The burglar first pounded on the door in Plano, and presumably the thief figured that nobody was home, so he climbed onto the balcony and broke the window in order to gain access. The homeowner heard the glass shattering and went for his weapon and called 911. What would have happened if the homeowner was unable to defend himself against the thief? There will be no charges filed against the homeowner, thankfully.
The local news reported that the intruder managed to get inside and the homeowner shot the would-be thief as he ran up the stairs. At least one report noted that there were several men involved. The injured man fled and witnesses reported that he sped off in his vehicle. Police found him in the car described by witnesses and took him into custody. He was wounded and in "unknown condition". The criminal was taken to the hospital. Fortunately for the homeowner, he was able to fend off this home invasion. He is shaken, but fine. Thankfully, the only person injured was the criminal.
How often are such intrusions thwarted by responsible gun-owners? Watch the local news report here:
High profile gun crimes are inevitably politicized by those who believe that such tragedies are not enough by themselves, but should be dominated by discussions about gun control. Recent examples of this include the horrific Colorado theatre shooting, the "Gabby Giffords" tragedy and the "Trayvon Martin" shooting.
Stories, such as this one, that support the idea that responsible gun owners can save lives, are rarely reported outside of the local news.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 17
So far as the use of guns to defend the home, I'm in favor of shooting those who invade homes.
I also feel obliged to point out that people are also shot by home owners defending their homes when the person shot was not invading but lived there also. People do make mistakes with guns and sometimes shoot the wrong person. I do not know the relative numbers so I cannot say whether more innocent or more guilty people are shot in this situation.
The problem is that we don't know which is more common. No one buys a gun expecting to shoot a family member by mistake. We just don't know the odds.
Is there some national "clearinghouse" of gun wounds and the circumstances in which they take place? I don't know of any.
What you and almost everyone else is conveniently forgetting, ignoring, or whatever, is that the Aurora movie theater shooting was the SECOND shooting this year in Aurora, Colorado. The difference was that a gun-totting church member was armed and KILLED THE SHOOTER BEFORE THE SHOOTER COULD MASSACRE THE CHURCH MEMBERS.
On April 22, 2012 a man went to a church and started shooting members. He killed ONE member before he was killed by another member. A total of TWO people died there, ONE member and the SHOOTER. If no one had been armed in the church, MANY MANY more would have died, possibly as bad or worse than the theater.
Here (http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/12175-two-aurora-shootings-one-widely-known-the-other-ignored) is one of the many stories about the two shootings, IN THE SAME EXACT CITY a few months apart.
http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/armed-citizen/