politicususa.com— it’s bizarre and confusing to see the media glorifying while ignoring the moral decision of the “Make My Day Mom” to kill a young intruder.
Jan 8, 2012View in Crawl 4
"On New Years Eve, Martin was carrying a 12-inch hunting knife, which McKinley saw in his hand ... as he entered her home. It appears that Martin and accomplice Dusty Stewart were breaking in to get McKinley’s husband’s prescription drugs and that they had possibly broken in before."
Okay, you don't need a 12-inch knife AND a friend to lift a little pill bottle out of a medicine cabinet in a home a lone woman and infant live in.
Nor do you need it to fight your way out of the home and back to "safety," where ever that is for a person who would do such a thing.
Given how he armed himself, there is no way to think her life was not in danger. The fact he overtly introduced himself to her before breaking in armed to her house is beyond creepy.
The only story in this "story" is how hard the author's trying to avoid acknowledging the facts of the case which are that a young woman with a three month old child had her home broken into by a couple of low-lifes one of which she killed. End of story.
For s**t-heels like the author of the linked PoliticsUSA piece that narrative just doesn't work which is why you have to google the story get a few facts. Once you do know what went on there's no story other then a couple of scum bags, thinking they'd have an easy score, got what was coming to them.
It's from the same website that produced this gem:
"The latest dirty trick is the work of a right-wing operative who manipulated Representative Anthony Weiner’s (D-NY) Twitter account to send a picture to a young woman in an attempt to smear the Congressman’s image."
the information you are giving was the original information that people had to start with. It wasn't until later that the real truth came out. Great job at hindsight
"The only story in this "story" is how hard the author's trying to avoid acknowledging the facts of the case which are that a young woman with a three month old child had her home broken into by a couple of low-lifes one of which she killed. End of story."
Actually, if you bothered to really read the article, and not make a presumption before just scanning it, you would have seen that multiple times the author mentioned that what happened was justified and that there may have been no other way out of it.
The article is not calling into question her actions in the least - it is calling into question the reactions by others to what happened.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
To a point you are correct, however this writer went out of his way to make her look like a nut before he made it clear he owned a gun and would have done the same thing.
Yes he did I applaud the girl for what she did she was protecting herself and her baby. Cracks me up that they are charging the dead guys friend with murder.
This is utterly ridiculous. She waited for him to go through two doors. She even asked the 911 operator if it was OK to shoot him! She obviously took the decision very seriously, and given the facts she showed an amazing level of restraint as she would have been well justified shooting him coming through the first door.
On top of that, once he got in the room he could see she was armed and still came at her. Warning enough, goodbye and good riddance. She did the world a favor, the only empathy I feel is with her for having to make a hard choice with so many other disasters going on in her life....
I'm confused why you keep asking people about their reading comprehension levels. If you don't agree with their point, that's fine, but don't attack them personally.
Everyone understands what the article is saying, they are commenting on the fact that the ass-clown that wrote this article is putting a slant on this woman before he says it's justified.
So instead of attacking people's reading comprehension and views, if you don't agree with them, just keep your mouth shut. you're only making yourself look like an ass.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
even though the person who wrote the article agreed that the shooting had to be done. I can imagine you're confused with reading comprehension because you didn't comprehend anything in the article at all. I would just have to say, confusion justified. The story was about why people glorifying guns, not the fact a person was killed. How incredibly silly you people are
FTA: "In point of fact, the purpose of the second amendment was to maintain independent militias to defend the country should its security be threatened."
In actual point of fact, the US Supreme Court ruled in the Heller case that "It is clear from those formulations that "bear arms" did not refer only to carrying a weapon in an organized military unit."
Further, the Oklahoma State Constitution states that "The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power, when thereunto legally summoned, shall never be prohibited; but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons. "
FTA: "Nowhere in the transcript of the 911 call do we hear her warn the intruder that she is armed and will shoot him."
