MO - 68 year old woman fatally shoots 24 yr old home invader/rapist, Kansas City

New Posts

I will shoot an intruder if he/she is inside my house. I will not shoot if the intruder is outside of my house no matter what he/she does. I will call 911 and wait for LE.

This 68 year old woman was raped, for goodness sake. What would you recommend - that she waits to see if he is going to kill her as well as rape her? I'm 100% on her side. I'm certainly NOT going to try to wrestle the intruder who may even be on drugs if I can get my hands on a gun - especially if I have been raped or harmed.

I own a gun and am a responsible gun owner. I would not shoot to kill, but would seriously wound the intruder enough to not be able to move while I wait outside for LE.

Not protect herself? Of course she should.

MOO
 
LaLaw2000 said:
I own a gun and am a responsible gun owner. I would not shoot to kill...
Click to expand...

If you shoot, you shoot to kill which means several times to cause rapid/fatal blood loss. If you don't plan to kill them and don't think the situation calls for you to kill them then do not shoot.
 
now this is pretty clearly a justified shooting.

I love the way his family member is saying they have been given no facts from LE but the family suspects foul play. Sigh. Yeah, that of the now deceased guy.
 
The only bad part about this story is she didn't shoot him before he raped her.

If you are outside my house and I don't know you I will meet you at the door with a 357. I refuse to be afraid in my own home. I live so far out in country that if called the police I could be dead and buried before they got there. The house I live in the people who rented before I bought it was evicted for not paying rent cause they were in jail for drugs. So I bought the house the got out of jail and started harassing me. I called the police 3 times the last they got caught but the police couldn't do anything but give them a warning and tell them to stop. I ask the officer what if they came back to my house mad he said lock the door and call 911. I pump my 12 gage in front him and told him I would not me afraid in my own house he either stops them or I would. For the next few weeks you couldn't step out of my house without seeing a deputy on patrol. I also never had any more trouble from the other people.
 
Williams knocked on the door asking for a name of someone who does not live there. He pushed the door opened and forced the woman into the bedroom and raped her. She was able to get her gun when he walked into another room.

The woman fetched her revolver and walked out of her bedroom, police said. When the man came at her again, she shot him once. He collapsed.

Williams was released from prison last year for one burglary and two robbery convictions stemming from a 2006 incident in Kansas City. He was 17 when prosecutors accused him of using a tire iron in a home invasion robbery that netted $400 and two laptop computers.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/11/14/4620776/man-found-shot-to-death-inside.html#storylink=cpy
 
I'm confused by the video that appears at the link. Is the perp "Juice"? If so, why do they keep referring to him as the victim. Or is the video/story linkage hinky? TIA!
 
I think the Jackson co fox video was an early one with bad facts. That news video says the women told LE that she found him shot in her home. The Kansas city news link said a neighbor heard a gunshot then saw the woman come out of her home and ask for help.
 
colette said:
I think the Jackson co fox video was an early one with bad facts. That news video says the women told LE that she found him shot in her home. The Kansas city news link said a neighbor heard a gunshot then saw the woman come out of her home and ask for help.
Click to expand...

yes, that's the video I heard. That she found him in her home.
 
Sonya610 said:
If you shoot, you shoot to kill which means several times to cause rapid/fatal blood loss. If you don't plan to kill them and don't think the situation calls for you to kill them then do not shoot.
Click to expand...

BBM:

Huh? I was a parish deputy for 10 years and had to qualify with weapon(s) once a year.

If I can blow out a kneecap or even both kneecaps, why would I shoot to kill? He/she would be incapacitated. Shoot both feet - same effect. Then let LE, the lawyers, and the trial judge handle it. I'd rather see justice done, but that's just me.

FWIW, I pray I will never be in this situation. I am now just a retired grandmother with a gun who knows how to use it.

:twocents:
 
I'll bet the "alleged" perp's relatives will be calling foul.
 
Sonya610 said:
Perhaps she could have wrestled or kicked him instead?
Click to expand...
After all, she is 68 years old and wrestling and kicking a young male of 24 at her age may not have been an option of which she was physically capable of taking.


He does seem to have a bit of a shady past....
 
LaLaw2000 said:
If I can blow out a kneecap or even both kneecaps, why would I shoot to kill?
Click to expand...

Here's why:

1) Because a real life crisis is NOT like shooting a still target at the range, the target moves and can shoot back, aiming for center mass gives you the best chance of hitting them at all.

2) Because if the perp has a weapon they could shoot you dead even after you "blew out their kneecaps". If the perp is on drugs they may feel no pain and beat you to death with your own weapon.

