Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KSEE 24 Fresno)   Shotgun-wielding mom saves her little girl from masked kidnapper, proving that America's obsession with firearms is AWESOME   (ksee24.com) divider line 306
    More: Hero, Fresno County, Fresno counties, kidnappings, maples  
•       •       •

15017 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Aug 2012 at 11:07 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



306 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-30 07:54:36 AM  
Hard not to hit the hostage with a scattergun, mom. Next time, use a 9mm with a laser.
 
2012-08-30 08:03:19 AM  
I guess it was a nice day to start again.
 
2012-08-30 08:38:27 AM  
While the weapon of choice may not have been ideal, this is exactly why the 2nd Amendment needs to continue to be interpreted as an individual right. Mom used the threat of imminent death by scattergun to protect her child from intruder, and saved the day in doing so. Of course, one in the chest and one in the face from a .45 with no warning at all would have been a more permanent solution.
 
2012-08-30 08:43:01 AM  
One could also note this incident did not require a semi-automatic rifle with a thirty round magazine, or a concealable handgun with fifteen round magazine to protect life and property. I was under the impression that only weapons more suitable to a battlefield could be used to save lives.
 
2012-08-30 08:53:51 AM  

Ennuipoet: One could also note this incident did not require a semi-automatic rifle with a thirty round magazine, or a concealable handgun with fifteen round magazine to protect life and property. I was under the impression that only weapons more suitable to a battlefield could be used to save lives.


Generally, handguns wouldn't be what anyone (other than Brady acolytes) would ever call a battlefield weapon, and I can assure you this woman would have loved a rifle with a standard capacity magazine. Indoors and without ear protection a shotgun blast will cause permanent hearing damage with the added problem of low capacity, over-penetration (with slugs or buck) or not enough penetration (birdshot). Not to mention the severe recoil and difficulty in maneuvering tight spaces.

And shotguns are regularly targeted by the antis anyway, unless they're total fudd guns without any scary-looking features.
 
2012-08-30 08:59:49 AM  
Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.
 
2012-08-30 09:04:57 AM  

sno man: Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.


I'd be offerring them gas money.
 
2012-08-30 09:07:19 AM  

Fark It: Generally, handguns wouldn't be what anyone (other than Brady acolytes) would ever call a battlefield weapon, and I can assure you this woman would have loved a rifle with a standard capacity magazine. Indoors and without ear protection a shotgun blast will cause permanent hearing damage with the added problem of low capacity, over-penetration (with slugs or buck) or not enough penetration (birdshot). Not to mention the severe recoil and difficulty in maneuvering tight spaces.


That's exactly WHY you want a shotgun.

Show the enemy you're crazier than a pack of monkeys on PCP and willing to do anything with total disregard for consequences to yourself or innocents just to fark their day up, and they'll usually surrender. If they don't, you have to actually be totally insane or risk losing.
 
2012-08-30 09:44:30 AM  

sno man: Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.


but it would be way harder to casually end another life with a coffee table
 
2012-08-30 09:46:25 AM  

Jackson Herring: sno man: Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.

but it would be way harder to casually end another life with a coffee table


Use the corners.
 
2012-08-30 09:56:42 AM  

Jackson Herring: sno man: Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.

but it would be way harder to casually end another life with a coffee table


This guy (pops) did it with his hand.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-08-30 09:59:16 AM  

MmmmBacon: While the weapon of choice may not have been ideal, this is exactly why the 2nd Amendment needs to continue to be interpreted as an individual right. Mom used the threat of imminent death by scattergun to protect her child from intruder, and saved the day in doing so. Of course, one in the chest and one in the face from a .45 with no warning at all would have been a more permanent solution.


Actually, it shows that you don't need an assault rifle or a hand gun for self defense.
 
2012-08-30 10:07:30 AM  
I know nothing about guns, wouldn't firing a shotgun at some asshole holding my kid be dangerous to my kid?
 
2012-08-30 10:13:16 AM  

doglover: Fark It: Generally, handguns wouldn't be what anyone (other than Brady acolytes) would ever call a battlefield weapon, and I can assure you this woman would have loved a rifle with a standard capacity magazine. Indoors and without ear protection a shotgun blast will cause permanent hearing damage with the added problem of low capacity, over-penetration (with slugs or buck) or not enough penetration (birdshot). Not to mention the severe recoil and difficulty in maneuvering tight spaces.

That's exactly WHY you want a shotgun.