She has no obligation to anyone trying to break into her home and the fact that you even suggest this is exactly why the castle doctrine is necessary. A person shouldn't have to retreat and cower in there bedroom and try and dissuade intruders from further aggression by detailing their possible defensive measures.
I get called a "liberal" all the time on Digg. I own several guns. I've had my CCW for 20 years. I dugg up his comment.
f**king SUCKS to be a generalizing tool, doesn't it? How about you say "you can't dissuade the writer of this column with facts?", rather than be a douche?
Namecalling is another liberal trait that doesn't advance the arguement. I was complementing Barakalypse on his literate and concise legal brief. You? Wouldn't waste my time on you. Hit me with some facts Sparky and we can talk.
From Oklahoma and this isn't the whole story. They did break the door down, and both were locked. She should not have to run away if it's her house. I would have done the same thing. BTW on a lighter note the one that escaped called his mom to come pick him up haha
This is such a stupid story leaave it to politicusasa to talk ad blame the victim.
Who would of not done the same.?.
I believe these men would have hurt her and the baby.
If they are dangerous and deranged who knows the
horrible way they may have hurt and killled them.
She did right.With no regrets I hope
lmao so now the burglars are the victims typical liberal bulls**t. Liberals would've let the thieves steal everything while their on the phone with 911 like dumb asses. Thank god your not the majority
How many of you are there around here that can't actually comprehend the English language?
Where did you get ANY of you idiotic rant from the article?
Oh, wait, that's right... no where, you just felt the need to inject your lack of intelligence into the discussion.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
she did what she had to do, that doesn't make her a hero, and it doesn't make the necessity of killing someone something to be celebrated. many years ago, i shot at a person who thought there wasn't anybody home and tried to come into my house. i am glad to this day that i didn't have to shoot twice, but i would do it again if circumstances dictated. you don't have to believe i did; if not keep it to yourself, i won't respond to bait.
I understand completely I am a gun owner I like the saying that guns are like condoms I would rather have one and not need it, then need one and not have one. I don't want to use it in the situation of home defense but glad I have them if I need them
FTA: "Nowhere in the transcript of the 911 call do we hear her warn the intruder that she is armed and will shoot him. "
Oh--so it's the fault of the 18-year-old, brand new mother (and brand new widow), that the subhuman, predatory scum got removed from the gene pool. Or maybe it's Sarah Palin's fault.
f**king PolicitcusUSA. "Journalism" for the severely brain damaged.
obviously you missed the point where no blame was put on the woman who did the shooting for doing anything wrong. Great try but it was fully expected of you anyways
"McKinley told the police she knew the intruders were up to no good, but in truth, she didn’t know what they were going to do. No one could know that."
Given that the deceased broke down her locked door and he was armed with a large knife, I can confidently posit that they he was not there selling Girl Scout cookies.
Good lord, liberals are f**king morons. If you want to subject you and your family to the tender mercies of someone who would violently enter your home armed with a large knife, be my guest. As for me and mine, an intruder will be met with all the deadly force I can muster.
I find what you're saying so intensely funny that I can't stop laughing. You never read the article, if you did you have no idea what the article said even though it was in favor of the woman shooting the man. The article was about the emphasis on guns and not on the fact that a person was shot. How brain-dead are you?
Huh? You are really a bizarre person... I think we have very clearly seen your position long ago - I somehow don't think you were ever voting for him.
How does your comment have anything to do with the article?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
no he didn't. you seriously misjudge the intelligence of the whole digg community, allies and adversaries alike, by suggesting you ever had any intention of voting for obama. your dishonesty serves as an example to us all.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
why did Obama just lose a vote? Obama has done more for the NRA, then the NRA has done for you. The NRA and all of its time has only gotten two bills changed. It takes in millions and millions of dollars, has several vice presidents and tons of people working in its offices and does absolutely nothing for you
At no point in the article does the author suggest she was wrong to kill the intruder. In fact, the author says EXACTLY the opposite, quoted below. The author even identifies with the mother and suggests that they would do the same in the situation. The author's problem is the fact that we are glorifying her actions, something that I would suggest (as would the author) she will have some trouble living with later.
