Chicago Homeowner Shoots Alleged Intruder During South Side Break-In

Armed Defender Ends Attack on the Road, iStock-1354934183

A Chicago homeowner with a valid concealed carry license defended his property early Saturday morning after confronting a man allegedly breaking into his garage on the city’s South Side.

According to the Chicago Police Department, the incident occurred around 2:39 a.m. on March 7, 2026, in the 5100 block of South Loomis Boulevard. Police say a 59-year-old man was attempting to break into a residential garage when the homeowner confronted him.

Authorities reported that the homeowner, who holds a valid Illinois Concealed Carry License (CCL), drew a firearm and fired at the suspected intruder. The suspect was struck in the right calf and transported to the University of Chicago Medical Center, where he was listed in good condition.

As of the latest reports, charges against the suspect were pending, and detectives from CPD’s Area One unit are investigating the incident.

The homeowner has not been publicly identified, and police have not indicated that he faces any charges.

The incident highlights a reality that is increasingly visible even in cities with strict firearms regulations: law-abiding citizens use firearms to stop violent crimes. While incidents like this one rarely generate national headlines, research suggests defensive gun use occurs far more frequently than many Americans realize.

Studies examining crime victimization surveys and national self-defense data have produced a wide range of estimates. Some analyses of federal crime surveys estimate around 80,000 defensive gun uses per year during crimes such as assaults, robberies, and burglaries, while other national surveys have estimated millions of defensive gun uses annually.

Research cited by the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) also notes that defensive gun use often receives little media attention, even though armed citizens sometimes stop crimes before police arrive.

Data compiled by the Crime Prevention Research Center shows that concealed carry permit holders commit firearms-related violations at extremely low rates compared to the general population.

One CPRC analysis found that permit holders are convicted of firearm violations at about 1/12 the rate of police officers and roughly 1/240th the rate of the general public.

The South Side shooting also comes in the context of persistent violent crime in Chicago.

For many residents, the presence of violent crime and the reality that police response times can vary has led to a growing number of Illinois residents seeking concealed carry licenses since the state began issuing them in 2014.

The incident on South Loomis Boulevard is a clear example of a defensive gun use: a homeowner confronted an alleged intruder in the middle of the night and used a legally possessed firearm to stop the crime.

National research suggests such incidents occur far more frequently than most media coverage would indicate. Depending on the methodology used, defensive gun use estimates range from tens of thousands to potentially millions of incidents each year in the United States.

At the same time, data from the Crime Prevention Research Center indicates that gun owners involved in these situations are overwhelmingly law-abiding citizens who commit firearm offenses at extremely low rates.

For many Americans, particularly those living in high-crime areas, the ability to legally carry a firearm is seen as a practical means of self-defense. In the early-morning confrontation on Chicago’s South Side, that preparation may have prevented a garage burglary from becoming something far worse.

---

from https://ift.tt/GNf0HQD
via IFTTT

Gonzales Drops Out, Herrera Republican Nominee in Texas District 23

An I Voted sticker on an IWI X95 bullpup carbine in 5.56mm with an Elcan SpectreDR 1.5-6x optic on top. IMG Jim Grant

In Texas District 23 for the House of Representatives, Tony Gonzales has dropped out of the race at the request of House Republican leaders. House Speaker Mike Johnson and other Republican leaders called on Tony Gonzales to step aside from his current campaign.

In a joint statement, House Speaker Mike Johnson, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, Majority Whip Tom Emmer, and Conference Chair Lisa McClain said they have urged Gonzales to step aside from the race while the investigation proceeds.

The investigation into ethics complaints against Representative Gonzales began after Brandon Herrera received 43.3% of the vote in the Republican primary election, while Gonzales received 41.7%. Then Gonzalez essentially confirmed an affair with a staffer who later committed suicide, on the Joe Pags Show. The allegations of the affair had mired Gonzales’ campaign in controversy.  On March 5, 2026, Gonzales issued a statement on X, saying he would not seek re-election. From X.com:

After deep reflection and with the support of my loving family, I have decided not to seek re-election while serving out the rest of this Congress with the same commitment I’ve always had to my district. Through the rest of my term, I will continue fighting for my constituents, for whom I am eternally grateful.

Brandon Herrera posted on X, thanking Tony Gonzales for dropping out of the race. From X.com:

 I appreciate Tony Gonzales for making the appropriate decision.

I appreciate Tony Gonzales for making the appropriate decision.

I look forward to being the voice of TX23 that our district deserves. From the border, to oil theft, water rights, data centers, and many other issues.

