Woman shoots intruder while on the phone with 911
 

I thought this would be a nice spark for debate, since the opinions are apparently devided on;

A. Calling the police and waiting for them to show up.

or

B. Shooting the mofo yourself, he had it coming.

On Dutch newssites this story is posted on, people are calling public outrage about the fact this woman is not waiting for the police to arive, and took matters into her own hands. How naive do you want to be, waiting for a cop who is on the other side of town while you have a perfectly good shotgun in your hands? Yet people still religiously claim that calling the police is the only right thing to do and no matter what, you should never be your own judge.

It made me wonder how people around here would go about dealing with this?

The woman did the right thing. This is one of those rare cases where a gun that is owned for home protection was actually used for home protection. I can find no fault with her actions.

I approve of the woman's actions for the same reason as OANST. The fucker deserved what he got.

Under the conditions she was in it would have been foolish to expect anything more from her.

It was still a stupid thing for her to do.

Really? I disagree. A crazed man was screaming obscenities at her, and then threw her patio table through her glass door so that he could get in. You think shooting him was stupid? I would have shot him twice. Just to make sure.

She had a gun and therefore the advantage, the logical thing to do would have been to either disintergrate his kneecaps or wait til the last possible moment before firing. There's acres more of things she could have done, including what was suggested to her by the operator.

But then again, she's only human like the rest of us and having an ideal position to stand on which we can dispose our tactical wisdom with does no good to a woman who's scared out of her life with a weapon that's as much a danger to herself as to others.

I wouldn't say she did the right thing, but she certainly didn't do the wrong thing.

She was standing at a place where she had a clear shot at him the entire time. He could see that she was on the phone, and was holding a large weapon. He was not deterred. She had no way of knowing if he was armed, or if injuring this clearly mentally unstable man would actually stop him. Once you fire a shotgun you then have to break it open, remove the shells, put in new ones, and close it up. She really only had one chance to stop him. What she did was right. It was fair. She waited until the last possible second.

Eh, it's exactly the same as I would have done in that situation.

Also, locking yourself into a small room brings a whole slew of other dangers. If he could have gotten her to fire the weapon before he broke through the door, she would have been at his mercy. I'd say that she acted clear mindedly, and intelligently.

Don't get me wrong. I believe in gun control. This is a rare occasion where guns made a difference for the better. It doesn't outweigh the massive amount of bad that they do, though.

who thinks like that in that sort of situation? unless you're trained in such instances, you would just target the largest piece of body mass you could see on the intruder and fire. she had the bravery not to fire before he entered, she seemed to only pull that trigger at the last moment.

and like OANST said, running could cause you to panic, even if its to temporary safety like the room suggested. even then if the police didn't arrive by the time he managed to break into the room, she would be cornered. each situation is different from others, so sometimes these protocols the operators on the phone tell the victim to do aren't always the best, as they are limited to their advantage.

I answer B) She did the right thing by protecting her self.

Running into a room and locking the door can harbor you plenty of safety and time, if the room is big enough, has a window and the door strong enough. Unfortunatly, when telling people to lock themselves up they immediatly run into the bathroom which is small, has no alternative escape and, from what I've seen in American houses, doors aren't exactly strong either. Even if it is, though, lighting a fire in front of the door would render your pretty dead.

I'm thinking that if you run into a room and train your gun on the door then you have much less chance to miss when they burst in.

She did exactly what i would expect and encourage anyone else to do in this situation.

You also lose sight of your attacker, which induces even more panic and fear. Personally I'd prefer to keep a clear line of sight on anyone attempting to murder or hurt me, if only to know what he/she is up to.

You no longer hear footsteps or bashing. Does that mean he's gone, or waiting for you outside the door? That sort of stuff.

I suppose the end result of my line of argument is that somone with a gun should know how to use it better. As I've stated before, I don't blame her at all for what she did and I'd do the same in her situation.