The Hero-worship is the problem that the author is trying to address. It is never a good thing to kill a person. It may be the "right" thing, or the "best" thing that you can do in a situation, but it's never good to have to take a life. Yes, she needed to protect herself and her baby. Sure, in hind-sight, there could have been other options, and she could have been more explicit saying "I have a gun, don't come in or I'll shoot" but that is not the point of the article. Palin calling this event the "purpose" of the second amendment is seriously misinformed and harmful to our current understanding of the most important document in our country's history.
"But in this case, it’s not that the young mom was wrong for killing to protect her baby and herself, it’s that how we discuss these things matters. Dubbing McKinley the “Make My Day Mom” is hero-worshiping, frighteningly glib and ultimately serves to trivialize the decision to pull the trigger with intent to kill.
I also own a shotgun and would shoot to kill an intruder in my home if I thought it were necessary. But glorifying this and calling it the purpose of the second amendment is disturbing. In point of fact, the purpose of the second amendment was to maintain independent militias to defend the country should its security be threatened. It was a reactionary stance to the framers distrust of a federal army."
If Sarah Plain had a brain, and we know she doesn’t, she would be sensitive to exactly what the lady did. She killed a fellow human being. Obviously necessarly but the point is that palin, once again encourages this stuff. palin, brain dead as she is once again puts owning guns over the life of a human. Her best step should have been to say I am sorry she had to kill a person
Owning a gun is a solemn thing. Human life always comes first. Even if you have to kill someone as this person did, the human life must be uppermost in the mind. Not glorifying owning a gun.
Really? See, most normal people wouldn't have read that from the comment - where did you get that from?
At what point in the comment was that even remotely implied?
Stop being such an ass.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Thank you Shivabeach you have just helped me make a point to a friend. That republicans an democrats are the exact same nothing but a bunch of whiny little bitches. I don't like Sara Palin but I am curious as to what you would have posted if she didn't say anything and wasn't mentioned in the article.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
my point is that Sarah, who doesn't have a brain, is only interested in people having guns. She was not interested in the fact that the woman killed a person. I am 100% in approval of what this woman did if the guy was in the trailer. My point is that owning a gun is secondary to human life. The gun doesn't come first, if it does then you're not much of a human.
as for your whiny little bitch stuff, it fits you. You missed the entire point of that article because you are so hopped up on guns
johnnysoftwareJan 8, 2012
"On New Years Eve, Martin was carrying a 12-inch hunting knife, which McKinley saw in his hand ... as he entered her home. It appears that Martin and accomplice Dusty Stewart were breaking in to get McKinley’s husband’s prescription drugs and that they had possibly broken in before."
Okay, you don't need a 12-inch knife AND a friend to lift a little pill bottle out of a medicine cabinet in a home a lone woman and infant live in.
Nor do you need it to fight your way out of the home and back to "safety," where ever that is for a person who would do such a thing.
Given how he armed himself, there is no way to think her life was not in danger. The fact he overtly introduced himself to her before breaking in armed to her house is beyond creepy.
arpadJan 8, 2012
The only story in this "story" is how hard the author's trying to avoid acknowledging the facts of the case which are that a young woman with a three month old child had her home broken into by a couple of low-lifes one of which she killed. End of story.
For s**t-heels like the author of the linked PoliticsUSA piece that narrative just doesn't work which is why you have to google the story get a few facts. Once you do know what went on there's no story other then a couple of scum bags, thinking they'd have an easy score, got what was coming to them.
slang4catJan 8, 2012
It's from the same website that produced this gem:
"The latest dirty trick is the work of a right-wing operative who manipulated Representative Anthony Weiner’s (D-NY) Twitter account to send a picture to a young woman in an attempt to smear the Congressman’s image."
http://www.politicususa.com/en/weiner-gop-dirty-trick
What do you expect?
