Woman Kills Intruder Breaking Into Her Home

[mombrontrent]

Sorry I have to disagree, arming criminals adds to the problem, not arming the general public.
As for this woman GOOD FOR HER, that intruder got exactly what he deserved

But where do criminals get their weapons? I'm guessing they are not legally purchased most of the time. I bet they are not usually registered in their own names I am also Canadian and LOVE that our gun laws are so strict. I can go out and about my day anywhere and not worry that someone might be carrying a gun because really it rarely happens. Sure thier is gun related deaths but very rarley and most are gang related. It would never even occur to me that someone might have a loaded gun at the ready in the home, car or purse. I feel very safe here and while I do love to visit the U.S. on occasion, I am always a little on edge thinking about all those loaded guns that could be around.

 

[punkin]

You know, even in states that require retreat, they require it only in a reasonable manner. In other words, as an example, if she lived in a closely packed neighborhood with friendly and burly neighbors, or say she was a wold class runner and KNEW she could outrun anyone chasing her.

A recent widow with a baby to protect, alone, in the middle of no-where, who kills a hyped up dope fiend trying to enter her house will never get prosecuted anywhere, and if she was prosecuted by some bonehead who cares nothing for getting re-elected, a jury would give her a standing ovation before voting unanimously to acquit!

 

[Embel]

First, I said depends. If it's a very rural area with nothing and no one, then maybe not. However, your sentence above presumes a ton -

- that they'd immediately know she'd left the domicile. If she could have moved out an entryway or window without them knowing, she has a head start.

- that they'd want to catch her. Yes, they apparently were specifically targetting her, though I don't know why, it could be that they thought there was a specific reason to rob her. There's trouble people are willing to engage in for their goals and then there's trouble they're not. Dunno what or where their line was here.

- that there was noplace close to go and no one close to hear her. If either of those things is in play, makes both running more likely to have an immediately good outcome and the perpetrators less likely to chase or attempt to engage her once they know she's moving.

- that she doesn't know the area better than they do. Most people know their home area well. If she's in the dark and knows where she's going and what's out there, she has an advantage over people who do not.

- she had nothing but a cell and the baby at hand. She had the gun, could have taken it and not the cell, depending on if there are neighbours about, in case.

The article that I read said that it happened at 2PM. If this is true, there was no darkness to hide her.

Even if she were able to sneak out without them noticing (and there were 2 of them going back and forth between her front and back doors) one cry from the baby would have given her away.

 

[dngnb8]

However, your sentence above presumes a ton -

Actually, yours does too.

 

[luvmy3]

But where do criminals get their weapons? I'm guessing they are not legally purchased most of the time. I bet they are not usually registered in their own names I am also Canadian and LOVE that our gun laws are so strict. I can go out and about my day anywhere and not worry that someone might be carrying a gun because really it rarely happens. Sure thier is gun related deaths but very rarley and most are gang related. It would never even occur to me that someone might have a loaded gun at the ready in the home, car or purse. I feel very safe here and while I do love to visit the U.S. on occasion, I am always a little on edge thinking about all those loaded guns that could be around.

Well this US resident can tell you that I don't walk around worried about the people who have a legally obtained gun in their possession. In my experience those who have gone through the proper channels have guns for a few reasons, for sport or for protection. I worry more about the criminals who have a loaded gun at the ready, they have guns for one reason and one reason only.

 

[The_Alice]

Okay, I'll play along:

First, I said depends. If it's a very rural area with nothing and no one, then maybe not. However, your sentence above presumes a ton -

- that they'd immediately know she'd left the domicile. If she could have moved out an entryway or window without them knowing, she has a head start. Ever been in a mobile home? Had a baby with you? One peep, one window opening, door opening etc. would alert them she was leaving. It's not an estate.

- that they'd want to catch her. Yes, they apparently were specifically targetting her, though I don't know why, it could be that they thought there was a specific reason to rob her. There's trouble people are willing to engage in for their goals and then there's trouble they're not. Dunno what or where their line was here. And having a 10 inch knife means you are up to no trouble. Riiiiiight.

- that there was noplace close to go and no one close to hear her. If either of those things is in play, makes both running more likely to have an immediately good outcome and the perpetrators less likely to chase or attempt to engage her once they know she's moving.Have you ever run across an open field? Even if it's flat it can be treacherous if a farmer has been planting it before (roots of previous crops, rocks, etc.) What if it's not been ploughed ever and you have branches, larger rocks, small areas where it is uneven and you twist your ankle?