It’s an honor to be chosen and together we will make Texas… https://t.co/oJMXtmwHSq

— Brandon Herrera (@TheAKGuy) March 6, 2026

Texas District 23 covers a large chunk of west Texas. It is one of the largest congressional districts in the United States. It is a mostly rural district, running up to the edge of El Paso in the west, Odessa in the east, and San Antonio in the southeast.

Texas congressional district 23 as of 2026

In 2024, the district voted Republican, 180,720 votes to 109,373 for Democrats. Because Herrera will not have to campaign in a runoff primary, he can conserve his resources to campaign against the Democratic challenger.

The odds have shifted strongly in favor of Herrera becoming the next congressional representative from Texas District 23.

With Gonzales dropping out of the race, it is likely the Democratic Party will allocate significant funding to flip the seat. It is difficult to do in a district that has a strong conservative majority.

Brandon Herrera has shown he can run a good primary campaign. Now he has to run a campaign in the general election. He has a good start in funding the campaign. The actions of Speaker Johnson and the leadership make it likely that he will have an endorsement from President Trump and obtain some campaign funds from the Republican Party.

The Democratic opposition has tried to paint Herrera as a fringe candidate. Such attacks are not as effective as they once were because the media landscape is far more fractured and partisan than it used to be. In the past, Progressive candidates, both Republican and Democratic, could rely on the old, dominant progressive media to set the narrative and decide what constituted a scandal and what did not.

Apparently, it needs to be said again. People in the Jewish world have messaged me and asked me about my relationship with @TheAKGuy.

Here is why I support and continue to defend him.

I have known Brandon for nearly nine years. In those nine years, he has:

1. Wrote me a blurb…

— Yehuda Remer (@ThePewPewJew) March 8, 2026

“Scandals” for conservatives had a low threshold. Scandals for progressives tended to be swept under the rug. That dynamic is no longer dominant.

---

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

---

from https://ift.tt/EPF769p
via IFTTT

West Virginia Senate President Kills Machine Gun Bill

West Virginia Senate President Kills Machine Gun Bill, iStock-525735226

In a move that has triggered debate among gun rights advocates and lawmakers, West Virginia Senate Bill 1071, commonly referred to as the “Machine Gun Bill,” will not proceed in the current legislative session. Senate President Randy Smith (R-Preston) announced his decision to block the bill, citing what he calls significant legal and drafting issues rather than any opposition to Second Amendment rights.

The bill, introduced late in the session, aimed to expand access to fully automatic machine guns for eligible West Virginia residents. Specifically, it advocated creating the Office of Public Defense within the West Virginia State Police, which would oversee the purchase, sale, and distribution of machine guns to individuals for state defense purposes. Supporters contend the bill aligns with Second Amendment protections, bolsters personal and community security, while complying with federal background check requirements.

SB 1071 initially cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, March 2, following a contentious meeting that ended in confusion. Committee Chairman Tom Willis called for a recess, and after discussions, the bill appeared to advance with strong support. However, it never reached the full Senate floor or the Finance Committee, stalling ahead of the crossover day deadline on Wednesday, March 4, the point by which bills must pass their originating chamber to remain viable.

Smith explained his rationale in statements released today, describing the legislation as “poorly drafted” and submitted on the final day for Senate bills. He consulted with multiple attorneys, members of West Virginia’s National Rifle Association, and the West Virginia Citizens Defense League (WVCDL), all of whom reportedly advised that the bill would likely fail in the House of Delegates and invite court challenges. “This bill, as it was submitted to us, would be unable to pass the House of Delegates and would face numerous judicial challenges to its implementation upon passage,” Smith stated.

Speaking to multiple senators, WVCDL lobbyist Art Thomm implied that the NRA does not support the bill. Ammoland News spoke to NRA-ILA President John Commerford, who denied that the NRA had anything to do with killing the bill. In fact, Commerford stated that the NRA is looking forward to working with the sponsor of the bill to improve it for next year.

Mr. Commerford also confirmed to AmmoLand News that Thomm does not work for the NRA and hasn’t worked for the gun rights organizations for a few years. The NRA has a new West Virginia State Director starting Monday. The lawmakers AmmoLand News spoke to said they believed the NRA was opposed to the bill’s passage.

