911 tells teen mom to ‘do what you have to’ to protect baby.

[no1_vern]

Teen mom kills intruder after 911 tells her to ‘do what you have to’ | The Raw Story

An 18-year-old Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder on New Year’s Eve after a 911 dispatcher told her to “do what you have to do to protect your baby.”

-snip-

"I can’t tell you that you can do that, but you do what you have to do to protect your baby,” the dispatcher said.

Shortly after that conversation, McKinley used the one of the weapons to kill Justin Martin after he kicked in the door. A second man, Dustin Stewart, later turned himself in to police.

“You’re allowed to shoot an unauthorized person that is in your home,” Blanchard police Det. Dan Huff said. “The law provides you the remedy, and sanctions the use of deadly force.”

One hates to think of what might have happened if she had been unarmed.

[Creatures]

uhm, owning two guns but unable to wound instead of killing?

Creatures

[Epidemic]

Creatures,

I think wounding is an option, but if you or loved ones lives are in danger you may not want to play around with a trick shot.

I believe self defense classes teach to shoot center mass with a double tap, not to shoot knives out of hands or chandeliers onto criminal to incapacitate them.

This is not the movies.

I know you are not a big defender of a persons right to defend themselves you would have them wait and hope the victims are not too badly wounded before the police arrive. I happen to believe that the violent antagonist knows that they give up their rights when assaulting the protagonist.

The criminal knows they are in the wrong, they choose to physically impose their will on others and hope that the victims will not prevail. in this case thanks to Colt the Teen aged female was able to render the criminals calculation useless.







Creatures,

let me ask you this? Two men are trying to kick down your the door of a woman with a knife in hand, do you think they are delivering cookies?

What are the likely outcomes of her not having been armed or having not used the guns?

[mad1]

uhm, owning two guns but unable to wound instead of killing?

Creatures

Joey Dillon Gunslinger Amazing Trick Shot - YouTube

[Steve R Jones]

Intruders have feeling too.... He could have only been wounded so he could then become a burden on Society via the high cost of PRISON.

[Epidemic]

More than likely they were a burden on society already. Whether it is a burden on doing harm to people or the burden of securing, and feeding they are a burden on humanity..

[Creatures]

Epidemic I've been trained to first fire a warning shot (when there is time), then extremities then lower torso (bladder).
I don't know what they train you over there but shot to kill is the last option and only when your life is in danger. Nothing life threatening happened thus far just a guy entering a room, IMO more than enough time to warn them BEFORE they enter the room that you are armed. Chances are very low that they will throw a grenade throw the door OR shoot through the door randomly.

warning shot probably would have driven them off

Creatures

[Max_Confusion]

One less scumbag on the planet. Screw a warning shot, their warning was a couch barricading the door and 21 minutes of attempting forced entry(time this little gal spent on the phone with 911), while waiting for the police.

[Chuckiechan]

In self defense it's "One shot in the center of mass, a second shot if he doesn't immediately retreat or fall."

The line between self defense and manslaughter varies with the political climate in a given area. You can't be seen to "want him dead" - that goes to "intent".

The best "California defense" - Get a lawyer and say no more than "I shot once to the center of mass. He fell. I called 911. I didn't know if he was dead or alive."

NOTE: A warning shot can be considered "Negligent discharge of a firearm" unless you can prove you were "warning off bodily harm".

[Epidemic]

warning shot probably would have driven them off

Creatures

To the next house where they are unarmed?

[sharder8]

Epidemic I've been trained to first fire a warning shot (when there is time), then extremities then lower torso (bladder).
I don't know what they train you over there but shot to kill is the last option and only when your life is in danger. Nothing life threatening happened thus far just a guy entering a room, IMO more than enough time to warn them BEFORE they enter the room that you are armed. Chances are very low that they will throw a grenade throw the door OR shoot through the door randomly.

warning shot probably would have driven them off

Creatures

You negated your own argument Creatures . . .

He was armed, he had a large hunting knife!

Single, young, female, mother w/ baby . . . big guy comes busting through the door after trying to get in for 20 minutes . . . what are you thinking? That he wanted to wish her a "Happy New Year"? Use the brain God gave you and the intelligence your teachers supposedly furnished you with Creatures!


Harder

[Creatures]

doesn't matter the person with a gun is the better armed person in this situation, the guy with the knife was NOT charging her but just came through the door thus there is no imminent threat of death.

and don't tell me she was standing right at the door OR not in cover. she had the upper hand, you were in the army, charging a house equals at least 1 casualty when someone is pointing a gun at the door (ignoring situations with flash bangs etc.)

they told here to do anything which probably caused her to shot to kill, although I'd prefer to punish him with prison time than a good way out of his miserable life.

Creatures

[Epidemic]

doesn't matter the person with a gun is the better armed person in this situation, the guy with the knife was NOT charging her but just came through the door thus there is no imminent threat of death.

and don't tell me she was standing right at the door OR not in cover. she had the upper hand, you were in the army, charging a house equals at least 1 casualty when someone is pointing a gun at the door (ignoring situations with flash bangs etc.)

they told here to do anything which probably caused her to shot to kill, although I'd prefer to punish him with prison time than a good way out of his miserable life.

Creatures

had she fired a warning shot would he just have waited till she walked to her car tomorrow? This person meant to do harm to another person. He forfeit his rights as a human being when he violently tried to break into a house and attack a woman.