Show the enemy you're crazier than a pack of monkeys on PCP and willing to do anything with total disregard for consequences to yourself or innocents just to fark their day up, and they'll usually surrender. If they don't, you have to actually be totally insane or risk losing.


Which is why you always shoot the hostage.
 
2012-08-30 10:13:59 AM  

vpb: MmmmBacon: While the weapon of choice may not have been ideal, this is exactly why the 2nd Amendment needs to continue to be interpreted as an individual right. Mom used the threat of imminent death by scattergun to protect her child from intruder, and saved the day in doing so. Of course, one in the chest and one in the face from a .45 with no warning at all would have been a more permanent solution.

Actually, it shows that you don't need an assault rifle or a hand gun for self defense.


Person used what was on hand != argument against "assault weapons" (real assault rifles are fully automatic) or handguns.

In fact, for all you or I know, that shotgun might well have been an "assault weapon" under California law. All it takes is for it to be a semi-auto with either a folding stock and a pistol grip, or that can accept a detachable magazine. Add a pistol grip folding stock to a Remington 1100, and *BINGO*, assault weapon.
 
2012-08-30 10:26:01 AM  

RoyBatty: I know nothing about guns, wouldn't firing a shotgun at some asshole holding my kid be dangerous to my kid?


Not necessarily, especially at relatively close range.

If you are within a few feet of the intended target, the "spread" of the shotgun loaded with any kind of shot is going to be pretty minimal. Consider this: If you have a shotgun and load that patterns at 3 feet in diameter at 20 yards (a very loose pattern), at 10 feet the pattern is going to be less than 6 inches in diameter.

If it was loaded with slugs, then it's firing a single projectile, albeit a rather large one. No "spread" comes into play in that case.
 
2012-08-30 10:31:08 AM  
dittybopper:

Thanks.

Consider this: If you have a shotgun and load that patterns at 3 feet in diameter at 20 yards (a very loose pattern)

That's interesting, I certainly had the impression that at 20 yards it would be more dispersed than that.

Also news to me that the dispersal pattern is a function of the load, but I guess that makes sense.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-08-30 10:41:02 AM  

dittybopper: vpb: MmmmBacon: While the weapon of choice may not have been ideal, this is exactly why the 2nd Amendment needs to continue to be interpreted as an individual right. Mom used the threat of imminent death by scattergun to protect her child from intruder, and saved the day in doing so. Of course, one in the chest and one in the face from a .45 with no warning at all would have been a more permanent solution.

Actually, it shows that you don't need an assault rifle or a hand gun for self defense.

Person used what was on hand != argument against "assault weapons" (real assault rifles are fully automatic) or handguns.

In fact, for all you or I know, that shotgun might well have been an "assault weapon" under California law. All it takes is for it to be a semi-auto with either a folding stock and a pistol grip, or that can accept a detachable magazine. Add a pistol grip folding stock to a Remington 1100, and *BINGO*, assault weapon.


An assault rifle is an assault rifle. Disabling the fully automatic function doesn't make it any less what it is. It would be an assault rifle if it were totally nonfunctional.

The fact that a shotgun was sufficient proves that there is no need for an assault weapon.
 
2012-08-30 10:42:34 AM  

vudukungfu: Which is why you always shoot the hostage.


I'm not very good at rescue operations.

However, berserk rage and intimidation... I can manage that. Fire does not tell upon you. Iron cannot leave a mark. You bite the rim of your shield and froth at the mouth. THAT is what wins fights when skill is not enough.

Look at chimps. They go for the balls, the eyes, and the fingers; and they don't stop. Nothing in their environment farks with chimps.
 
2012-08-30 10:52:00 AM  
Pffft. Amatuer.This mom only needed a 2x4 to save her kid.
 
2012-08-30 10:53:01 AM  
This is all sunshine and lollipops but we're also protecting our right to have ARMED kidnappers.
 
2012-08-30 11:08:44 AM  
Did she also take out 11 innocent bystanders?
 
2012-08-30 11:09:34 AM  
That's terrible, he got away without being shot in the liver
 
2012-08-30 11:10:58 AM  

RoyBatty: I know nothing about guns, wouldn't firing a shotgun at some asshole holding my kid be dangerous to my kid?


That depends. If you're using a slug or a very tightly packed load with a narrow choke, no. It's pretty much going to put a hole where you aim it.

Now, if you're a tard at home defense and load your shotgun up with a wide choke and birdshot, you're going to have a mess to clean up from both of them.
 
