Just curious, is it the actual position of liberal anti-gun types that we would be better off as a society if these three thugs were still alive after successfully burglarizing this residence? Just asking.
Sheriff’s spokesman Deputy Nick Mahoney said the suspects entered the home through a glass back door with the intent to burglarize it. It was not immediately clear why they picked that home.
Mahoney said the suspects encountered the homeowner’s 19-year-old son, who opened fire (with an AR-15) after an exchange of words. Two of the suspects died in the home’s kitchen while a third was found in the driveway.
This home was defended with the exact weapons liberals want to ban. (And would have succeeded in banning if Hillary were in the White House and Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court). And in states like Maryland, you can be prosecuted for defending your home against home invaders.
Follow up. Will the three dead thugs be counted as “Gun deaths” when the liberals are rounding up their anti-gun talking points.
Update: How the BBC is covering it: Three teenagers who broke into a home in Oklahoma were killed by the homeowner’s son firing an assault-style AR-15. They describe the dead thugs as “teens” or “teenagers”
six eight times, and “intruders” once. They also bring up “stand your ground laws” even though they have no relevance to this case (but they are another things liberals oppose because they side with the thugs).
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.