Critics of the decision, including bill sponsor Sen. Chris Rose (R-Monongalia) and Sen. Laura Chapman (R-Ohio), voiced frustration over the lack of transparency. Rose noted that reviving the bill would require suspending constitutional rules and obtaining a two-thirds majority, a hurdle he deemed unlikely at this stage. “Traditionally speaking, this bill would be dead at this time,” Rose said. Chapman reiterated these sentiments, calling the process opaque: “The bill is dead, and it was killed without transparency and without consensus, despite the fact that this bill had overwhelming support by this body.”

Gun Owners of America (GOA) has mobilized supporters to pressure Smith for a floor vote. In an urgent call to action, GOA claimed the bill “mysteriously disappeared” despite passing committee and urged constituents to contact the Senate President, pointing out that 93% of West Virginia gun owners reportedly support such measures. “We have an extremely small window to get this done,” GOA stated.

The bill’s failure emphasizes continuing tensions in West Virginia’s Republican-dominated legislature over gun rights legislation. While the state has some of the most permissive gun laws in the nation, including permitless carry, efforts to challenge federal restrictions on machine guns, which have been tightly regulated since the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) and further restricted by the 1986 Hughes Amendment, commonly experience scrutiny for possible conflicts with national law. During committee discussions, concerns were raised that the bill may unintentionally expose residents or state police to federal violations, with West Virginia Troopers Association President Lonnie Faircloth voicing concerns about transferring machine guns to private citizens.

Opposition within the committee was limited but notable. Sen. Ryan Weld (R-Brooke) voted against the bill, and Sen. Joey Garcia (D-Marion) questioned its adherence to federal regulations. Despite this, the measure had obtained considerable backing from gun rights groups and some lawmakers who viewed it as a stand against supposed federal overreach.

As the legislative session winds down, the fate of SB 1071 acts as a reminder of the procedural and statutory hurdles even popular ideas can face. Smith reasserted his commitment to Second Amendment issues, suggesting that a better-drafted version could be considered in future sessions. For now, however, West Virginians seeking machine guns have to navigate the existing National Firearms Act licensing process, which remains stringent and costly.

This change has fueled discussions on social media platforms such as X, where users and news outlets have shared updates on the bill’s demise. Gun rights advocates continue to rally, but with the session’s end approaching, the window for revival appears to be closing fast unless a super majority of the Senate votes to suspend the rules.

West Virginia Introduces Bill to Repeal the State’s Machine Gun Ban

Neutering the National Firearms Act — What Gun Owners Need to Know About the “One Big Beautiful Bill” ~ VIDEO

---

About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

---

from https://ift.tt/M3yXWzK
via IFTTT

Senator Mike Lee Introduces Nationwide Constitutional Carry to Eliminate Permit Requirements

Senator Mike Lee Introduces Nationwide Constitutional Carry to Eliminate Permit Requirements, iStock-1810940319

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has launched a campaign to repeal carry permit requirements across the United States, introducing legislation that would establish nationwide Constitutional Carry and eliminate the patchwork of state laws that gun rights advocates argue trap law-abiding Americans in a maze of conflicting regulations.

The National Constitutional Carry Act, first obtained by Fox News Digital, represents the most ambitious federal effort yet to guarantee that Americans can carry firearms in public without obtaining permission from government officials. Lee announced the bill on social media with characteristic directness.

“Today I’m introducing the National Constitutional Carry Act in the U.S. Senate,” Lee wrote on X. “Americans have the right to keep and bear arms without asking for permission from hostile politicians or getting jailed for crossing the wrong state line. Stay strapped.”

Today I’m introducing the National Constitutional Carry Act in the U.S. Senate.

Americans have the right to keep and bear arms without asking for permission from hostile politicians or getting jailed for crossing the wrong state line.

Stay strapped. @GunOwners @gunrights pic.twitter.com/Y9DiqLpo5g

— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) March 5, 2026

The legislation would accomplish several goals that gun rights organizations have pursued for decades. It would eliminate concealed carry permit requirements nationwide for eligible United States citizens, defined as those already legally allowed to own a firearm. It would prohibit state and local governments from requiring licenses that impose fees or other conditions on public carry. And it would bar states from criminalizing public carry for eligible citizens who travel across state lines.

“The Founders established a national right to keep and bear arms, not to ask for permission from hostile local officials or risk imprisonment for crossing the wrong state line,” Lee said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “Many states already protect the right to carry without a permit, and it’s time to reaffirm this right for all law-abiding Americans. The National Constitutional Carry Act will establish nationwide permitless carry to keep America safe and her people free.”

Currently, 29 states allow some form of constitutional carry, meaning residents can carry a concealed firearm without obtaining a permit from the government. But Americans who travel between states face a confusing landscape where the firearm they legally carry in one jurisdiction could result in felony charges in another. Lee’s bill aims to resolve this by establishing a national floor of protection that supersedes restrictive state and local laws.

