“Gun bans disarm victims, putting them at the mercy of murderers or terrorists who think nothing of breaking the gun laws.” — Michael Bednarik
Yesterday at approximately 9:30 AM, an unknown person kicked in a locked door of an apartment residence in Merrimack As reported in the Union Leader… A forced entry. The female resident of that apartment, alone…was awoken by the intrusion. She consequently confronted the intruder, armed with a handgun. The intruder fled. The intruder fled.
The intruder was not shot. The “victim” was not disarmed. Nothing was stolen. The victim was not raped or assaulted. The victim was not raped or assaulted. So lets recap the facts here for the anti-gun pablum pukers: (1) Assailant broke down the door of an apartment; (2) The woman, a lone occupant, was awoken by the break-in and retrieves a handgun; (3) Upon entering the woman’s bedroom, the assailant is confronted by the woman with the handgun; (4) The assailant flees.
Oh but I can hear the counter-arguments now. “There is nothing in the article that he was there to do any harm.” There was nothing to indicate he was not there to do anything but commit a crime. The very act of forcible entry is a crime. “perhaps he was confused or mentally unstable and needed help” Mentally confused and unstable people are often very capable of great harm and do commit crimes.
For all the liberal hand-wringing, supposition and pontification anti-gun liberals undertake, the bare raw fact is the outcome here was positive, save for the fact the criminal has yet to be caught. But don’t worry, liberals…the likelihood of him being caught increases when he commits a violent crime against another who will likely be unarmed and lacking the ability to defend ones’ self under the pretext of the anti-gun template.
To this woman I say, “Bravo!” and to the anti-gun liberals you can all pat yourselves on the back and take credit for the countless others who have suffered violent attacks from having bought into your bullshit anti-gun arguments.