- that she doesn't know the area better than they do. Most people know their home area well. If she's in the dark and knows where she's going and what's out there, she has an advantage over people who do not. Right. She probably knew the area better than they did. Which is probably why she elected to stay in her house and arm herself.

- she had nothing but a cell and the baby at hand. She had the gun, could have taken it and not the cell, depending on if there are neighbours about, in case.Ever carry a 12 gauge around? It's not easy. Let alone trying to run with it and an infant.

 

[Nette]

But where do criminals get their weapons? I'm guessing they are not legally purchased most of the time. I bet they are not usually registered in their own names I am also Canadian and LOVE that our gun laws are so strict. I can go out and about my day anywhere and not worry that someone might be carrying a gun because really it rarely happens. Sure thier is gun related deaths but very rarley and most are gang related. It would never even occur to me that someone might have a loaded gun at the ready in the home, car or purse. I feel very safe here and while I do love to visit the U.S. on occasion, I am always a little on edge thinking about all those loaded guns that could be around.

Really? I live in TX which has a concealed carry permit... it RARELY even crosses my mind that someone -- much less lots of someones -- has a gun on them.

Have you ever heard the statement "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"? So so true. If criminals couldn't steal their guns here from law abiding citizens, they'd go to Mexico (or in a Canadian's case right to the US) to get a gun, or they'd get a gun from an underground black market who probably got the gun from Mexico. ETA: if you've got your guns stored properly in a gazillion pound gun safe, it's pretty hard for a criminal to steal them in the first place.

 

[The_Alice]

Well this US resident can tell you that I don't walk around worried about the people who have a legally obtained gun in their possession. In my experience those who have gone through the proper channels have guns for a few reasons, for sport or for protection. I worry more about the criminals who have a loaded gun at the ready, they have guns for one reason and one reason only.

My thoughts exactly. I am less worried about those who have registered their weapons, and more worried about those who have unregistered weapons for criminal purposes.

 

[mjantz]

My words in blue inside the quote box

First, I said depends. If it's a very rural area with nothing and no one, then maybe not. However, your sentence above presumes a ton -

- that they'd immediately know she'd left the domicile. If she could have moved out an entryway or window without them knowing, she has a head start.
If its a standard trailer (not a double wide) its little more than a hallway with rooms along one side of the hall. One of my friends who lived in a trailer both doors were on the same side.

- that they'd want to catch her. Yes, they apparently were specifically targetting her, though I don't know why, it could be that they thought there was a specific reason to rob her. There's trouble people are willing to engage in for their goals and then there's trouble they're not. Dunno what or where their line was here.
As its a small town probably everyone knew about the poor girl with the new baby whose husband died on Christmas Day. I think they saw her as an easy target. I don't know if their motive was simple robbery or something more sinister but I don't blame her for not waiting to find out.

- that there was noplace close to go and no one close to hear her. If either of those things is in play, makes both running more likely to have an immediately good outcome and the perpetrators less likely to chase or attempt to engage her once they know she's moving. But she would be running with a baby which means she's going to be slower & not go flat out full speed. If the guys had seen her they could have easily caught her.

- that she doesn't know the area better than they do. Most people know their home area well. If she's in the dark and knows where she's going and what's out there, she has an advantage over people who do not. She may know the area well but that doesn't mean she can find places to hide along the way or go the quickest route. I knew the traveled areas around my parents house well but I must admit I was not familiar with the cattle pasture (which wasn't our property). I could have seriously injured myself in trying to escape.

- she had nothing but a cell and the baby at hand. She had the gun, could have taken it and not the cell, depending on if there are neighbours about, in case.

 

[Wadecool]

Terrible thing to happen to a family. A lot of people say...good for her, and things like that. While yes it is good she came out of it uninjured. 1) I wonder did she really need to kill this person? Does this mean that people who commit break and enter residential crimes should receive capital punishment?
2) This poor woman is now; for the rest of her life going to have to deal with killing someone. To a normal person this has got to be extremely difficult. Everywhere she goes now people will look at her,talk about her. I do not envy her.

I am Canadian, and believe regular people do not need guns. If you feel you need one for protection, IMO you should move somewhere you feel safe. I can't imagine living in fear like that. I believe that the vast majority of people are good and will do me no harm.
In any city there will be a certain amount of crime. Arming the general population just adds more to this problem.

1)First of all, the distance that she shot the man from was probably 8 to 12 feet and at that distance with a 12 gauge shotgun, there's no "wounding" the intruder, it's a kill shot. Second, she did not know the intentions of the intruder and they weren't likely to announce their intentions first.