If politicususa.com were a person it would be smeared in feces and begging for nickels near the entrance ramp to the highway.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
the information you are giving was the original information that people had to start with. It wasn't until later that the real truth came out. Great job at hindsight
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
"The only story in this "story" is how hard the author's trying to avoid acknowledging the facts of the case which are that a young woman with a three month old child had her home broken into by a couple of low-lifes one of which she killed. End of story."
Actually, if you bothered to really read the article, and not make a presumption before just scanning it, you would have seen that multiple times the author mentioned that what happened was justified and that there may have been no other way out of it.
The article is not calling into question her actions in the least - it is calling into question the reactions by others to what happened.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
grannysrightJan 8, 2012
To a point you are correct, however this writer went out of his way to make her look like a nut before he made it clear he owned a gun and would have done the same thing.
seidnuJan 9, 2012
Yes he did I applaud the girl for what she did she was protecting herself and her baby. Cracks me up that they are charging the dead guys friend with murder.
superkendallJan 8, 2012
This is utterly ridiculous. She waited for him to go through two doors. She even asked the 911 operator if it was OK to shoot him! She obviously took the decision very seriously, and given the facts she showed an amazing level of restraint as she would have been well justified shooting him coming through the first door.
On top of that, once he got in the room he could see she was armed and still came at her. Warning enough, goodbye and good riddance. She did the world a favor, the only empathy I feel is with her for having to make a hard choice with so many other disasters going on in her life....
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
What the hell is your point? Do you even know how to comprehend full sentences, let alone the concept of a complete article?
Did the article ever say that she didn't have the right to defend herself and her child? Did it say she should face charges for it or something?
I'm very confused why you felt the need to point out what you did. What is the ridiculous part?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
diggumsmack83Jan 9, 2012
I'm confused why you keep asking people about their reading comprehension levels. If you don't agree with their point, that's fine, but don't attack them personally.
Everyone understands what the article is saying, they are commenting on the fact that the ass-clown that wrote this article is putting a slant on this woman before he says it's justified.
So instead of attacking people's reading comprehension and views, if you don't agree with them, just keep your mouth shut. you're only making yourself look like an ass.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
even though the person who wrote the article agreed that the shooting had to be done. I can imagine you're confused with reading comprehension because you didn't comprehend anything in the article at all. I would just have to say, confusion justified. The story was about why people glorifying guns, not the fact a person was killed. How incredibly silly you people are
barackalypseJan 8, 2012
FTA: "In point of fact, the purpose of the second amendment was to maintain independent militias to defend the country should its security be threatened."
In actual point of fact, the US Supreme Court ruled in the Heller case that "It is clear from those formulations that "bear arms" did not refer only to carrying a weapon in an organized military unit."
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=07-290
Further, the Oklahoma State Constitution states that "The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power, when thereunto legally summoned, shall never be prohibited; but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons. "
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statedat.htm
FTA: "Nowhere in the transcript of the 911 call do we hear her warn the intruder that she is armed and will shoot him."
She has no obligation to anyone trying to break into her home and the fact that you even suggest this is exactly why the castle doctrine is necessary. A person shouldn't have to retreat and cower in there bedroom and try and dissuade intruders from further aggression by detailing their possible defensive measures.
rubourdJan 8, 2012
You can't dissuade liberals with the facts.
kingnovaJan 9, 2012
I get called a "liberal" all the time on Digg. I own several guns. I've had my CCW for 20 years. I dugg up his comment.
f**king SUCKS to be a generalizing tool, doesn't it? How about you say "you can't dissuade the writer of this column with facts?", rather than be a douche?
rubourdJan 9, 2012
Namecalling is another liberal trait that doesn't advance the arguement. I was complementing Barakalypse on his literate and concise legal brief. You? Wouldn't waste my time on you. Hit me with some facts Sparky and we can talk.
Closed AccountJan 8, 2012
yes it was a hard thing to do,shooting a person, then again he shouldn't have gone into robbery to make ends meet.
tjmarshall86Jan 8, 2012
From Oklahoma and this isn't the whole story. They did break the door down, and both were locked. She should not have to run away if it's her house. I would have done the same thing. BTW on a lighter note the one that escaped called his mom to come pick him up haha
onthetrailJan 9, 2012
This is such a stupid story leaave it to politicusasa to talk ad blame the victim.
