According to Sheriff Bobby Grubbs, the gunman was shot by an armed citizen and responding Early Police Sgt. Steven Means who was being fired upon by the gunman Charles Conner of Early. Grubbs stated that the gunman and the victims had a verbal confrontation about the dogs, and that Conner shot the male victim, then the dogs, and turned the gun on the male victim’s common law wife with a .9mm handgun.
I am well aware that one incident really doesn’t demonstrate anything overall, but I just thought it remarkable that pretty much every element of this story flies in the face of what gun control advocates would have us believe.
First, after the initial killings, the bad guy used an old-school .30-30 lever gun to hold the responding cop at bay…a gun that they anti’s assure us (for now) is not one they want to ban. The Police Officer was using an AR-15 “assault weapon”…hey, I though those were only good for “spraying bullets” and wantonly killing everyone around.
The cop has having no luck and, according to the citizen who helped out, was in danger of being killed by the criminal with a gun designed over a century and a half ago, regardless of the cop being armed with a bullet hose death machine.
Finally, the cop was saved by a lawfully armed citizen who recognized the danger and provided armed assistance.
Pretty much every element that makes the anti’s uncomfortable is present in the story. Somehow I doubt that you’ll see them doing much blood dancing over this incident.
BTW: The thing that prompted me to research this further was the interview that David Hardy linked to, which included the citizen saying that the criminal was some 165 yards away when he shot him in the thigh. I was curious as to what type of firearm the citizen used. I eventually found the article quoted and linked above, which revealed that the citizen employed a .357 magnum handgun in his defense of the Police Officer.
Now that’s some shootin’ right there.
Kudos to the citizen in this story. I think it’s important for us to remember that the Police don’t hold powers over and above, or independent of the citizenry. They are, rather, entrusted to exercise powers granted to them by that citizenry, as a more efficient and effective means to fulfill the responsibilities that we, as a society, share.