11 year old shoots at home invader

ALBANY, GA (WALB) - An 11 year old Albany boy fired a shot during a home invasion last night.

The boy shot a .357 magnum at a gunman who came into his house.

The 11-year old told Police about 7:15 Wednesday night that several juveniles kicked in the back door at his home in the 200 block of Tremont Avenue.

He said a boy with a pistol came into the house and pointed the gun at him.

That's when the 11-year old fired the .357. He said that scared the home invader off.


http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=11242417

Well, I know someone who is going to get a lot of cookies for dinner for the next couple of weeks.

otherwise, he'd be in custody right now.

His parents on the other hand might have some explaining to do.

How did an eleven year old get a .357 Magnum out of a locked gun cabinet, load it and fire it while all of this was happening? Where did the juveniles (other children?) get the gun they brandished?

Remind me never to stop by to borrow a cup of sugar.

Neal Boortz does this, consider your company.

so logic brings us to conclude that you are pleased by these shootings.

Or are you railing against the proliferation of guns in our nation?

Just in case you hadn't noticed, this sub-forum sees rather a lot of threads featuring news stories of criminal misuse of guns, kids killed by negligent discharges, etc., all presented with a tone of "see? if we didn't have so many guns, these things wouldn't happen."

Dave is very simply responding to that with news stories of guns being used for positive purposes. It should be perfectly obvious that guns can be used for good or ill, and the fact that they get used for ill doesn't mean they can't be used for good.

And, frankly, the forum rules are on Dave's side:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x95935
Dave's posts are about "the use of firearms in self-defense." The multitude of threads about incidents of criminal misuse etc. of firearms arguably do not belong in this forum, since Skinner does not mention such topics.

and gloat over stories of innocent people being killed with guns, never innocent people avoiding death/harm using a gun. That would be inappropriate and make it difficult to claim that guns never serve any purpose (and will only be used against you in any such situation).

You get a bonus if the innocent person killed was a gun owner/advocate, hence the soccer mom obsession.

You'd prefer a dead family, robbed house or another form of passive response.

And your own gun-grabber grave-dancing will never cancel out the fact that people (every day) use firearms to defend themselves and their loved ones.

how novel

gun while they are home alone.

Frankly, I wouldn't want to go anywhere near a home that arms pre-teens with "man stoppers". That's why you and I live in different places. You have it your way. I like it my way. I'll just be really pissed off if a bunch of gun lovers try to change the laws in my neighborhood. We don't want a bunch of goobers wearing guns to the local shops.

Nothing makes me more ill than pro-death stick people forcing their backwards ideas on states and communities that don't want them. I have no problem with people carrying guns in the sort of communities that want them. All their kids can tote guns where they live, even the babies. Just stay away from normal people.

The silence is deafening.

:toast:

I haven't much to say except gun lovers are all alike. You all have these imaginary rights and the rest of the world has to suffer for it. You are a minority and your day will eventually come. Start getting over it now.

It's kind of funny you accused someone of saying 11-year-olds should have ready access to loaded weapons when he didn't actually say it,

And when AtheistCrusader actually says that, not a peep.

Neither are gun owning Democrats.

the more they DON'T like them. I don't care who you vote for, there are more people in this country who don't own guns and don't want them in their neighborhoods than do.

You can interpret the 2nd amendment many different ways and the more you people keep forcing your "gun rights" on people who don't want them, the sooner you will lose them. Believe it.

Actually, only 43% / 39% want stricter gun laws..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/123596/In-U.S.-Record-Low-Support-Stricter-Gun-Laws.aspx

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/gun_control/50_oppose_stricter_gun_control_laws

I was allowed to go hunting anytime I felt like it. I had complete access to my gun and the ammo. The only ones who suffered were the cottontail rabbits. We ate them.

If the armed mob of juveniles who kicked down the back door had free reign to beat the 11 year old to death or simply shot him with the gun they had.

As it stands 1 shot was fired, nobody was hit and the incident ended with no fatalities or injuries, instead of a potentially gruesome homicide.

and another 9 issue permits occasionally, I'd say that people carry in a majority of the United States. Chances are, if you life in a shall-issue state, you walk by people carrying concealed and never even know it!