Who would of not done the same.?.
I believe these men would have hurt her and the baby.
If they are dangerous and deranged who knows the
horrible way they may have hurt and killled them.
She did right.With no regrets I hope
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
the article did not blame the victim in fact it sided with the person that did the shooting. Why is it that you guys reading ability is so poor?
bcronosJan 8, 2012
"When you chose to take someone’s life, it’s a decision you can’t go back on." ---
God, this site's deep philosophical insights are staggering!
Nice shot lady...
kcast985Jan 8, 2012
lmao so now the burglars are the victims typical liberal bulls**t. Liberals would've let the thieves steal everything while their on the phone with 911 like dumb asses. Thank god your not the majority
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
How many of you are there around here that can't actually comprehend the English language?
Where did you get ANY of you idiotic rant from the article?
Oh, wait, that's right... no where, you just felt the need to inject your lack of intelligence into the discussion.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mikelistJan 9, 2012
she did what she had to do, that doesn't make her a hero, and it doesn't make the necessity of killing someone something to be celebrated. many years ago, i shot at a person who thought there wasn't anybody home and tried to come into my house. i am glad to this day that i didn't have to shoot twice, but i would do it again if circumstances dictated. you don't have to believe i did; if not keep it to yourself, i won't respond to bait.
seidnuJan 9, 2012
I understand completely I am a gun owner I like the saying that guns are like condoms I would rather have one and not need it, then need one and not have one. I don't want to use it in the situation of home defense but glad I have them if I need them
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
you didn't even read the article. If you did your comprehension powers are completely gone
libertyalwaysJan 8, 2012
FTA: "Nowhere in the transcript of the 911 call do we hear her warn the intruder that she is armed and will shoot him. "
Oh--so it's the fault of the 18-year-old, brand new mother (and brand new widow), that the subhuman, predatory scum got removed from the gene pool. Or maybe it's Sarah Palin's fault.
f**king PolicitcusUSA. "Journalism" for the severely brain damaged.
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
...and that was the extent of your take away from the article?
Learn reading comprehension a bit more, learn how to actually understand a complete article, before shooting your mouth off.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
obviously you missed the point where no blame was put on the woman who did the shooting for doing anything wrong. Great try but it was fully expected of you anyways
number23Jan 8, 2012
"McKinley told the police she knew the intruders were up to no good, but in truth, she didn’t know what they were going to do. No one could know that."
Given that the deceased broke down her locked door and he was armed with a large knife, I can confidently posit that they he was not there selling Girl Scout cookies.
Good lord, liberals are f**king morons. If you want to subject you and your family to the tender mercies of someone who would violently enter your home armed with a large knife, be my guest. As for me and mine, an intruder will be met with all the deadly force I can muster.
slang4catJan 8, 2012
"Good lord, liberals are f**king morons."
Truer words were never spoke.
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
"Good lord, slang4cat is a f**king moron."
Fixed it for you...
luke1h7Jan 8, 2012
I'm a liberal and I think she was completely justified in shooting this guy. What say you about liberals now, sucka?
seidnuJan 9, 2012
don't mind them they are typical partisan members they feel cause your views are different it gives them the right to be a douche bag.
lobo65Jan 8, 2012
"Good lord, liberals are f**king morons."
Lieberals are ignorant and or stupid and or insane.
rockcosmosJan 8, 2012
spoken like the truly neo-conned
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
I find what you're saying so intensely funny that I can't stop laughing. You never read the article, if you did you have no idea what the article said even though it was in favor of the woman shooting the man. The article was about the emphasis on guns and not on the fact that a person was shot. How brain-dead are you?
slang4catJan 8, 2012
Obama just lost a vote.
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
Huh? You are really a bizarre person... I think we have very clearly seen your position long ago - I somehow don't think you were ever voting for him.