I might have been inclined to warn him but that is the cowards way out. You just push your problem off to the next person or a later date when you are not able to defend yourself.

[sharder8]

doesn't matter the person with a gun is the better armed person in this situation, the guy with the knife was NOT charging her but just came through the door thus there is no imminent threat of death.

and don't tell me she was standing right at the door OR not in cover. she had the upper hand, you were in the army, charging a house equals at least 1 casualty when someone is pointing a gun at the door (ignoring situations with flash bangs etc.)

they told here to do anything which probably caused her to shot to kill, although I'd prefer to punish him with prison time than a good way out of his miserable life.

Creatures

Let's set things straight about the Army . . . we are trained to shoot to kill! If you don't kill him first . . . he kills you! Only time we intentionally shoot to wound, is if we are looking to take a prisoner for interrogation. Sorry Creatures, but I don't think you were taught to give a warning shot first, then shoot for a leg, then shoot for the lower abdomen, then shoot to kill. If that was the case, you'd be dead right after the warning shot! Our soldiers are worth too much money to waste their lives as you described . . . maybe Swiss soldiers aren't worth the money, but ours are.

Simple rule of self defense . . . kill them before they kill you!


Harder

[SoloCamo]

doesn't matter the person with a gun is the better armed person in this situation, the guy with the knife was NOT charging her but just came through the door thus there is no imminent threat of death.

Creatures

Honestly? Why wait till there is an imminent threat of death?

They are not there for a party, a weapon was involved, end it. Why in hell would anyone sane wait until there life was even further at risk before taking the person out? Just doesn't make sense. Nature teaches us very essential things, and as it's been said many times, only the strongest survivor.

I know you are intelligent enough to assume that there is threat of death when someone has broken into the privacy of your home. Weapon or no weapon, they are not there to do good.

I value my life over some scumbag, and I sure as hell don't want to have him get three warm meals a day on my taxes.

The others above said it better.

[mad1]

doesn't matter the person with a gun is the better armed person in this situation, the guy with the knife was NOT charging her but just came through the door thus there is no imminent threat of death.

and don't tell me she was standing right at the door OR not in cover. she had the upper hand, you were in the army, charging a house equals at least 1 casualty when someone is pointing a gun at the door (ignoring situations with flash bangs etc.)

they told here to do anything which probably caused her to shot to kill, although I'd prefer to punish him with prison time than a good way out of his miserable life.

Creatures

“You’re allowed to shoot an unauthorized person that is in your home,” Blanchard police Det. Dan Huff said. “The law provides you the remedy, and sanctions the use of deadly force.”

[Max_Confusion]

The scumbag made several bad choices, getting involved with drugs, stealing to support a habit/sale of drugs, and breaking into an armed citizens home with a weapon. A sure Darwin winner if there ever was one. It's time you hopey,feeley changey types get it through your thick skulls that vermin are meant to be eradicated, and this vermin has been eradicated.

[sharder8]

The scumbag made several bad choices, getting involved with drugs, stealing to support a habit/sale of drugs, and breaking into an armed citizens home with a weapon. A sure Darwin winner if there ever was one. It's time you hopey,feeley changey types get it through your thick skulls that vermin are meant to be eradicated, and this vermin has been eradicated.

The Old Confused One doesn't sound very confused on this one . . .




Harder

[Epidemic]

Creatures,

I don't understand your fascination with causing a catastrophic injury to someone instead of killing them

Seriously though, you are taught to injure in a military confrontain rather than kill?

While participating in combat in Quang Ngai Province on May 8, 1970, he was mortally wounded in the action for which he received the Medal of Honor. When his platoon was under heavy attack from a numerically superior enemy, Keith was seriously wounded. Despite his wounds, he advanced on the enemy with machine gun fire, killing 3 of the enemy advancing on the command post and dispersing the others. He was severely wounded by a grenade during this charge. In spite of his wounds and loss of blood, he charged a group of 25 attackers, causing them to retreat for cover. He was mortally wounded by enemy fire. His actions contributed significantly to his platoon's success in routing the enemy

you should probably ask the guys Miguel was fighting if they should have shot to kill

he saw a Japanese within the perimeter and, seizing a nearby rifle, killed him. A few minutes later, while lying on a litter, he discovered an enemy group moving up behind the platoon's lines. Despite his severe wound, he sat up, delivered heavy rifle fire against the group and forced them to withdraw. Pfc. Atkins' superb bravery and his fearless determination to hold his post against the main force of repeated enemy attacks, even though painfully wounded, were major factors in enabling his comrades to maintain their lines against a numerically superior enemy force.

I think there are a couple of dead Japanese soldiers who would disagree with shooting to wound as well. Your telling me they taught you to wound instead of kill in the Swiss Army? I am gonna have to say you must not have been listening that day to what was said, or perhaps you misunderstood the context. (otherwise you military is just being poorly trained)

Perhaps it was shooting to wound in trench warfare situation where you want them to waste time taking care of the injured

[Taxmancometh]

I fell sorry for the 18-year-old. First she losses her husband on Christmas day and the she has to make the decision to shot an armed assailant. Killing somebody is no joke and it will live with you for the rest of your life. I firmly believe in shoot to kill. You don't shoot to wound and how can you with a shotgun! It's just plain old nature's instinct.

RIP you pile of shit.