The legislation includes several carve-outs designed to preserve other legal frameworks while expanding carry rights. Private property owners would retain the right to prohibit firearms on their premises. Bans on firearms in security-screened locations such as government buildings would remain in place. And individuals who are not legally allowed to own a firearm under existing federal law would remain prohibited from carrying one.

The bill builds on prior legislative efforts. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) introduced similar legislation in the House in 2024, though it did not become law. Lee’s Senate introduction signals that constitutional carry advocates believe the political moment has arrived to push the issue at the federal level.

Gun rights organizations immediately rallied behind the proposal. The National Association for Gun Rights lauded the bill as “the only legislation that will restore the right of all law-abiding Americans to carry a firearm in every state without having to beg for government permission.”

Gun Owners of America offered support that explicitly connected the legislation to current geopolitical tensions. Erich Pratt, senior vice president of the organization, framed the issue in terms of national security during a time of international conflict.

“In a time of war, Americans cannot afford to have the right to bear arms delayed by arbitrary state permitting processes,” Pratt said, referencing the ongoing conflict involving Iran. “Public safety is threatened not only by ordinary criminals but also by bad actors working for foreign adversaries, and Americans need to be armed for the security of our free state.”

The legislation faces significant hurdles in a closely divided Senate where moderate Republicans have historically been reluctant to embrace firearms legislation that overrides state authority. Democrats are expected to oppose the bill uniformly, arguing that it would undermine public safety by eliminating permit requirements that allow law enforcement to screen potential gun carriers.

Supporters counter that the permit system has never prevented criminals from carrying weapons illegally and serves only to burden law-abiding citizens with fees, paperwork, and the risk of prosecution for inadvertently running afoul of complex state regulations. They point to the 29 states that have adopted Constitutional Carry without experiencing the increases in gun violence that opponents predicted.

Lee’s introduction of the bill places the issue squarely before the Senate during a period when Second Amendment jurisprudence has shifted dramatically in favor of gun rights. The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen established that regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, a standard that supporters argue constitutional carry easily satisfies given the absence of permit requirements through most of American history.

Whether the National Constitutional Carry Act advances in the current Congress or serves as a marker for future legislative efforts, its introduction represents significant progress in the push to establish carrying firearms in public as a right that requires no government permission. For gun rights advocates who have watched Constitutional Carry sweep through state legislatures over the past decade, the federal bill represents the logical culmination of a movement that has transformed the legal landscape of firearm carry across America.

District Magazine Ban Ruled Unconstitutional by D.C. Court of Appeals

Virginia Senate Advances Three Major Gun Control Bills to Gov. Spanberger’s Desk

---

About José Niño

José Niño is a freelance writer based in Charlotte, North Carolina. You can contact him via Facebook and X/Twitter. Subscribe to his Substack newsletter by visiting “Jose Nino Unfiltered” on Substack.com.

---

from https://ift.tt/3vkBArs
via IFTTT

Virginia Senate Advances Three Major Gun Control Bills to Gov. Spanberger’s Desk

Virginia Senate Advances Three Major Gun Control Bills to Gov. Spanberger’s Desk. Img Duncan Johnson

Gun owners in the Commonwealth are watching closely this week as the Virginia Senate prepares to vote on several controversial gun-control measures that critics say would further restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Among the bills headed toward final passage are HB 217, HB 110, and HB 901, three pieces of legislation backed by Democratic lawmakers that would impose new limits on firearm ownership, self-defense, and due process protections in Virginia. If the measures pass as expected, they will head to the desk of Governor Abigail Spanberger. While the governor seeks to disarm law-abiding citizens, she has also refused to help ICE deport violent illegal aliens.

Second Amendment advocates argue the bills represent yet another push by Richmond politicians to restrict gun ownership while failing to address violent crime.

Semi-Auto Ban and Magazine Restrictions

The most sweeping proposal is HB 217, a bill that would prohibit a wide range of commonly owned semi-automatic firearms. The legislation would also impose new limits on magazine capacity and bar adults under the age of 21 from possessing certain firearms.

Semi-automatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines are among the most common firearms and accessories owned by Americans today. Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller and Bruen decisions, arms “in common use” for lawful purposes are protected by the Second Amendment. Even the D.C. Circuit Court found magazine bans to be unconstitutional.