How does your comment have anything to do with the article?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lobo65Jan 8, 2012
Unfortunately, being dead doesn't necessarily stop democRATS from voting.
seidnuJan 9, 2012
LMFAO that goes for republicans as well
mikelistJan 9, 2012
no he didn't. you seriously misjudge the intelligence of the whole digg community, allies and adversaries alike, by suggesting you ever had any intention of voting for obama. your dishonesty serves as an example to us all.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
slang4catJan 9, 2012
Are you daft?
mikelistJan 9, 2012
no, but you apparently are. unless you meant the guy that was killed, in which case you are just a troll.
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
why did Obama just lose a vote? Obama has done more for the NRA, then the NRA has done for you. The NRA and all of its time has only gotten two bills changed. It takes in millions and millions of dollars, has several vice presidents and tons of people working in its offices and does absolutely nothing for you
ohnoimabearJan 8, 2012
At no point in the article does the author suggest she was wrong to kill the intruder. In fact, the author says EXACTLY the opposite, quoted below. The author even identifies with the mother and suggests that they would do the same in the situation. The author's problem is the fact that we are glorifying her actions, something that I would suggest (as would the author) she will have some trouble living with later.
The Hero-worship is the problem that the author is trying to address. It is never a good thing to kill a person. It may be the "right" thing, or the "best" thing that you can do in a situation, but it's never good to have to take a life. Yes, she needed to protect herself and her baby. Sure, in hind-sight, there could have been other options, and she could have been more explicit saying "I have a gun, don't come in or I'll shoot" but that is not the point of the article. Palin calling this event the "purpose" of the second amendment is seriously misinformed and harmful to our current understanding of the most important document in our country's history.
"But in this case, it’s not that the young mom was wrong for killing to protect her baby and herself, it’s that how we discuss these things matters. Dubbing McKinley the “Make My Day Mom” is hero-worshiping, frighteningly glib and ultimately serves to trivialize the decision to pull the trigger with intent to kill.
I also own a shotgun and would shoot to kill an intruder in my home if I thought it were necessary. But glorifying this and calling it the purpose of the second amendment is disturbing. In point of fact, the purpose of the second amendment was to maintain independent militias to defend the country should its security be threatened. It was a reactionary stance to the framers distrust of a federal army."
shivabeachJan 8, 2012
If Sarah Plain had a brain, and we know she doesn’t, she would be sensitive to exactly what the lady did. She killed a fellow human being. Obviously necessarly but the point is that palin, once again encourages this stuff. palin, brain dead as she is once again puts owning guns over the life of a human. Her best step should have been to say I am sorry she had to kill a person
Owning a gun is a solemn thing. Human life always comes first. Even if you have to kill someone as this person did, the human life must be uppermost in the mind. Not glorifying owning a gun.
I cannot believe that there are more than 25 people who want Palin to be president. She is a very unthinking uncaring person.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
superkendallJan 8, 2012
So just to clarify, you would have preferred both her and the baby had been raped and killed. Got it.
dividebyoJan 8, 2012
Really? See, most normal people wouldn't have read that from the comment - where did you get that from?
At what point in the comment was that even remotely implied?
Stop being such an ass.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
I'm not even going to waste my time with you
seidnuJan 9, 2012
not much of a Palin fan myself but for once I agree with what she said
seidnuJan 9, 2012
Thank you Shivabeach you have just helped me make a point to a friend. That republicans an democrats are the exact same nothing but a bunch of whiny little bitches. I don't like Sara Palin but I am curious as to what you would have posted if she didn't say anything and wasn't mentioned in the article.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shivabeachJan 9, 2012
my point is that Sarah, who doesn't have a brain, is only interested in people having guns. She was not interested in the fact that the woman killed a person. I am 100% in approval of what this woman did if the guy was in the trailer. My point is that owning a gun is secondary to human life. The gun doesn't come first, if it does then you're not much of a human.
as for your whiny little bitch stuff, it fits you. You missed the entire point of that article because you are so hopped up on guns