Personally, if it came time to defend my property from an unruly, violent, and destructive mob of thugs, I would probably reach for something a bit more… capable… than a bolt-action rifle with all of five rounds in the magazine, but it obviously worked:
Roger MacBride says that he’s used to looking out for trouble in his old Northeast neighborhood. But usually the problems involve prostitutes or drug addicts, and he says that he wasn’t ready for what he calls a mob of young troublemakers who threatened his home and family.
MacBride says the teens surrounded his house, picking up rocks and throwing them at him. That’s when he says in his eyes, the mob stopped being a bunch of kids and became a big threat. He says the teens were reaching for his door handle when the the sight of his Soviet rifle had an instant reaction.
"I grabbed this and literally just came straight out the porch, came out just like this, and was like now, get the (expletive) out of here," said MacBride. "I literally come out that side door, and these two kids are like, hey, he’s got a gun. And then everybody just woosh, they just dispersed totally."
… and if it worked, it probably was not the wrong answer.
This news story is interesting from a variety of angles… First, it will probably be recorded nowhere as a "defensive gun use" despite obviously being one – no one was killed, no one was wounded, but a man’s life and his property was unquestionably defended, and that defense was greatly facilitated by the presence of a firearm. When anti-rights cultists start trotting out the number of fatalities due to people killing other people with firearms compared to the allegedly (at least according to them) low number of DGUs, remember stories like this (and remember that if Mr. McBride had killed one of the thugs in self-defense, that number would be added to the anti-rights cultists’ tally, stupidly enough). How many incidents like this transpire without even a whisper from the news?
Second, Mr. MacBride did not have to fire the rifle to disperse the mob – just the presence of it, and his visible willingness to use it, was enough to convince them to ply their violent trade somewhere else. Granted, we are talking about a few dozen thugs, if even that, as compared to the potentially-hundreds in the mob in Milwaukee, so displaying a firearm may not always be the defusing action you desired, but, not to belabor the obvious, no one wants to be shot. Some of the discouraging influence may have been the size of the firearm (if nothing else, Mosin-Nagants make handy war clubs), the attitude of the person wielding it, the threat of actually being shot, or any combination of the above, but, again, the simple truth is that it worked.
In a similar vein, open carry has discouraged crime in the past, with no way of determining how many other crimes were deterred by the open display, but not necessarily brandishing, of firearms.
Third and finally, Mr. MacBride was wearing some kind of skirt-ish thing and a welder’s apron, sporting a tattoo, and flying a Gadsden flag – screwing with him was a failure in the victim selection process of the mob.
Now, imagine how this situation would have transpired differently if the anti-rights cultists had their way with America decades ago – private ownership of arms would be outlawed, which would have left Mr. McBride the choice between hiding in his home while the violent thugs tore apart his neighborhood, or confronting a stronger enemy with a lesser force-multiplier, and probably ending up in the hospital – if not morgue – for his troubles. Why do "gun control" supporters want to leave potential victims defenseless? Why do "gun control" supporters want to empower these pernicious mobs of destructive bullies by disarming their targets? Why do "gun control" supporters aid and abet criminals?
I have no good answers to those questions, but I am very happy that Mr. MacBride found an appropriate answer – however temporary it might be – to the illegal demolition mob that was afflicting his neighborhood. I would suggest, should his budget permit it, that he and his neighbors consider up-arming, though – mobs like those tend to have a dim view of folks who stand up to them, and may be back to balance the score.
(Courtesy of Gun Free Zone.)