2) She and her baby are ALIVE today because of how she handled the situation and has the rest of her life to deal with killing the intruder. I'm sure she prefers that scenario to the alternative.

 

[brerrabbit]

In my opinion she made the best decision given her circumstances that she could make. I will not get into a what if, she should have, why did she discussion for one simple reason. Until you have been in this situation you can talk about what you would do till your blue in the face about it, and I will almost guerentee you that what you actually do when the time comes will be a very different outcome.

I have faced an intruder situation before and can tell you that when it happens that the idea of taking a life no matter how many guns you own, what you have said you will do and what others have said to do, you have little or no time to recall all those moral discussions and arrive at a solution. Pure survival mode kicks in and your are driven by instinct alone. It does not even begin to be fair for people with only the information the media is presenting to second guess this woman. Survival for her baby and her kicked in, instinct took over and she did what she did. Regardless of anything else, she and her child survived and bad people meaning to do bad things did not.

In my world view it was a good outcome and I am willing to leave it at that.

 

[marthachick]

I don't think people really understand how isolated rural can be...

We live on a road that is about 1 1/2 miles long. There are 8 inhabited houses on it. Behind our house it is at least 1/2 mile through deep woods, brush, creeks, and fences. I seriously don't see getting to a house through that if someone is seriously trying to get to you. Especially if you are carrying a baby. Nope, as I said before, come in my house uninvited and you might get shot.

 

[sbell111]

Thank goodness I don't live in a state that adheres to "Castle Doctrine". That idea is just plain ridiculous at times. Lets say she runs out the back door with her child and her gun. Bad guy chases and is about to catch her. Does that mean since she is not in her "Castle" she cannot use said gun to defend herself. Even if said bad guy is coming at her with a knife? Are we beginning to see the idocy of Castle Doctrine?

I think that you are missing the point. The 'Castle Doctrine' stipulates one situation that would allow for the taking of a life. It does not disallow every other situation. If she had run and they had chased after her and she had killed one or both of them, then she would still no doubt have a reasonable self-defense argument.

My only criticism of her was that she didn't plug the other SOB.

It sounds like that opportunity didn't present itself as he apparently turned tail and ran off, probably leaving a trail of pee.

But where do criminals get their weapons? I'm guessing they are not legally purchased most of the time. I bet they are not usually registered in their own names I am also Canadian and LOVE that our gun laws are so strict. I can go out and about my day anywhere and not worry that someone might be carrying a gun because really it rarely happens. Sure thier is gun related deaths but very rarley and most are gang related. It would never even occur to me that someone might have a loaded gun at the ready in the home, car or purse. I feel very safe here and while I do love to visit the U.S. on occasion, I am always a little on edge thinking about all those loaded guns that could be around.

Funny thing. We Americans also go about our days generally not being concerned about gun violence. Certainly, the mom in question likely never had to think much about it previously. Luckily, our laws allowed her to be prepared in the unlikely event that two idiots were to try to break into her home. Had she lived somewhere else, such as Canada, the two assailants, armed with hunting knives, would have successfully entered her home and done God know's what to her and her baby.

Further, it is a mistake to suggest that crime, violence, and gun ownership is an 'American thing'. After all, a third of the murders in Canada involve firearms. Further, a million or so Canadians (non-LEOs) are licensed to carry a concealed handgun. Obviously, many more carry illegally. (As in the US, it's not the legal-carry people you have to worry about, after all.)

It should also be noted that the gun ownership rate in Canada is about 27% of all households. In the US, it's about 32% (both of these numbers are a number of years old, but let's go with it). This similar gun ownership rate and the fact that the inturders were armed with knives that are legal in both countries effectively takes that gun control politics out of this issue.

Finally, it is my personal opinion that if this young mother lived in Canada and two hosers tried to break in and attack her, she would be within her rights to kill them. This position is supported by Section 34(2) of the Canadian Criminal Code states:

(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

 

[sbell111]

I am Canadian, and believe regular people do not need guns. If you feel you need one for protection, IMO you should move somewhere you feel safe. ...

The mother in question lived in rural Oklahoma in a county that only feels the need to have three deputies covering 12,000 square miles. She does live 'somewhere safe'. Bad things happen to good people in 'safe' places.

An ounce of prevention...

 

[proud_canadian]

I just read a news article about this and it said she is now 18, was married for 2 years and her husband died in his 50s.

So a 50 something year old married a 16 year old????

That to me is extremely shocking.

I didn't read any of the other comments on this thread yet so don't know if that has come up.

As for what happened, good for her, and I would have done the same had I had weapons. Which I would seriously consider if my DH were dead and I lived alone.