Gun-rights supporters argue that HB 217 would criminalize ownership of widely owned firearms while doing little to deter criminals, who routinely ignore existing gun laws.

Restrictions on Firearms in Vehicles

Another measure advancing through the legislature, HB 110, would impose new restrictions on how firearms may be stored in vehicles.

For many gun owners, keeping a firearm secured in a vehicle is a practical necessity when traveling, commuting, or stopping in locations where carry is restricted. Critics say the proposed law could make it more difficult for citizens to maintain access to a firearm for lawful self-defense.

Second Amendment advocates argue that such policies disproportionately impact responsible gun owners who follow the law while leaving criminals unaffected.

Expansion of Virginia’s Red Flag Law

The third measure, HB 901, would expand Virginia’s existing red flag law, formally known as an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO).

Red flag laws allow courts to temporarily suspend a person’s firearm rights based on claims that the individual may pose a danger to themselves or others. HB 901 would broaden the list of individuals who can file such petitions, potentially expanding the number of cases where citizens could lose access to firearms without a criminal conviction.

Critics warn that expanding red flag laws raises serious due process concerns, particularly when individuals may be subjected to firearm confiscation based on accusations rather than criminal findings.

NRA-ILA Responds

The legislative push has drawn criticism from the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), which argues that lawmakers are focusing on restricting lawful gun ownership instead of addressing violent offenders.

In response to a controversy involving a criminal suspect identified as Abdul Jalloh, NRA-ILA Executive Director John Commerford sharply criticized Virginia’s political leadership.

“While Abigail Spanberger and progressive politicians in Richmond continue to give free passes to violent illegal aliens and provide cover for career criminals, they are simultaneously pushing to disarm law-abiding citizens and restrict self-defense options,” Commerford said. “This dangerous duality not only undermines our Second Amendment freedoms but also puts the Commonwealth’s public safety at severe risk, leaving everyday Virginians vulnerable to preventable violence.”

A Familiar Pattern in Richmond

The current slate of legislation follows several years of aggressive gun-control efforts in Virginia’s Democratic-controlled legislature. Since 2020, lawmakers have passed measures including universal background checks, expanded red flag laws, and new local gun-control authorities.

Gun-rights advocates say the latest bills continue a trend of targeting lawful gun owners while failing to address the underlying causes of violent crime.

If the bills clear the Virginia Senate as expected, they will move to Governor Spanberger for final consideration. With Democrats controlling both chambers of the legislature, supporters of the Second Amendment are warning that Virginians could soon face some of the most restrictive firearm policies in the region.

For gun owners across the Commonwealth, the coming days in Richmond could prove decisive in determining how far the state government is willing to go in regulating firearms and limiting the right to self-defense.

ATF Exposed: Bureaucrats Blocked Americans from Owning Post-1986 Machine Guns

Supreme Court Signals Trouble for Federal Law Disarming Regular Marijuana Users

---

from https://ift.tt/vtdpUE9
via IFTTT

Colorado Gun Control Bills Target Homemade Firearms and Barrel Sales

3d printed ghost gun pistol file printer manufactured iStock-Sven Loeffler 1012763192

The Colorado legislature is moving quickly to pass bills that would prevent people from making their own firearms without government permission. Two bills appear likely to become law. The two bills are expected to be signed by Governor Jared Polis. House Bill 1144 has passed the House 40 – 25 on a party-line vote and was introduced in the Senate yesterday. Senate Bill 43 passed the Senate 19-16, with four Democratic senators joining 12 Republican senators to vote against it.

House Bill 1144 prohibits the manufacture of firearms by “3D printing”, except for people licensed by the government:

Knowingly manufacturing or producing a firearm, unfinished frame or receiver, large-capacity magazine, or rapid-fire device (firearm or firearm component) by 3-dimensional printing. The prohibition does not apply to a federally licensed firearm manufacturer , an instructor or student of an accredited gunsmithing program, or an institution that operates an accredited gunsmithing program. Unlawful three-dimensional printing of a firearm or firearm component is a class 1 misdemeanor; except that a second or subsequent offense is a class 5 felony.

House Bill 1144 defines 3D printing broadly, to mean both additive and subtractive manufacturing.  The bill also makes it illegal for most people to offer or sell digital instructions in a rather broad and vague way:

Knowingly offering to sell or distributing digital instructions that may be used for an activity that constitutes a violation of specified existing state law concerning unlawful conduct involving an unserialized firearm, frame, or receiver.

