The victims were dead before police even arrived. As such there are two ways of looking at this.
1. The Liberal agenda suggests that banning all "assault rifles" will stop mass shootings. I guess the next, logical (for them), step would be to ban all guns and shootings will stop. This ignores a couple of facts. First, criminals don't care about the law. That's why they are criminals. If you outlaw a gun that they want they WILL get it. The second si that more people are murdered by hammers than assault rifles. More people are murdered by knives than by hammers. More people die in drunk-driving accidents than by hammers and knives combined. Does this mean we should ban hammers, knives, and alcohol/cars as well?
2. Every other party (as in just about everyone that isn't part of the Liberal agenda) would suggest that if the home-owner had a gun maybe this wouldn't of happened. They could also call this a case-study in what would happen if guns were outlawed. The criminal had a gun, which they almost certainly will. The legal, law-abiding, citizen apparently did not. The victims relied on the police who apparently showed up too late.
But don't worry. I'm sure Obama and the Fed's will have a solution for us simple, common, folks that obviously can't help ourselves.
The radical notion that other people are not your property.
MSNBC is to Democrats what Fox News is to Republicans. There is NO un-bias news network. Only a select few un-bias shows.
I mean, sure, the guy in this story forced his way into a home he most likely knew was occupied, searched around until he found someone and got 5 bullets for his trouble, but lets second guess the situation and assume he went up to the third floor to find the newest issue of Cosmo. The lady is obviously the same as the guy that shot someone obviously no threat on his front porch...
She shot for center of mass on a large (judging by picture) assailant wielding a crowbar that had just forced his way through her locked front door. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Not a situation to seek out by any means, but the criminal created the situation by his violent actions and forced her into a response. Could she have taken the odds of using 1 or 2 of her 6 shots to aim for a leg? Maybe she just needed a nice gun with 15+ rounds so she had the luxury.
If I were a thief, I wouldn't find my life worth getting shot over the possible $20-50 that may be in a person's wallet or their household items.
If a person breaks into my home, I'm going to point either my .44 or shotgun at them and give them the chance to surrender. If they become a greater threat (pull knife, gun or attempt at fighting) they will be put down with 2 .44s or 1 12 gauge #4 turkey shot. Say I happen to find their backside, they will get a nice smack to the top of their head with the barrel. The burglar bars on my house aren't for my protection, they are to deter thieves.
If you're too much of a pussy to own a gun and learn how to use it, then you leave fate in the hands of someone else.
I often find myself wondering why I still linger in the United States.
Never got why people compare anything else to guns.
Pretty stupid since a knife is more avoidable than a gun and cars are indeed not designed to kill people.
Alcohol= most of the time fun and games.