Cleve. homeowner shoots and kills intruder

[JDE101]

Typical of the flaming liberal Cleveland media! And Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton, and all the other cities in Ohio.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[oneshot]

So, what if he concealed himself and 'waited' for the dirtbag to break in...then shot him?

I hope it was 2-CoM and 1H.

Society now has one less scumbag wandering the streets looking for crimes to commit.

Agreed. The property owner has the right to "occcupy" and protect his investmants just as anyone else has. To think otherwise would also imply NO one has the right to defend himself in the home. This should not be confused with setting a boobie-trap for intruders.

^I'm in this camp^^^^^^^^^^^^


Who gives a rats pituty what spin some morons want to put on it.

[SmokinFool]

Not just irresponsible, horribly written too. I think little Blake needs to go back to journalism school, learn to write and pay more attention to the part on ethics as well.

Agreed, although stories such as this are happening with such frequency, that I'm actually a bit surprised whenever there is real, factual, unbiased coverage of any story involving guns/gun owners/self defense. For some reason, it seems almost impossible for "reporters" (and I use that term loosely) to keep their personal opinions out of their coverage these days. What now passes for hard news is probably making the "ancient ones" of journalism turn over in their graves.

As for the actual facts in this story (at least as we know them) it appears to be a case of a homeowner protecting his property and perhaps his own safety. Now, I admittedly do not know the laws in Ohio, but I would think that this is a perfectly legal thing to do.

[wsquared]

I hardly equate "sleeping on the couch" with "lying in wait for villains". I'd also point out that even the truly awful grammar and poor wordsmithing of the reporter still found time to mention that the homeowner "got his gun". Not "drew his gun". Not "pointed the AR-15 loaded with 60 rounds of tacticool zombie ammunition".

Regardless of whether the owner of the home happens to live there full time, he was woken from a sleep while in a property he owns, got his legally owned firearm, and when he saw an immediate threat to his life in the form of someone who was both armed with a lethal weapon and engaged in a criminal acticity, and he responded with lethal force. I see absolutely no issue with his actions.

[bgusty]

I always find it so odd when people make a big deal out of situations like this. Burglar with a deadly weapon enters a home and gets shot by the owner. One less criminal walking around. I am guessing he won't have any more vandals anytime soon.

[jblives2ride]

the big deal is, that poor biased journalism is seen by thousands of readers and puts a big damper on 2nd ammendment rights... they see/read that the gun owner is at fault not the criminal