheesh people!"
Click to expand...

I agree. I tell my wife when she disagrees with my methods: "Argue with the result."
 
Nobody is arguing with the result so much as recognizing the fact that the same course of action may not end up with the same result in a similar circumstance. Pointing out where she made errors is an educational tool.

She apparently got grazed in the head. The result attained was only a fraction of an inch off from being completely different.
 
The attackers were still armed when they ran, that's a clear continuing threat to her and a definite threat to anyone they encounter outside. I can't see where self-defense ever stopped and became something else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top