But ignorance is bliss, right?

It would have been a double-barrel 12 gauge. And I don't miss.

Some children are perfectly competent around potentially dangerous items with proper training. Like a pool, or a gas line to a furnace, or a set of stairs, or a bathtub, or leaving your car keys hanging on the wall.

But 11 year old kids are far more likely to accidentally shoot themselves, a friend, or a sibling, causing tragedy all around.

I am fully supportive of a personal handgun in the home for any noncriminal, sane, sober person who wants one, but only if the kids cannot access it whatsoever.

Total up all the numbers of children that grew up with a loaded firearm in the household for personal protection, and the kids who killed themselves or a sibling/friend, and compare.

Problem is, you cannot, because the statistics don't exist. There is no way to gather the data. Your claim is spurious. I know 6 different households with 'go to' guns at the ready, and the children know full well where they are. No deaths across two generations.

'Far more likely' is bullshit.

And me and my sibling managed to get through childhood without blowing each others head off.

You're right, "far more likely" is a complete crock of shit. Millions of Americans grew up in gun-owning household with no problems.

How often have you heard stories of children using a gun in some life saving way?

How often have you heard of a tragic accidental shooting done by a child?

Children are very curious. It is only natural they would want to handle a loaded gun. Loaded guns need to be kept away from children (outside of an instructional event or guided hunting experience).

One monstrous generational difference was that when I was growing up a kid who wasn't responsible enough to be trusted with a pocket knife by 6 or 7, a .22 for hunting rabbits and driving the tractor by 10, and his first real deer rifle by 12 or 14 was considered a failure by his parents and his peers.

That in 1954 I was able to get on a Greyhound bus with a rifle, by myself, at age 11, to go hunting with my uncle who lived in Canada just shows how much things have changed. Our modern society has abysmally low expectations of its kids.

is a bit disturbing on one hand...on the other millions of households have relatively unsecured firearms in them with children this age in the house. Are some of the parents idiots? yes Your kids, assuming there are no real guns in their life, likely would be curious. Most kids who grow up in homes with guns are made fully aware of their inherent danger, their purpose, their proper use, and first of all, proper gun safety.

It always "seems" to people who have not been brought up around them, or have had bad experiences that kids will be curious and get into the guns when mom or dad are away. Kids who are brought up in homes withe guns are not curious, they already know and respect the gun rules. My boys are grown now but both would have reacted in a similar fashion as this kid did under the same circumstances. They would have most likely had a shotgun. Obviously if one of my kids had mental problems which would make a gun more dangerous, I would have moved everyone to my inlaws house..thankfully not the case..both are now very responsible young adults.

Bottom line, to kids who grow up in homes with guns, guns are no more a curiosity than say, a swimming pool, an ATV or snow mobile, the poisons under the sink, a bike, or a car, all kill more kids annually, accidentally, than guns accidentally do.

102 unintentional firearms deaths in 2006
138 bicycle
326 poisonings
934 drown
4,288 motor vehicle related

CDC
http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html

the relatively low frequency with which you hear positive firearm uses versus negative firearm uses would have more to do with bias in the media than actual, real-world numbers.

Is that a fact or is that your opinion?

I hope his family and him are well tonight.

:toast:

You were pretending a concern that the bullet may have injured someone. It didn't.

did he follow all the rules so highly touted here by law-abiding, responsible gun owners? like knowing what's behind your target, etc.?

i wasn't pretending anything. i asked a question.

Why would it have been morally superiour for him to have let the intruder do whatever harm that he wanted to do? He may have killed the boy. But from your view, at least the boy would not have touched and eeeeevvvviiiilllll gun.

When I was 11 I had my own gun. It was a .410 shotgun. I still have that gun, over 50 years later.

Would you be happier if the kid could not access a gun?

BTW - When my daughter was 11 I taught her how to shoot a .357. And she knew that it was kept loaded and where it was.

i have asked questions.

who gives a flying fat fiddler's fuck if you shot a gun at 11, or your daughter shot a gun at 11?

Obviously, it was to find something wrong with the story. IOW - to complain.

He should not have missed the BG's!

more range time..