When I was younger, I told my father I wanted to carry a gun when I was older. He warned me that I needed to know what I was doing or someone would take it from me and kill me with it. While that was a bit excessive, especially since it’s not nearly as common as that comment might suggest — we know because anti-gunners would make that a talking point — it was meant to suggest knowing what you’re doing. Fair enough.
In the San Francisco area, not only did the gun control laws they love so much fail to keep a teenager disarmed, but his lack of knowledge led to fatal consequences for him.
A teenager was fatally shot after allegedly breaking into a Fremont apartment and assaulting its occupants, one of whom fought back and grabbed the suspect’s gun, authorities said.
Police believe two teenagers forced entry into an apartment on San Pedro Drive Friday afternoon and assaulted its two occupants before one of the residents took control of the suspect’s firearm and fatally shot one of the teenagers, Fremont police said Monday.
Police found the teenager with a gunshot wound at the residence. He was later declared dead at a local hospital.
The residents suffered “non-life-threatening injuries.” In other words, it sounds like they got banged up in the altercation, but are otherwise fine.
Good on them, too.
Ideally, you’ll have a gun. When you don’t or can’t, though, taking one from the bad guy and killing him with it is almost as good, and kind of wins you some serious badass points in the process.
I will say that it’s not a tactic I’d bank on pulling off, though. This could have gone the other way easily. It didn’t, and that’s fantastic, but it could have.
This is also why California’s gun control agenda is so horribly misplaced.
See, I don’t know if the residents would have had a gun or not. What I do know, though, is that the law is designed to discourage people from buying guns for home defense. A lot of people have bought the hype that surrounds that agenda, too. They don’t own guns because they believe the propaganda about how you’re less safe with a gun in the home or whatever.
But the criminals are still getting guns. Based on the lack of a name here, I’m guessing the teenagers are minors, which means no guns for them from any state. Still, they had one. They tried to use it. They failed and suffered fatal consequences for it. Yet again, it could have gone the other way, and we all know it.
This story worked out well. I’m glad it did, and there’s a certain twist to that ending that just warms my heart.
No one, though, should be in that position except by their own choice, and that choice shouldn’t be the result of government manipulation or special interest propaganda designed to make people push away a fundamental liberty.
At least this story had a happy ending. I just can’t help but wonder how many don’t simply because the victim wasn’t lucky enough to successfully disarm his attackers.
And how many face criminal charges, even momentarily, because they did what they had to do.
Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.
Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