Senate Bill 43  requires firearm barrels to be sold or transferred by a federally licensed dealer in person. From legiscan.com, a summary of the bill:

The bill requires a firearm barrel to be sold or transferred in person by a federally licensed firearm dealer. A person who is not a federally licensed firearm dealer shall not possess a firearm barrel with the intent to sell or transfer, or with the intent to offer to sell or transfer, the firearm barrel. Unlawful sale of a firearm barrel and unlawful possession with intent to sell a firearm barrel are each an unclassified misdemeanor.

A person must be 18 years old or older and legally allowed to purchase a firearm under state and federal law to purchase a firearm barrel, subject to certain exceptions.

The bill requires a federally licensed firearm dealer to record a sale or transfer of a firearm barrel for at least 5 years.

The bill requires the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to create a form for federally licensed firearm dealers to record a sale or transfer of a firearm barrel.

Both bills are likely to be challenged as unconstitutionally infringing on rights protected by the Second Amendment. In the Bruen decision, the Supreme Court ruled that infringements on the Second Amendment are only allowed if they were understood to be acceptable as part of the right to keep and bear arms in 1791, when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The Senate bill on barrel sales only applies inside the State of Colorado, so Colorado residents could purchase barrels in other states if the sale was done outside the state of Colorado.  It is unclear whether Colorado could prevent the mailing of a firearm barrel to someone in Colorado from outside the state.

Colorado is likely to argue these measures are only regulations on the commercial sale of firearms, and the Supreme Court in Heller noted some regulations on commercial sales are allowed.

Challengers to the bill will likely argue that it directly infringes on the right to acquire firearms by making your own, an activity practiced since before the Constitution was written. The challengers will likely argue that the right includes the right to purchase firearms parts, such as barrels.

There may be a challenge to the law claiming the state does not have the authority to regulate federally licensed dealers.

---

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

---

from https://ift.tt/g2GncUb
via IFTTT

Elderly Couple Survives Home Invasion, Wife Arms Herself with “Sweet Jane”

An elderly Buckhead couple says a violent home invasion shattered the calm of their Garden Hills neighborhood Monday night after a man forced his way into their home and threatened to kill them.

David and Mary Hubert told Atlanta News First that they have lived in the house for more than 20 years and had never experienced serious crime in the area before the incident. Their quiet evening changed suddenly when a man barged into the lower level of their home around 7 p.m. while the couple was watching movies on different floors.

Police later arrested 36-year-old Ramon Darden, who now faces charges including burglary and criminal trespass.

“Get Out of My House”

David said the intruder suddenly appeared inside the home and confronted him. Shocked to find a stranger standing in his house, David told the man to leave.

Instead of leaving, the suspect became aggressive, cursing and behaving erratically.

Recognizing the danger, David moved quickly. He locked himself inside a room and called 911, staying on the phone with Atlanta police while officers responded to the scene.

Mary Reaches for “Sweet Jane”

Upstairs, Mary Hubert heard the commotion unfolding below. She immediately reached for a handgun she keeps close by, her .38 caliber pistol that she affectionately calls “Sweet Jane.”

Mary grabbed the revolver from under her pillow and moved into a defensive position, hiding while watching the hallway using reflections from the bathroom mirrors so she could see if the intruder approached.

While David remained locked down on the phone with dispatchers, the suspect reportedly wandered through the house for a period of time, moving room to room. David said the man appeared to be smoking and even turned family photographs face down while roaming the home.

For more than an hour after police arrived, David still had not been able to reach Mary and did not know where she was inside the house. But he told reporters he wasn’t worried about her ability to defend herself.

“I know she’s capable of defending herself,” he said. “They had better hope they get me and not Mary.”

Police Arrest Suspect

Atlanta police eventually located and arrested the suspect inside the home and cleared the scene. The couple said they are grateful to law enforcement and thankful they both survived the ordeal.

Authorities believe the suspect may have entered through an unlocked side door near the garage, something the homeowners say they have since corrected.

Stories like this illustrate a simple reality: when someone breaks into your home and threatens your life, the first line of defense is the person already there.

David created time and distance by locking himself in a room and calling the police. Mary prepared to defend herself with “Sweet Jane” if the intruder came upstairs.

In this case, the firearm never had to be fired. But it served the purpose millions of Americans rely on every day, a tool that gives law-abiding citizens a fighting chance while waiting for help to arrive.

And for David and Mary Hubert, that preparation may have made all the difference between a terrifying story and a tragic one.

The 2nd Amendment: America’s Timeless Equalizer for the Weak & Vulnerable

---

from https://ift.tt/XUs02FY
via IFTTT