3) Because the police do not "shoot folks in the leg" for a reason, they practice a whole lot more than civilians do, they have better aim and a LOT more training which is why they shoot multiple times to drop the target as fast as possible.

4) Because using a firearm to stop a threat/attacker is a brutal and often very bloody endeavor, if you are going to have a gun for protection then you need to accept that reality. If you are afraid to inflict serious bodily injury then you are best off using mace or a stun gun.

5) Because if they are dead then they won't be able to tell their side of the story in court.

(I am sure there are other reasons that I didn't think of and someone else can chime in.)
 
Good on her. At least she is alive to tell the tale. He could have decided to kill her so she couldn't recognize him. Shoot out the kneecaps? police don't do that. Watch them when they are training. They practise firing at a torso, no legs to be seen.

And if he was any of those high performance drugs a bullet to the leg wouldn't stop him. You have to hit something vital so they can't retaliate.
 
Marg from Oz said:
Good on her. At least she is alive to tell the tale. He could have decided to kill her so she couldn't recognize him. Shoot out the kneecaps? police don't do that. Watch them when they are training. They practise firing at a torso, no legs to be seen.

And if he was any of those high performance drugs a bullet to the leg wouldn't stop him. You have to hit something vital so they can't retaliate.
Click to expand...

Yup. I agree 100%

I am Canadian, so, I am pretty much anti gun. BUT OMG. Come into a grandma's home and rape her?! You deserved to get shot. Police are trained NOT to aim for a limb. They are trained to aim for large body mass (torso).
 
Marg from Oz said:
And if he was any of those high performance drugs a bullet to the leg wouldn't stop him. You have to hit something vital so they can't retaliate.
Click to expand...

Exactly and hitting something vital is not easy in a crisis, even if you fire 5 shots and hit them in the chest. That is why police fire so many times, they realize they may NOT hit something vital that will drop the suspect immediately but if you shoot enough holes in them them the blood loss and shock will bring them down fast. That is also why police carry larger calibers (9mm or 40 cal) because the bigger the hole, the more damage/blood loss.

Guns aren't magic, it isn't like in the movies where people get shot once and immediately fall down. It takes some effort.
 
Sonya610 said:
Here's why:

1) Because a real life crisis is NOT like shooting a still target at the range, the target moves and can shoot back, aiming for center mass gives you the best chance of hitting them at all.

2) Because if the perp has a weapon they could shoot you dead even after you "blew out their kneecaps". If the perp is on drugs they may feel no pain and beat you to death with your own weapon.

3) Because the police do not "shoot folks in the leg" for a reason, they practice a whole lot more than civilians do, they have better aim and a LOT more training which is why they shoot multiple times to drop the target as fast as possible.

4) Because using a firearm to stop a threat/attacker is a brutal and often very bloody endeavor, if you are going to have a gun for protection then you need to accept that reality. If you are afraid to inflict serious bodily injury then you are best off using mace or a stun gun.

5) Because if they are dead then they won't be able to tell their side of the story in court.

(I am sure there are other reasons that I didn't think of and someone else can chime in.)
Click to expand...

Sorry. I still disagree with you.
I think this woman did what she needed to do and I will stick with what I would do. LE is not just trained to shoot at 'still targets' as you say, and they are not trained to just shoot at the torso. Between us, my late husband and I had 31 years of experience.

This guy already had burglary conviction(s) as per the article, IIRC. He most likely didn't have a gun with him, IMO. The majority of burglars don't. He had already raped her and she was within her rights to protect herself. She shot him anywhere she could. Someone who is not trained with a handgun will shoot just aiming for the person - anywhere on the person.

I would do what I stated I would do, and I am glad she protected herself as best she could.
MOO
 
LaLaw2000 said:
Sorry. I still disagree with you.
I think this woman did what she needed to do and I will stick with what I would do.

MOO
Click to expand...

I have to say that in the heat of the moment most people just react and don't think about anything other than stopping this person from getting to you again. Someone who is trained in self-defense might but the average person would be just trying to stop the person in their tracks. I would not want to have to relive the death of someone I shot over and over again unless I feared they would have killed me had I not stopped them. If this person had a weapon raised in a striking position that would surely have killed me I would have aimed to kill knowing I had no choice. So it just may come down to what you feel your options are at the time within a split second. jmo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 210 more.
Total: 3,803 (members: 211, guests: 3,592)

Online statistics

Members online
211
Guests online
3,592
Total visitors
3,803
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,697
Messages
17,957,684
Members
228,588
Latest member
cariboucampfire73
Back
Top