2012-08-30 11:13:45 AM  

vpb: dittybopper: vpb: MmmmBacon: While the weapon of choice may not have been ideal, this is exactly why the 2nd Amendment needs to continue to be interpreted as an individual right. Mom used the threat of imminent death by scattergun to protect her child from intruder, and saved the day in doing so. Of course, one in the chest and one in the face from a .45 with no warning at all would have been a more permanent solution.

Actually, it shows that you don't need an assault rifle or a hand gun for self defense.

Person used what was on hand != argument against "assault weapons" (real assault rifles are fully automatic) or handguns.

In fact, for all you or I know, that shotgun might well have been an "assault weapon" under California law. All it takes is for it to be a semi-auto with either a folding stock and a pistol grip, or that can accept a detachable magazine. Add a pistol grip folding stock to a Remington 1100, and *BINGO*, assault weapon.

An assault rifle is an assault rifle. Disabling the fully automatic function doesn't make it any less what it is. It would be an assault rifle if it were totally nonfunctional.

The fact that a shotgun was sufficient proves that there is no need for an assault weapon.


*In this specific case*

And anyway, necessity is irrelevant. Rights don't have to be justified by anything.
 
2012-08-30 11:14:07 AM  

brap: This is all sunshine and lollipops but we're also protecting our right to have ARMED kidnappers.


In most cases:
Woman with gun vs man with gun is a much more level playing field than man with knife vs woman with knife/chair/whatever she can grab.
 
2012-08-30 11:14:32 AM  
Ennuipoet

One could also note this incident did not require a semi-automatic rifle with a thirty round magazine, or a concealable handgun with fifteen round magazine to protect life and property. I was under the impression that only weapons more suitable to a battlefield could be used to save lives.

1/10
In the next gun thread you'll be asking for proof guns are ever used for defense.
 
2012-08-30 11:15:37 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: sno man: Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.

I'd be offerring them gas money.


You owe me a keyboard.
 
2012-08-30 11:15:53 AM  
My BS detector is getting a small hit off this story. Guys that break in and steal shiat don't normally takes kids. Guys that break in and take kids don't normally take shiat. Something about her story sounds fishy. I could be wrong, hell, I did marry my ex wife, WTF do I know.
 
2012-08-30 11:16:23 AM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: sno man: Dunno, if someone was trying to kidnap my kid, and all I had was a coffee table I will guarantee that I as a coffee table wielding parent, the guy would not get away either.

I'd be offerring them gas money.


I just spit coffee on my keyboard :)
 
2012-08-30 11:17:11 AM  
This is the third law abiding citizen with a gun story I've seen in the last couple of days.

Why aren't these crazy mother farkers out there shooting the place up?

Oh yea.. that's right.. cause they are law abiding citizens protecting themselves.
 
2012-08-30 11:17:20 AM  

NightOwl2255: My BS detector is getting a small hit off this story. Guys that break in and steal shiat don't normally takes kids. Guys that break in and take kids don't normally take shiat. Something about her story sounds fishy. I could be wrong, hell, I did marry my ex wife, WTF do I know.


Fishy? E-mail f­l­a­g­[nospam-﹫-backwards]esu­ohe­t­ih­w­*gov.
 
2012-08-30 11:17:31 AM  

RoyBatty: I know nothing about guns, wouldn't firing a shotgun at some asshole holding my kid be dangerous to my kid?


Not if you stick it in their mouth
 
2012-08-30 11:17:48 AM  
On the good side, two links in the same week showing a POSITIVE use of firearms is a good thing on Libtopia.

On the bad side, here we go again.
 
2012-08-30 11:18:56 AM  

Ennuipoet: One could also note this incident did not require a semi-automatic rifle with a thirty round magazine, or a concealable handgun with fifteen round magazine to protect life and property. I was under the impression that only weapons more suitable to a battlefield could be used to save lives.


Different weapons for different situations. As pointed out before your ignorant comment, using a shotgun in a close range hostage situation isn't ideal. What if this happened in a park or supermarket parking lot? Is the Mom supposed to carry a shotgun with her everywhere she goes becuase, god forbid, she's not allowed to carry a small easy to use firearm?
 
2012-08-30 11:19:08 AM  
ha-ha-guy SmartestFunniest 2012-08-30 11:14:07 AM


brap: This is all sunshine and lollipops but we're also protecting our right to have ARMED kidnappers.


Couldn't happen. There are strict laws in place against kidnapping.
 
2012-08-30 11:19:08 AM  

brap: This is all sunshine and lollipops but we're also protecting our right to have ARMED kidnappers.