 

[sbell111]

You know, even in states that require retreat, they require it only in a reasonable manner. In other words, as an example, if she lived in a closely packed neighborhood with friendly and burly neighbors, or say she was a wold class runner and KNEW she could outrun anyone chasing her.

I can't imagine a jury anywhere considering a young mom barricaded in her own home while two men beat at the doors in anything else but full retreat. There is only so far you can retreat before you are backed against the wall and your only options become kill or be killed.

 

[Geoff_M]

I just read a news article about this and it said she is now 18, was married for 2 years and her husband died in his 50s.

So a 50 something year old married a 16 year old????

That to me is extremely shocking.

Here's a local OK newspaper story on the incident. They were only married in November, so getting a license wasn't an issue, but McKinley said that the two year romance had strained relations with her family.

Also, it appears the primary motive of the attempted home invasion was drugs. The dead guy was a drug addict and has accomplice said that they thought there would likely be leftover pain medication in the home from McKinley's late husband.

I caught a bit of an interview on CNN at lunch with McKinley. I was reading closed captions and only partly paying attention, but if I got the gist right the perp had come to the home prior to the fatal encounter (right after her husband had died) and was banging on the door. McKinley's sister and brother-in-law was there with her and the BIL answered the door. The dude acted very surprised to see a guy answer the door and asked who he was. After the BIL answered the question, the guy seemed to stumble over his words and muttered a couple of things and then turned and left. My guess is this was the genesis of "stalking" statements.

 

[m&m's mom]

Anyone else notice that this woman was married to a 58 yo man who recently died???

When I saw the photo that looked like it came from a yearbook, I pegged him to be in late 50's due to hairstyle and clothes.

I have been in a similar situation. DH was out of town and I was home alone with my baby. Doorbell rang at 3:00am and then pounding on the door and screams to "OPEN UP!!". I was terrified! There were guys physically trying to get in my front door. I checked on DD and multiple guys were in the flower bed outside her window trying to open the window! I immediately grabbed my gun and my cell phone. FORTUNATELY I live like 2 miles from the police station and 6 cop cars were in front of my house very, very quickly. Turns out they had the wrong house, were trying to visit relatives down the street and was, I guess, trying to get his attention.
The police were reading them the riot act and a female officer came to tell me it was ok and the policeman wanted them to apologize to me which I said was fine. They knew it was obviously just a mistake but I was so scared!
This poor girl was 10 years younger than I was, in a rural house with few options. She did the right thing.
Anyone notice throughout the whole interview, her legs were shaking and her dog was adorable w/ her baby.
I sure hope she is able to reconcile w/ her family- she needs them now.

 

[cornflake]

Do the people on about she couldn't have run because farmer's fields and no neighbours and whatnot actually know for sure she lived abutting some fecund fields with no neighbours or is that just an assumption?

Because as I said, all I saw on the news was that it was a trailer, not shots of the entire neighbourhood and while plenty of places yes, are rural, plenty also are not.

I keep saying it depends and I keep getting back that I don't understand what rural truly means and how hard it is to run through a farmer's field. Unless people know for sure that she lived right on a field and had no neighbours anyplace, seems quite the assumption.

And as for the 'in this here country we're allowed guns to defend ourselves and this was perfectly legal and etc.' again, this varies by state and municipality. In my state and especially in my city, no, you're not really allowed guns to defend yourself except in very, very special circumstances which will take you years of time and mountains of paperwork to prove. Also in my state, she'd very likely at the least be investigated over this - there is no such castle law here, or even close. You must be in imminent danger of losing your life itself by the reasonable person standard, not you think you're in danger, not you might be injured, to be allowed to use deadly force - and if you use deadly force, even if permissable for self-defense, you'd best have one of those insanely hard-to-obtain permits if you used a gun, otherwise you're going to jail, no questions asked, no excuses.

 

[dngnb8]

Do the people on about she couldn't have run because farmer's fields and no neighbours and whatnot actually know for sure she lived abutting some fecund fields with no neighbours or is that just an assumption?

Because as I said, all I saw on the news was that it was a trailer, not shots of the entire neighbourhood and while plenty of places yes, are rural, plenty also are not.

I keep saying it depends and I keep getting back that I don't understand what rural truly means and how hard it is to run through a farmer's field. Unless people know for sure that she lived right on a field and had no neighbours anyplace, seems quite the assumption.

Is your opinion they wouldnt hear a crying baby and chase her just an assumption?

Is your opinion they couldnt run faster then a mom carrying a crying baby just an assumption?