But that isn't the only scenario that could play out. Keep in mind that when locked into a small room, you no longer have any idea what this person is doing. This will raise your anxiety level, making you more likely to discharge the weapon at the wrong moment, not hitting your target, and thus allowing this man the upper hand. It would have been stupid of this woman to allow a situation with so many variables to take place, when she was so clearly in charge of the situation to begin with.

And it seems to me that she handled the gun very well. One shot kill, and all.

Like Oanst said, he saw that she was armed and calling the police. He had every reason to give up if he valed his life. I would have aimed for the knee, and she probably did too. But with that kind of anxiety, anything's possible. Plus, if he had a gun, he could have shot her even if he was immobilized. It's also clear she wanted anything but to fatally injure him. It's just an unfortunate incident, but at least the innocent didn't have to be the ones to die this time. I know I probably would have shit myself if I were in her position.

Did he actually die?

Oh, yeah. He died.

So, did the guy have a history of this kind of thing or was it his first time?

How do you know?

If you feel that your life may be in danger and you'd be overpowered, but you have a weapon, by all means, use the damn thing.

The problem is that in these situations, there's rarely enough time for someone to guage whether or not defense through weaponry is necessary. It's also important to note that most people's aim isn't very good. I'd much rather disable an attacker than kill them, but I'm lousy with a gun.

Most of the people who arm themselves are unfortunately paranoid motherfuckers who would shoot someone for lifting a glass of water. Those are the last people who should be carrying a weapon.

If I was in such a situation, I would have probrably come to the same solution, but I'd be very hesitant, and end up waiting til the last few seconds.

I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do though...

Sure it is. And I wouldn't have waited until the last possible second. And I wouldn't have felt bad about it. Not even a little bit.

So a burglar breaks into your home, what do you do kill him? I'm someone who is against guns and is all for gun control. I don't think anyone who tries pinching your TV deserves death.

If this happened in my country that woman would most certainly be prosecuted. She would have to prove that she killed the man because her life was in danger, not television set. While I do honestly think Australia’s gun laws are over the top, I think it should be illegal to whip out a shotgun and end someone's life for trying to steal something.

Have you listened to the call? It's pretty obvious he wants more than a TV set.

What makes you think he was trying to steal something?

If I had the sense at the time to try to shoot his knees out or something, I would've, but I'm not contesting that she did the right thing.

You know what I'll do if it ever happens to me? I'm going to pass a form through the mail slot asking them if they have any history of violent crimes, if they just want some of my stuff, and if they intend to harm anyone inside the home. Once I get the form back, I will make my decision from there.

Even if he just wants my TV set, it's MY fucking TV. Where does he get the guts to think he can mess with my stuff? I would have no problem shooting a fucker like that, the world would be better off without him anyway. By shooting him, I just saved the state tons of money.

NO I WONT I'LL HIDE BEHIND THE DOOR AND STAB THEM IN THE FUCKING THROAT WHILE I SCREAM DIE COCKSUCKER DIE DIE DIE.

Ask them to come back in six to eight weeks to allow for processing.

i would have laffed it she shot the doorknob and the doorknob blwew up in three halfs and one it hit and two hit him and then she died

im hardcore an i laugh at werd stuff soz

Here they call him a burglary suspect.

I'm glad that News9.com was there to wrap this thing up for us. They must have come to this conclusion from the fact that he was screaming obscenities, and throwing tables through doors. That's what most burglars do. I should have seen it earlier.


Edit: If only Bilbo had taken this strategy. Smaug would have been all "Oh, shit. Let me hide in the bathroom until he leaves. Then I'll have a good cry".

If only Smaug had had a shotgun, the book would've been so much better.

He probably just wanted to sex her up.

I don't know how the laws are there, but here, if you're on my property and weren't invited AND proving to be a threat? Bye bye.

Or you could have California law. If the guy had lived, he would have sued. And he probably would have won.

Same here as well. Guy in my neighborhood shot a burglar and lost in court. TOTAL BULLSHIT.

Just goes to show. If your going to shoot someone, make sure they're dead.
honastly, that lady did the best thing possible. But i got to say it wasn't the best idea shooting while on the phone with the police.