Yes, because kidnappers would obey the no guns allowed" laws if they were passed.
 
2012-08-30 11:19:08 AM  

Ennuipoet: One could also note this incident did not require a semi-automatic rifle with a thirty round magazine, or a concealable handgun with fifteen round magazine to protect life and property. I was under the impression that only weapons more suitable to a battlefield could be used to save lives.


Well, if you read the SCOTUS decision in Miller vs US, you'll see that Miller was convicted because at the time the sawed off shotgun and full auto *weren't* widely used by the military ...
 
2012-08-30 11:19:15 AM  

NightOwl2255: Guys that break in and steal shiat don't normally takes kids. Guys that break in and take kids don't normally take shiat


that creepy guy who stole that amanda smart girl or whatever was a homeless dude, you could picture him stealing provisions and kids...
 
2012-08-30 11:19:41 AM  

Ennuipoet: One could also note this incident did not require a semi-automatic rifle with a thirty round magazine, or a concealable handgun with fifteen round magazine to protect life and property. I was under the impression that only weapons more suitable to a battlefield could be used to save lives.


The need for those weapons will arise in due time if we continue our present course. The supposedly NOT TO BE INFRINGED right to bear arms is not there to protect us from illegal aliens but from tyrannical government.
 
2012-08-30 11:19:42 AM  

NightOwl2255: My BS detector is getting a small hit off this story. Guys that break in and steal shiat don't normally takes kids. Guys that break in and take kids don't normally take shiat. Something about her story sounds fishy. I could be wrong, hell, I did marry my ex wife, WTF do I know.


The only think I could have think of was he was trying use to the kid as leverage to keep the woman from calling 911 and give him getaway time. Otherwise I'd agree, someone doing a smash and grab likely wants the XBox, DVDs, etc.

My general rule if I ever have a thief come into my home is that I'm not going downstairs and getting into a shoot out with him. My wife can call 911 and I'll set up at the top of the stairs with a gun. I have home owners insurance and all that. Now if he comes upstairs he dies. Odds are he's just looking for more loot, but for all I know he's the one burglar out there who also happens to be a serial rapist.

/of course with my life the day the break in happens will also be at the same time my daughter is downstairs to get a glass of water, so I won't have the advantage of everyone being safely upstairs and in bed
//just hope the large dogs deter him
 
2012-08-30 11:19:48 AM  

Ned Stark: Rights don't have to be justified by anything.


Nobody has a right to own assault weapons.
 
2012-08-30 11:19:52 AM  
kunochan.com
 
2012-08-30 11:20:13 AM  
Mom used the best firearm available at the moment. Bless her.
 
2012-08-30 11:21:33 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Ned Stark: Rights don't have to be justified by anything.

Nobody has a right to own assault weapons.


Yes they do.
 
2012-08-30 11:21:54 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Ned Stark: Rights don't have to be justified by anything.

Nobody has a right to own assault weapons.


Define assault weapons please, and make it a real definition, not what cosmetically makes you think something is an assault weapon.
 
2012-08-30 11:21:57 AM  

RoyBatty: That's interesting, I certainly had the impression that at 20 yards it would be more dispersed than that.


Video games give a weird impression of shotguns.

They're probably one of the best self defense weapons there is. They look goddamn frightening, so there's a solid chance if you point one at someone they'll hightail it without you having to shoot at all which is the best possible outcome. If you do have to shoot, they've got great stopping power because the shot is so heavy.
 
2012-08-30 11:22:00 AM  

vpb: The fact that a shotgun was sufficient proves that there is no need for an assault weapon.


Not sure if serious.

In this exact situation, exactly as it went down... yeah. But this is not every defensive situation, or even representative of every hostage scenario.
 
2012-08-30 11:22:04 AM  
Another example of successfully protecting yourself using a firearm. There are thousands.
 
2012-08-30 11:22:33 AM  

NightOwl2255: My BS detector is getting a small hit off this story. Guys that break in and steal shiat don't normally takes kids. Guys that break in and take kids don't normally take shiat. Something about her story sounds fishy. I could be wrong, hell, I did marry my ex wife, WTF do I know.


The picture I got was of the guy breaking in to steal stuff, and Mom with the crazy eyes and a shotgun has a problem with that, and he scoops up the kid as a human shield, then thinks better of that plan and drops said kid and runs. I could be wrong of course, but this also struck me as very odd.
 
Displayed 50 of 306 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report