The Left loves to drone about how if you own a gun, you are more likely to shoot someone you know, than a perfect stranger. There is a very good reason for that. Indiana man fatally shoots attacker who battered him and woman in 'fit of rage' - Washington Examiner
Mitchell had a history of legal trouble, including domestic violence, and Henry had been letting him stay in the residence he was renting.
So he was doing a "good deed" by letting this guy stay with him. It didn't work out in the end.
He went into a violent rage. Battered Blake Henry, and at least one woman in the residence, and shattered a glass case. In the end Mr. Henry was forced to defend himself, and others in the home.
When Mitchell turned violent, Henry took action and shot him, and he immediately called the police and commanded at least one person to “apply pressure” in an apparent attempt to save his attacker’s life, according to the report.
“After a thorough assessment of the events that occurred, it has been determined that Henry acted in self-defense, and in the interest of justice, no criminal charges will result from the investigation conducted in this matter,” according to the Washington County Prosecutor’s Office.
Click thru for some quotes, and more details.
You are more likely to shoot someone you know, because for one, that is a large group of people outside your family, and includes the creepy guy from the coffee shop, the ex who is morphing into a violent stalker, and more. The real reason you are more likely to shoot someone you know is because they are statistically more like to be a problem than the perfect stranger. That doesn't seem to make much impression on the Left. Don't clutter the issue with facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment Moderation is in place. Your comment will be visible as soon as I can get to it. Unless it is SPAM, and then it will never see the light of day.
Be Nice. Personal Attacks WILL be deleted. And I reserve the right to delete stuff that annoys me.